Wednesday, 26 March 2014

Brexit: Not Shortlisted

"The European Union is, and always has been, a political project, even though this has not been something that has been as openly acknowledged as it should have been in Britain" Labour MP and IEA judge Gisela Stuart

Today we learnt the names of the final six to go forward to the IEA Brexit prize. Unfortunately the entry by Richard North was not selected; it can be read or downloaded from here.

In many ways it was not a surprise. We had doubts from the start that a submission which aims to negate the economic arguments in order to win a referendum against FUD would be in direct contrast to the economic bias of the IEA.

Despite that a number of the judges acknowledged publically that the EU is a political project not an economic one, a feeling persists the IEA in general and indeed this country still cannot get to grips with the true nature of what the European Union is. This is reflected in the obvious concentration of economic interests in the final six.

What compounds the disappointment though is that after many months of hard work the news was received by a rather terse email from a press person:

The words "good and intriguing" are rather patronising to say the least. "Intriguing" is clearly a euphemism for not what we were looking for. After months of hard work by Richard researching a very complex and important subject and producing an original thesis of "Flexcit" contestants deserve much better than a patronising, bland and standard email.

Despite that it's encouraging that we now have a very detailed, layered and practical document on how the UK can exit the EU, that in itself is progress.

Finally I would like to thank Richard for his enormously hard efforts since October, much of it unseen, in producing a very valuable and useful piece of work. One that needs to be re-read a few times to fully appreciate its scope.


  1. Thank you also for your research and advice. It is really appreciated.

    1. It was a pleasure and I feel honoured that I was included in the process.

      I feel a little deflated tbh, but I'm sure it will pass. If nothing else we have a superb document to work with and on a personal level it I know more now than I did at the beginning.

      They've clearly chosen the safe options as you say. As WfW notes it will be interesting to see the winning 3 entries. I don't think it is going to reflect favourably on IEA.

  2. it did not get shortlisted becouse it was totale crap

    1. Did a monkey write this comment or can you not spell?

  3. pissing people off is norths specialist subject another reason he got the boot