If there was any question as to whether a shadow European Union referendum campaign is under way, then this week confirmed it beyond all doubt.

Those who favour a referendum were out in force beginning with John Longford, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, calling for an ‘end to the uncertainty’. It is pretty clear from the quick follow-up attack on Labour’s support for the European Union from organisations like Business for Britain that this was an orchestrated hit.

It was left to Ed Balls and Chuka Umunna to put the case for the United Kingdom staying in the EU. They both did it well, but there was hardly a chorus of voices waiting to back them up afterwards.

The message it sent out was one of a tightly organised anti-EU campaign against an uncoordinated and seemingly uninterested pro-European side. It is hard to understand why there is such a lack of interest in putting forward the case for the EU, but it needs to change and fast.

Fortunately, there are some signs of hope. Despite what sections of the media would suggest figures from YouGov published this week show public attitudes are actually largely positive towards Europe. Sizeable majorities believe that the UK would be worse off, less influential and have fewer jobs if it left the EU.

Maybe because of this it is tempting for pro-Europeans to adopt a wait-and-see approach to making the case for Britain in Europe. Best not to stir things up when there may not even be a referendum, would be the logic behind this thinking.

But it is a dangerous game to play and risks creating an opportunity for Eurosceptics to erode the public’s existing support, unchallenged. This danger has not gone unnoticed and now a growing number of voices are calling for a full blown pro-EU campaign to be mounted.

One member of the European parliament recently told me, ‘For years now the public have been bombarded by anti-EU sentiment in the media. None of us have done enough to counter that and it will hurt us in a referendum if we let it continue.’ The message it seems, is that it is time for pro-Europeans to get serious.

And it is not just on organisation where the pro-EU side needs improvement. Sharper counter arguments are a major requirement.

Watch an interview with any Eurosceptic and one number always comes up: £55m. This is, according to Nigel Farage and others, the daily cost of Britain’s membership of the EU. It is a scary number and an effective tool to convince voters that the UK could afford to pay for more of what they want, if only we were not in the EU.

Pro-Europeans have struggled in response. The default reaction it that the figure is false, because it does not take into account of money and benefits the UK receives from EU membership. The true cost they assure us is much lower.

This is true. The only problem is though that the true amount we pay to the EU according to Full Fact is around £24m a day. Which is still to any normal person a pretty large and scary number.

A better figure is 38p. It is not scary at all, although no one ever uses it. It is the cost per person, per day of being in the EU. Or expressed another way: access to the world’s largest single trading bloc and the 3.5 million jobs which go with it, costs each of us less than a Mars bar a day.

If pro-Europeans can find a way to make 38p, not £55m, the only number that counts in the EU debate they will have won a big battle.

But having strong rebuttals is not enough. As Ronald Reagan once said, in politics ‘if you are explaining, you are losing’. Pro-Europeans can not expect to win a campaign fought solely on the Eurosceptics’ turf of costs and immigration.

Instead the challenge is to widen the terms of debate, without falling into abstraction of debating our perceived global influence and prestige. These big picture arguments are of course important but, the political class has a tendency to overestimate their impact on the public.

For most voters losing their right to NHS treatment when they holiday in Europe, not being able to retire to Spain or finding out their UK driver’s licence is no longer valid on the continent, are likely to be greater irritants than the state of the UK’s global influence.

One lesson of the Scottish referendum was the importance of talking about the nitty-gritty things which voters value, rather than subscribe to the media groupthink. Time and again commentators denounced the No campaign’s focus on the currency issue as a misstep. Yet polling and focus groups regularly showed keeping the pound was a major concern for voters.

Getting the right balance then between the macro-arguments, world position, influence and trade, et cetera, and the micro-arguments about the practicalities of Brexit is crucial.

And finally pro-Europeans need to be the biggest champions for change in the EU. While there remains some debate about what exactly what reforms the pro side should champion – although Douglas Alexander’s economic, immigration and institutional reforms, would seem to be a good place to start – the most important thing is to suggest some. If they do not, it will be too easy for Eurosceptics to make toxic the pro-Europe case as being in defence of the EU status quo.

It is time then for the pro-Europe side to get its act together. The arguments are on their side and for the moment the public is too. But without care that could change fast. The evidence this week is that unless something is done soon, the referendum campaign could be lost before it even begins.

———————————

Rich Durber is a former speechwriter for a shadow minister and writes a fortnightly column for Progress. He tweets @richdurber

———————————

Photo: European Parliament