I haven’t followed the Brexit campaign myself, but here are the quotes from the essay.
On lies and on the NHS:
Many of those who blame defeat on ‘lies’, including Cameron, Osborne, and Clegg themselves told flat-out lies. One example will do. Cameron and Osborne claimed repeatedly on TV, almost always unchallenged, that their new deal meant ‘after six months if you haven’t got a job you have to leave’. This is not an argument over the fairness of using a gross/net figure, like ‘£350 million’, or even a properly bogus figure like the Treasury’s £4,000 per household figure. It is a different category of claim – a flat out 100% lie. (For more details see HERE.) How much time did Today, Newsnight, and the Guardian spend explaining to people that the PM and Chancellor were lying through their teeth? Approximately none. Why? Because very few of those complaining about lies really are cross about ‘lies’ – they are cross they lost and they are not so interested in discussing a lie that undermines the pro-EU campaign’s attempt to neutralise fear of immigration.
Further, many of the same people spent the entire campaign saying ‘Vote Leave has admitted a Leave vote means leaving the Single Market, this is what will happen make no mistake…’ and now say ‘the Single Market was not an issue, Vote Leave never had a policy on it and there is no mandate for leaving it’. Cameron, Osborne, Mandelson, Campbell and Clegg spent much of the last 20 years lying through their teeth to further their own interests and prestige. Now they whine about ‘lies’. They deserved worse than they got – and reasonable Remain-ers deserved better leadership.
And elsewhere:
Some people now claim this [claim about the NHS] was cynical and we never intended to spend more on the NHS. Wrong. Boris and Gove were agreed and determined to do exactly this. On the morning of 24 June they both came into HQ. In the tiny ‘operations room’ amid beer cans, champagne bottles, and general bedlam I said to Boris – on day one of being PM you should immediately announce the extra £100 million per week for the NHS [the specific pledge we’d made] is starting today and more will be coming – you should start off by being unusual, a political who actually delivers what they promise. ‘Absolutely. ABSOLUTELY. We MUST do this, no question, we’ll park our tanks EVERYWHERE’ he said. Gove strongly agreed. If they had not blown up this would have happened. The opposite impression was created because many Tories who did not like us talking about the NHS reverted to type within seconds of victory and immediately distanced themselves from it and the winning campaign. Unlike Gove and Boris they did not learn from the campaign, they did not listen to the public. Until people trust that the NHS is a financial priority for Tories, they will have no moral authority to discuss management issues. This obvious fact is psychologically hard to absorb because of the strength of gang feelings in politics.
A tangential quote on data:
IN started with legal access to vast amounts of electoral data from at least three political parties, unofficial / illegal access to vast amounts of data from things like CCHQ data and the Crosby/Messina models built during the campaign, and vast amounts of commercial data. (CCHQ laughably claimed that there were ‘Chinese walls’ that prevented any abuse of Party data.) VL had none of these things. We could not even afford to buy standard commercial datasets (though the physicists found ingenious ways around this). We had no way even to acquire the electoral roll until the official process allowed us in early 2016, after which we had to wait a couple of months for LAs to fulfil their legal obligations to provide us with the data (which they did patchily and often late).
Finally, if you want to see his overall views of the IN campaign, it’s the section “Rough balance of forces” of the essay. He mentions having to go up against numerous enormous structural disadvantages (which isn’t surprising, since the government was pro-IN). For example:
IN set the legal rules. VL [Vote Leave] faced a huge imbalance in how these worked. For example, Cameron even during the official campaign could do huge events at places like the British Museum and the IN campaign did not have to account for such events as part of their £7 million. Meanwhile VL was told by the Electoral Commission that if people we did not even know put up huge signs that appeared on TV we might get billed for them.
Of course, Turkey does want to join the EU...they have been trying to get in for decades. But they never did get in, and it’s not like Erdogan is a particularly EU friendly figure,so it’s not like it’s suddenly likely.
Many of those who blame defeat on ‘lies’, including Cameron, Osborne, and Clegg themselves told flat-out lies. One example will do. Cameron and Osborne claimed repeatedly on TV, almost always unchallenged, that their new deal meant ‘after six months if you haven’t got a job you have to leave’. This is not an argument over the fairness of using a gross/net figure, like ‘£350 million’, or even a properly bogus figure like the
Treasury’s £4,000 per household figure. It is a different category of claim – a flat out 100% lie. (For more details see HERE.)
Some people now claim this [claim about the NHS] was cynical and we never intended to spend more on the NHS. Wrong. Boris and Gove were agreed and determined to do exactly this. On the morning of 24 June they both came into HQ. In the tiny ‘operations room’ amid beer cans, champagne bottles, and general bedlam I said to Boris – on day one of being PM you should immediately announce the extra £100 million per week for the NHS [the specific pledge we’d made] is starting today and more will be coming – you should start off by being unusual, a political who actually delivers what they promise. ‘Absolutely. ABSOLUTELY. We MUST do this, no question, we’ll park our tanks EVERYWHERE’ he said. Gove strongly agreed.
Ok. So The Dome’s justification of the £350m lie is that BJ kind of verbally agreed in principle to an extra £100m for the NHS.
So...a ballpark figure is OK on his side, but the Treasury can’t make an estimate of Brexit losses?
If they had not blown up this would have happened
What does this mean? BJ and MG fell out? They’re BFFs now.
So...a ballpark figure is OK on his side, but the Treasury can’t make an estimate of Brexit losses?
They can make a estimate. The question is whether “GDP loss / amount of households = loss per household”. That doesn’t seem to be true because “total household income loss / amount of households = loss per household” is what you should calculate when you want to calculate a loss per household.
What does this mean? BJ and MG fell out? They’re BFFs now.
How do you know?
Cummings has non-public information based on which he likely makes that claim.
(Gove and Boris agreed in 2016 that Boris would be their push for PM, then at the last minute Gove withdrew his support and announced his own candidacy, splitting support, causing Boris to withdraw, and neither got PM. [1,2] By a few years later, they seem to have mended things significantly.)
The issues in the leave (ie Brexit) campaign were
the misleading claim about extra funding for the NHS,
and the claim about the entire population of Turkey settling in the UK, which was both misleading and racist
The use of personal data by a company he hired, which has now folded under legal issues.
So what were the specific lies of the remain campaign.
I haven’t followed the Brexit campaign myself, but here are the quotes from the essay.
On lies and on the NHS:
And elsewhere:
A tangential quote on data:
Finally, if you want to see his overall views of the IN campaign, it’s the section “Rough balance of forces” of the essay. He mentions having to go up against numerous enormous structural disadvantages (which isn’t surprising, since the government was pro-IN). For example:
There’s no quote on Turkey.
The Dome was questioned about that a few months ago.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/cummings-smirks-when-confronted-with-vote-leaves-turkey-claim-282324/amp/
Of course, Turkey does want to join the EU...they have been trying to get in for decades. But they never did get in, and it’s not like Erdogan is a particularly EU friendly figure,so it’s not like it’s suddenly likely.
Ok. So The Dome’s justification of the £350m lie is that BJ kind of verbally agreed in principle to an extra £100m for the NHS.
So...a ballpark figure is OK on his side, but the Treasury can’t make an estimate of Brexit losses?
What does this mean? BJ and MG fell out? They’re BFFs now.
They can make a estimate. The question is whether “GDP loss / amount of households = loss per household”. That doesn’t seem to be true because “total household income loss / amount of households = loss per household” is what you should calculate when you want to calculate a loss per household.
How do you know?
Cummings has non-public information based on which he likely makes that claim.
(Gove and Boris agreed in 2016 that Boris would be their push for PM, then at the last minute Gove withdrew his support and announced his own candidacy, splitting support, causing Boris to withdraw, and neither got PM. [1, 2] By a few years later, they seem to have mended things significantly.)
Connor has answered the first point.
As to the second, BJ was singing DG’s praises at recent Conservative conference.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/16343362/boris-michael-gove-belting-total-eclipse-heart/amp/