David Craig, on October 21st, 2015A couple of days ago, I contacted UKIP to point out that the name the “In” campaign is using – “Britain Stronger in Europe” – is misleading. Europe is a geographical continent. We couldn’t leave Europe if we wanted to. We’re attached to it. So, the coming “In/Out” referendum has nothing to do with leaving the continent “Europe”. It has to do with leaving a political construct called the “European Union” (EU).
Since then Nigel Farage has criticised the BBC for continually substituting “Europe” for the “European Union”.
This may seem like a trivial issue. But actually, it’s quite important. Being part of something called the “European Union” is much less attractive to voters than being part of “Europe” because the words “European Union” conjure up images of the huge cost of the EU bureaucracy, the unnecessary rules and regulations, the bumbling and arrogant incompetence of EU boss Merkel and the loss of Britain’s independence to unelected, undemocratic, corrupt and wasteful bureaucrats in Brussels.
So, if we can force the “Britain Stronger in Europe” campaign to change their name to “Britain Stronger in the European Union” we can significantly weaken their appeal.
There seem to be two main steps to forcing this name change – through complaining first to the Electoral Commission and then the Advertising Standards Authority:
1. The Electoral Commission
Using the link below, you can already complain to the Electoral Commission demanding that the “Britain Stronger in Europe” campaign should not be recognised as the official campaign group for the “In” campaign as their name is misleading to voters because we will always be a part of the geographical entity called “Europe” and the referendum will be about whether we should stay in a political construct called the “European Union”. Therefore the “Britain Stronger in Europe” campaign should be forced to change its name to “Britain Stronger in the European Union” if it is to be recognised by the Electoral Commission as being the official “In” campaign
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/contact-us
2. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)
At the moment, we can do nothing here as the “Britain Stronger in Europe” campaign have not yet placed a single ad anywhere. But as soon as their first poster or newspaper or TV or Internet ad appears, we should contact the ASA making the same complaint that the name “Britain Stronger in Europe” is misleading to voters for the reasons I explain above. Like the Electoral Commission, the ASA has a simple on-line form we can fill in with details of our complaint as soon as the first ad is launched.
It would be utterly humiliating for the “Britain Stronger in Europe” campaign if we ignorant, unwashed plebs could force it to change its name to the much less attractive “Britain Stronger in the European Union”.
Category: 
very good idea have posted link on http://www.englandcalling.wordpress.com article Britain will vote to leave the EU if the public message is right
Thankyou David, I see the first title on that page you link to is:
‘Immigration and the price of a liberal conscience’
The next step in twingeing the Liberal Conscience will be the plight of all the Migrants now suffering in the European Winter cold, when the Archbishop of Aleppo says to stop enticing migrants to Europe and that Syria needs them there it is ironic to say the least. Also as the Migrant that had reached safe Denmark told the TV reporter when asked why he did not want to stay in Denmark when Sweden was 500km away. He said the salary was twice that of Denmark’ in Sweden and more importantly that he could bring all his family to him in Sweden much sooner i.e. in 4 months time. Therefore we can expect a massive extra many fold influx in the numbers of Migrants in Europe as a consequence of those already here. Our European leaders are well aware of this and were all along.
Now why the British with their Liberal Conscience think we can afford all this when we cant afford to sustain ourselves much longer baffles me. I can only assume that they trust our politicians know what they are doing which baffles me even further.Our true National debt per household that our Politicians dont reveal to us is �330,000 and could actually be worse.
As the Taxpayers Alliance have already warned us.
At the end of 2014-15, the real national debt stood at �8.6 trillion, over �320,000 for every single household in Britain.
Since 2009-10, the debt has grown by �1 trillion, growing from �7.6 trillion up to �8.6 trillion in 2014-15, equivalent to around five times our GDP.
Since 2009-10, liabilities arising from financial sector interventions have shrunk by �1 trillion. This means that debt ignoring financial interventions has grown by �2 trillion.
The official national debt � the one quoted by the Chancellor in his budget � hugely understates taxpayer liabilities. The real national debt is almost six times larger than the official national debt.
These figures may be underestimates. In addition to the debts we have examined, the public sector has a wide range of contingent liabilities.
We are not contrary to our opinion of ourselves a Rich nation, we were once but we have now borrowed and maxed out on our Credit.Our capacity to be helping others is none existent. We should be preparing to look out for ourselves.
This is not scaremongering this is real, but for some reason Politicians and Liberal minded people have taken leave of their senses, reality will come back to bite them it is only a question of time, what galls is that we pay the consequences for their folly too and that is totally unacceptable.
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/real_national_debt
I will leave you to read the concluding statement from the Taxpayers Alliance take your own conclusions from it as to whether we can afford the massive extra burden of an influx of Migrants to this country.Of course Our leaders will say they never saw it coming but of course they know full well.What I refer to here is the truth, unlike a salesman or a Politician I dont just tell people what they want to hear , or try to mislead for nefarious purposes.
…………………
Debt on this scale is without precedent in Britain. The previous peak was during the Napoleonic Wars when the national debt reached over 250 per cent of GDP. True, that
was just the official debt, but at the time the government had very few unfunded pension liabilities on top � the official national debt was pretty much identical to the real national debt.
More than a century later, the Second World War pushed our debt almost back to the same level relative to GDP, but again, pension liabilities were very much smaller than
today.
1 A real national debt well in excess of five times GDP has taken us into entirely uncharted and dangerous waters.
In case it is thought that our estimates are an exaggeration, it should be noted that we have been deliberately cautious in some of our key assumptions. As already mentioned,we are not including a wide range of contingent liabilities. We also do not include taxpayers� full contractual liabilities under many long-term commercial contracts (see below).
Importantly we do not include anything for the very real prospect that the government will need to borrow increasing amounts just to fund the growth in future debt interest
payments. Investors have been prepared to lend the government large sums for very low(and sometimes negative once inflation is taken into account) returns since the financial
crash.
2 But we do not know how long this will last, or how far and how quickly their required returns will rise.
Finally, we have included nothing to fund the escalating costs of healthcare and long-term care for our ageing population. Yet many argue this is a huge implicit liability, a liability reinforced by the strong NHS spending commitments given by the government.
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/taxpayersalliance/pages/5508/attachments/original/1434447400/Real_National_Debt.pdf?1434447400
Excellent idea – will get an email out for the 1st one and watch for their lame adverts like a hawk. Will many feature endless lines of angry young M*sl!ms?
Martin it is too late to do anything about it now, the shock of what is coming will take all by surprise, so be it.
Not looking good for a rename I’m afraid…
Reply from the EC is below:-
Thank you for contacting The Electoral Commission.
The European Union Referendum Bill is currently progressing through Parliament. Guidance will be available from our website once the bill has received Royal Assent and we will be able to provide more detailed advice at that time.
We are responsible for regulating referendum campaign funding and spending, as well as registering campaigners in the referendum. We do not regulate the content or messages of referendum campaigns.
As currently drafted, the Bill introduces provisions that require us to reach an opinion on whether the proposed name of a campaigner is obscene or offensive. If we decide that it is, we must refuse the application. There are no equivalent provisions that give us powers to refuse an application to register on the basis that the campaigner�s name might be considered misleading. Further information on our roles and responsibilities can be found here.
Prior to the publication of our referendum guidance, we have published information on our role in referendums which you can find this here. We will also be publishing campaigner update emails on the EU Referendum as the Bill progresses through Parliament. You can sign up to receive these here.
I hope the above is helpful to you. If you do have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the party and election finance advice line on 0333 103 1928 or e-mail the party and election finance inbox at pef@electoralcommission.org.uk.