To the man from Mars, for a country like the UK to join the EU might seem a pretty unappealing prospect. But we are already in. Moreover, despite the EU’s failings, we are frequently told that “business” wants the UK to stay in. Why is this?

By no means all business leaders support staying in. But it is true that a preponderance of the leaders of big businesses, and their lobbying organisations such as the CBI, do favour it (just as they favoured joining the euro). We must presume that they see advantages for their businesses, yet that does not necessarily mean that their perceived self-interest indicates an overall advantage for the UK, or that the political and constitutional factors favour staying in.

On both these issues business leaders are completely unqualified to pass judgement, except in their capacity as ordinary citizens with a vote.

In fact, when interpreting what business leaders say, there are some key structural features of the economic case that need careful attention. Even if the net balance of advantages and disadvantages of Brexit were exactly zero for the country as a whole, there would be distinct gainers and losers; and it is quite understandable that the latter should make it plain that they would rather stay in.

The potential losers from Brexit would tend to be those companies with substantial exports to the EU, minimal imports from the rest of the world and comparatively little UK business. Businesses that fall into this category are predominantly large – and well represented in the CBI.

By contrast, the gains from Brexit would be felt disproportionately by consumers, in the form of lower prices, including for food, and perhaps also lower taxes. They, of course, have no representation in business groups. And the corporate gainers would tend to be those who suffer from excessive EU regulation but don’t export much to the EU. These businesses tend to be small and not heavily represented in the CBI. Moreover, there is a category of gain that will not appear directly in the calculations of any business leaders, namely the benefit of the end of the EU regulatory juggernaut in the public and non-profit sectors.

Britain’s most prolific cancer researcher, Prof Angus Dalgleish, told the journalist Dominic Lawson that the EU’s Clinical Trials Directive had increased the cost of experiments more than ten-fold.

The upshot is that although it is important for the voice of business leaders to be heard, we should beware of thinking that they have some special insight into the balance of economic advantages – still less into the all-important political and constitutional issues.

David Fuller's view

Here is a PDF of Roger Bootle's article.

The more the EU is criticised from with within and also abroad, the more it ploughs ahead, in the manner of The Titanic. 

It has done nothing to encourage the UK to remain, not least for fear of similar reactions by other EU members.  Meanwhile, Germany’s Angela Merkel is willing to trade freedom of speech to placate Turkey’s hard-line Erdogan.