There has been much written on the UK’s relationship with the EU, not least in the pages of this newspaper. I write this piece for two reasons. Firstly, to lament the lack of rigorous intellectual exercise on the matter. Don’t get me wrong, I am (well, should be) writing my thesis as I speak and have no love for the tortured world of referencing. But without more openness on where statistics are found, we descend into the realm of the ethereal guided only by the will-o’-the-wisp of politics. Secondly, I write to leave no doubt that the UK is better off in than out.

With regard to immigration, Theo Demolder, writing in this newspaper, raises the concern that because the UK must accept EU immigrants, those “promising young professionals” from other parts of the world “lose out”. It is the British government that created the annual cap on skilled non-EU workers – a cap it froze between 2011 and 2014 according to a report from the University of Oxford’s Migration Observatory. Why? It has been repeatedly shown that immigrants add value, rather than subtract from the economy. A report in The Economist substantiates this claim. Even during the financial crisis’ peak years, immigrants from EU countries provided a net contribution of £8.6 billion. Immigrants from non-EU countries chipped in a measly £2 billion net. It is a substantiated decision taken by the UK’s executive. Don’t lay the blame at the EU’s door.

Legislative sovereignty is an important theme to both sides of the campaign. It is true that the UK sometimes doesn’t get what it wants. But citing the fact that there have been 55 ‘failures’ since May 2010 is rather disingenuous. Data from VoteWatch.eu shows that the UK has won a massive 97.4 per cent of votes in the Council of Ministers between 2004 and 2009. It is true that this figure has plummeted in the period between 2009 and 2015. The UK now only obtains its desired outcome a pitiful 86.7 per cent of the time (I don’t know about you but if that was my final Tripos score…). Discussing only the votes that the UK loses fails to highlight the fact that, for the most part, its policy aims are extremely similar to those shared by other states. It fails to recognise the extreme similarity between the goals that various European governments have, and, most of all, perpetuates the fiction of the ‘Brussels diktat’.

It is fair enough that a Brexiter seeks to make their case using the facts which show them in the best light. But for them to then stretch it to support other points is simply wrong. The ukandeu.ac.uk web blog shows the average distance between EU policy decisions and national governments’ own domestic policies. The UK ranks fourth. That means the policy decisions taken in Brussels are extremely close to the approach the UK would follow on its own. Interestingly, the EU commission ranks third from bottom.

With regards to the assertion that the role of the European Parliament has not been enhanced, I must disagree. Just one of the latest powers that have been given to the European Parliament is the doctrine of ‘Spitzenkandidaten’. Essentially the Parliament must nominate the President of the Commission: an important step in achieving more democracy in the EU institutions. Across the EU, democracy is the word of the day. Saying that legislation is handed down by unelected commissioners is wrong. Legislation is proposed by the commission only. It is at the European Parliament that legislation is determined. Of course, it would help if the UK’s representatives were actually there, as recognised by (even) the Daily Mail.

The third substantive point is the power of trade. To say that the EU’s collective bargaining power is diminishing in the world because its share of the global market dwindles is to miss a rather important point. The share of the gross domestic product of almost all Western nations as a percentage of world GDP is diminishing. Take the UK as an example. 25 years ago its GDP was 3.65 per cent of the world share. Today, it is 2.53 per cent. This is because there are countries which are growing much more quickly. So looking at percentage share of GDP is not helpful and does not support a conclusion that the EU is losing its role in the world.

Finally, Mr. Demolder raised an interesting point on national security. Juxtaposed controls are based on the Sangatte Protocol of 1991, which is strictly a bilateral agreement between France and the UK. It seems unlikely that this would be affected by the UK’s exit of EU agreements. However, the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) functions by permitting member states of the EU to arrest and transfer a criminal suspect to a different state. How important are EAWs? Their use increased from 3,000 to 13,500 between 2004 and 2008. Just one use they were put to was to recover fugitive bomber Hussain Osman from Italy to stand trial in the UK.

I wish that I had more space. The case to stay should be about positivity. But the continual misrepresentations perpetuated by the quitters on the Brexit side must first be corrected.