Haven't read the report, but read the Press. Seems like generally good reading for the Indies - £200m start-up costs are utter chickenfeed, especially set against efficiencies of administration. Much of the follow-up costs are predicated on the "hostility" of rUK in negotiations. Overall Dunleavy sees long-term viability as high, and he completely demolish the Treasury calculations. I am currently more interested in how Cameron's cack-handed handling of the Juncker appointment will play in the debate.
The press has been a bit misleading in both senses on this. They started off by saying Dunleavy has predicted £200 million, but that was never the full estimate. Dunleavy has actually said anything between £600 million and £1.5 billion is "possible", but he'd lean more toward £600 million if push came to shove.
The truth is, as Dunleavy says himself, it's incredibly difficult to put a concrete figure on it, so a range like the one he's given us is the best you can do. Neither the Yes or No side seem to want to accept that, though, so we have them throwing figures at each other (£200 million on the Yes side, £1.5 billion on the No side) as if they're cast iron certainties, when Dunleavy has never claimed any such thing.