LETTER: Debate based on knowledge

Councillor Latham complains of bias and unsubstantiated arguments being used to influence the electorate in the absence of facts.

He goes on to use ‘widely stated’ figures as facts to support his own views that we should exit the EU.

It is more than a little disingenuous to suggest that monies saved by the UK exiting would be re-allocated to the public sector and preserve jobs.

At the risk of bombarding the public with more facts here are some alternative arguments: around 3.5 million jobs are a direct consequence of UK membership of the EU; a mere 0.5% of UK GDP goes to the EU budget.

We contribute a net 118 Euros per person per year in contrast to Germany (270 Euros) and Holland (504 Euros).

The argument, rolled out with depressing regularity, that we could have a relationship with the EU like that of Norway or Switzerland is spurious. Switzerland is uniquely dependent on its banking sector (71% of its GDP) and Norway, with only 4.7 million people, has vast oil and gas reserves.

Both pay large contributions to access the EU single market, with Norway paying the equivalent of 90% of our net contribution per person.

Neither benefit from substantial EU funds available to members for agriculture, education and research, etc.

Enough! The arguments will continue unabated and probably with more and more dependence on sound-bites and facts to shock rather than inform. It would be great if instead we could anticipate debate based on knowledge-based information and not on red-herrings and the fear-factor.

Penny Lower

Labour Councillor (Seaford Town Central)

Sutton Park Road, Seaford