Aneurin Bevan once called Labour's lust for unilateral disarmament an "emotional spasm". The Conservatives' own emotional spasm, Euroscepticism, is now in its DNA. It began with Thatcher's Bruges speech in 1988, deepened with her political death in 1990 and finally entered the soul with the Maastricht rebellions in 1993. Ever since, the Conservatives have become more Europhobic with every election. It now looks like, spooked by Ukip, the party will become the first political party since 1983 to urge a British withdrawal.

This is plainly not what the prime minister wants. But, indifferent to Europe as an issue and irked by his backbenchers' nationalistic obsessions, he has moved sideways and backwards since his first Eurosceptic coup de veto in December 2011. But the line he draws around his mantra of reform, renegotiation and referendum is forever muddied. And this is why the 250 MPs and ministers who, on balance, would stay in the EU keep their counsel silent and their heads below the parapet.

But it needn't be this way. Cameron's January speech was bookended by patriotic paragraphs urging people to understand that Britain is, along with Germany, the leading player in Europe and that our power in the world is amplified through Europe as one of the key players in a world of power blocs. This is the bigger picture that, in their day, a Churchill and a Thatcher would have endlessly repeated. They were brilliant at simplifying a complex world and making Britons clear about where they stood in it. Sadly, it looks like British politicians are no longer big picture people.

The prime minister needs to further explain his theory of Britain being at risk in the global economic race. Today's Europe referendum bill is already a tool of the Europhobes. The current wording of the question is different from that proposed in the original draft, in which the question was: "Do you think that the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union?". After some lobbying by anti-Brussels MPs, it is now "Do you think the United Kingdom should be a member of the European Union?" Hey-ho, says the PM and does nothing.

But there is a fightback. European Mainstream, a group of 60 backbenchers who wrote to Cameron before his January speech urging him to focus on British leadership rather than British negativity, is growing. They are challenging the four core Europhobe arguments: that the EU costs too much, the EU is full of fraud and waste the EU is undemocratic and unaccountable, and that the UK has lost sovereignty and gained nothing in return.

On cost, Britain's net contribution to the EU was £6.9bn in 2012; this compares with at least £30bn, and up to £90bn a year, in gain from our membership of the single market. On fraud and waste, believe it or not, the EU is subject to an auditing regime far tougher than the UK.

The age-old story that the EU has failed to sign off its accounts for years is a result of 80% of the EU's budget being spent in the member states under the supervision of their governments. The UK's comptroller and auditor-general confirmed in June 2006 that if the UK had the same system as the EU, he would have to qualify all 500 UK expenditure accounts rather than just those where he thought there was a problem (13 in 2005).

On democracy, the antis claim that 75% of the UK's laws are "imposed by the EU". In reality, the European Commission proposes, the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament decide. The percentage of our laws deriving from our EU obligations varies from year to year but the House of Commons Library estimates it as being about 15%, not 75%. On sovereignty, the Europhobes want it back. But, if we left the EU and joined the European Economic Area, we would have saved about 20% of our current contribution to the EU budget, but would have no meaningful say over the EU laws we would be obliged to follow, and which would still be enforced by the court of justice and our own courts. Not very democratic really.

And on red tape, the estimate made by Priti Patel MP, published on Wednesday, that EU regulations implemented over the past two years will cost £5n ignores the benefits of the regulations (most of which the UK supported), gives one single figure for cost when actually the costs will be spread over many years (24 years in one case) and of course is dwarfed by the economic benefits of the single market to the UK of up to £90bn a year. But the EU can and should do better in minimising red tape.

But of course the devil has all the best tunes. Because of this drip torture of Europhobic propaganda, most Britons think their country is a powerless whipping boy of a Brussels elite which steals up to 25% of our national income. It is nothing short of an insult to the intelligence of the people. As Nye Bevan said: "Do you call this statesmanship?" No, it is an emotional spasm. And the Conservatives are waking up to the truth that their great party is becoming Nigel Farage in drag.