I am not anti-European.
— Nigel Lawson
The pro-E.U. campaign is all too likely to be based on a fear of the unknown because in most people's lifetime, we have never been out of the E.U.
I am delighted to accept the chairmanship of Vote Leave, to help ensure that the organisation is fully prepared for the start of the referendum campaign.
The heart of the matter is that the very nature of the European Union, and of this country's relationship with it, has fundamentally changed after the coming into being of the European monetary union and the creation of the eurozone, of which - quite rightly - we are not a part.
I'm sure Mark Carney is a very clever young man, but I think that the government would be mad to move from inflation targeting to money GDP targeting.
She felt Britain should not be so dependent on coal. She was in favour of building up nuclear energy to break the dependence on coal, and the main opposition to nuclear came from the environment movement. Mrs. Thatcher thought she could trap them with the carbon emissions argument.
Most of the countries in the world are outside the E.U., and they are doing very nicely, thank you.
However useful computer models may be, the one thing they cannot be is evidence. Computer climate models are simply conjectures.
God forbid that the United Kingdom should take a lead and introduce a sensible tax system of its own which would probably comprise a very low level of corporation tax - tax on corporate profits - and perhaps a low level of corporate sales tax, because sales are where they are, and sales in this country are sales here, which we can tax here.
The 'in' campaign will attempt to scare people into believing that if the U.K. were to leave, investment and jobs would move abroad. They are as wrong about that now as they were when they warned that this would happen if we did not sign up to the Euro.
We should be forced to give so many exemptions and concessions (inevitably to the benefit of high spending authorities in Inner London) that the flat-rate poll tax would rapidly become a surrogate income tax.
I have long argued that in the modern world, corporation tax has had its day as a major source of tax revenue.
As the resignation letter which I wrote to the Prime Minister clearly implies, it was not the outcome I sought, but it is one that I accept without rancour, despite what might be described as the hard landing involved.
The successful conduct of economic policy is possible only if there is - and is seen to be - full agreement between the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
To govern is to choose. To appear to be unable to choose is to appear to be unable to govern.
I am in favour of a fully transferable allowance.
I remember when we ignored Europe and we were totally committed to the Commonwealth and the former Empire, and thought imperial preference was the only thing which enabled us to survive, that was a mistake, and it's a similar mistake to feel Britain can't be a hugely successfully country - economically and in any other way - outside the E.U.
Too much of British business and industry feels similarly secure in the warm embrace of the European single market and is failing to recognise that today's great export opportunities lie in the developing world, particularly in Asia.
If you punish the banks, all you are doing is reducing the banks' capital, which you want to increase, and punishing shareholders, who have done nothing wrong.
I don't think the government needs to be frightened of the banks in the slightest.
I am not surprised Cameron says he supports what Gillard is doing in Australia because we have, in the U.K., a totally misconceived climate change plan as well.
In terms of the arguments, I think the pro-Leave campaign is winning them all.
You have got to clear up that corporation tax in the modern way has had its day as a major source of revenue, and we have got to find a new system.
One of the things that concerned me was the way the system operated: the wife who went out to work got a full personal allowance, but the wife who was working at home got nothing. This was particularly hard on wives who gave up work for a time to bring up children.
This clutching hold of the E.U. is a sign of a lack of national self-confidence - which is not healthy.
A flat-rate poll tax would be politically unsustainable; even with a rebate scheme, the package would have an unacceptable impact on certain types of household.
When differences of view emerge, as they are bound to do from time to time, they should be resolved privately and whenever appropriately, collectively.
If our system of cabinet government is to work effectively, the prime minister of the day must appoint ministers he or she trusts and then leave them to carry out that policy.
There is always, of course, a limit in a democracy as to what is politically possible, so you have to respect that limit. But in my experience, governments tend to be too timid.
We already have a sabbatical system. It's called opposition, and I've had enough of it.
Raising the personal allowance is massively expensive. For the same amount of money, you could look at reducing the rate of tax.
The right kind of immigrants can benefit the British economy enormously, but no country can accept indiscriminate, unlimited immigration.
You do not need to be within the single market to be able to export to the European Union, as we see from the wide range of goods on our shelves every day.
It would be wholly wrong constitutionally for the unelected House of Lords to do anything, to kill anything of a financial nature that has been through the House of Commons not once but twice.
Prime Minister Cameron says he wants to be the greenest government ever, but the definition of green is immature... I don't deny for a moment that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but there are so many other factors that affect climate. It is more complicated than the computer models that we are using. What the truth is, nobody knows.
You don't need to be within the single market to trade; it's not an issue.
Those who claim that to leave the E.U. would damage the City are the very same as those who in the past confidently predicted, with a classic failure of understanding, that the City would be gravely damaged if the U.K. failed to adopt the euro as its currency.
I have to say to the Government that you are not even getting nowhere fast - you are getting nowhere slowly.
The Treasury has enough trouble with forecasts even when they are trying to get them right.
One of the most important things that a Thatcher government did was change the mood of the nation to give it back its confidence.
I strongly suspect that there would be a positive economic advantage to the U.K. in leaving the single market.
No one, however long they have held the post, lightly gives up the great office of Chancellor of the Exchequer. Certainly I did not.
Britain's destiny lies in Europe.
The NHS is the closest thing the English have to a religion.
