CHRIS Watkin makes an impassioned plea for the UK to “Follow Norway out of the EU”, but his failure to mention key facts misrepresents the arguments.

It is worth pointing out for instance that Norway never left the EU, it was never a member in the first place, and as such it has not had to cope with any potential negatives a withdrawal might bring.

It is true Norway has a high income per head and no debt to speak of, but it has a very large non-oil fiscal deficit, meaning it relies on its oil (and gas) wealth which is rather troubling if the negative oil shock now routing the oil industry supplier chain persists.

Norway’s non-hydrocarbons trade is relatively small, unlike the UK’s.

Norway’s processed fish exports are moreover subjected to the EU’s import tariffs, raising the cost of its smoked salmon, for instance, and other agricultural products sold in Europe’s markets. High tariffs on imported produce, as well as comparatively less competition in domestic sectors sheltered from international trade, make it a high-cost economy.

Norway in any event is a de facto European Union state. It is a signatory to the European Economic Area, bringing all the benefits, but also many of the costs of membership of the European Free Trade Area without a say in EU governance which a growing share of Norwegian voters is uneasy about.

Norway has one of the best transposition rates of singlemarket legislation than most EU members, and while it is true it has a place at the WTO table, that doesn’t stand for much alone. The fact the WTO failed to conclude its last trade round is why the Trans-Pacific Partnership has proceeded, and why EU member states have fewer concerns.

It is worth noting too, as Mr Watkin fails to, that as a wealthy country like the UK, Norway is a net contributor to the EU budget, in fact it remits more than €300 million per year, with no say in how it is spent, on top of which there are contributions to regional cooperation programmes, European stability mechanisms and other emergency funding lines. Finally, Mr Watkin states Norway sets its own tax rates, implying rather oddly the UK does not. Nothing could be further from the truth, but even if taxes are adjusted to be competitive with our EU partners this is not a bad thing.

The UK after all has a considerably lower tax burden than Norway; just on corporate income tax alone the UK rate is seven percentage points lower than it is in Norway.

There are many more reasons both for and against EU membership, but if Norway is to be the comparator at least arm the public with the facts.

Then, only then, can British voters use their considered judgement to decide.

Jeremy Weltman Managing Director MJEconomics