BREXIT : WHAT IS NOT TO LIKE ?

It seems that we are in for a further bout of argument about Brexit.

Following Theresa May's visit to China, during which she achieved some valuable new trade agreements, there has been nothing but negativity from many quarters. The media, and particularly the BBC, seems obsessed with digging up every possible story of the Brexit horrors yet to come while advancing no evidence apart from the semi-mystical projections, forecasts and predictions of diehard Remainers. Assorted political figures, with Philip Hammond at the forefront but others such as the arrogant and annoying Vince Cable in tow, keep banging on about the 'type of Brexit' we are going to achieve and talk of staying as close to the European Union as possible; some still campaign for another referendum in the hope of reversing the nation's decision.

On the other side, and do doubt driven by the need to keep true Brexit at centre stage, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Bernard Jenkin and others have felt compelled to voice their concerns about the government's direction and ultimate objectives. They, too, have been drawn into the crazy world that imagines different 'types' of Brexit and are becoming increasingly vocal. The result is that the government, and Conservative Party, appear to be in disarray, something which is meat and drink to their opponents, notably Jeremy Corbyn, who keeps remarkably quiet on the subject of Brexit while simply criticising the government for its apparent indecision.

Amid all of this, what seems to be forgotten is that there are no 'types' of Brexit, only Brexit itself. The United Kingdom will leave the EU at the end of March 2019, when a transition period will begin; this will end on 31st December 2020 at which time we will be finally and fully free of the EU. How close we remain to the countries of the European Union will then depend on whatever trade and other agreements have been reached. We may pay for access to some services or facilities but we will be OUT of the Union, which also means OUT of the customs union, OUT of the single market and OUT of the agreement on freedom of movement. If we are not out of all of these agreements, we will not be out of the EU and Brexit will be a sham.

Those who argued that Brexit would be a catastrophic disaster for the UK have already been proved totally  wrong and yet they continue to forecast a bad outcome. Why ? Even David Cameron, one of the most ardent Remainers, has admitted that voting to leave the EU was not a disaster but, in his words, was a mistake. The UK economy has fared far better than the naysayers predicted and the sky has not fallen in, and yet those such as Philip Hammond and Vince Cable continue to talk it down. It already seems likely that the next round of official government forecasts will revise Hammond's miserable budget predictions from November, increasing predicted growth figures and tax revenues, and finding billions more funding for the NHS.

While our economy may not be booming, it has not collapsed and shows no signs of doing so. Once we are free of the EU and its volumes of bureaucracy, restrictive practices, corruption and simple waste, we will be free to invest as we wish to. We will not have to pay to keep French farmers in business nor allow Spanish trawlers access to our fishing grounds, except on our terms rather than  theirs. We will not have to pay for an entirely unnecessary tier of European government that  encompasses a parliament, commission, courts, ambassadors, council, vast civil service and heaven knows what else. We will make our own laws, free from European Union diktat; we will trade freely with whomsoever we like on terms that suit us, rather than being bound by the grindingly slow processes of EU negotiation.

What can there possibly be about leaving the European Union that is not to like ?