On January 16, The Voice published an insightful letter from G Ogden explaining why no net benefits can conceivably emerge from Brexit, but there will be huge disbenefits if we leave the EU… despite all the siren calls of Leave campaigners who insisted in 2016 that the UK would benefit from “the exact same benefits”, “they need us more than we need them”, “the easiest trade deal in human history”, “we can have our cake and eat it”, “we hold all the cards”, etc.
In contrast, all that Brexiteers are able to say today is that Brexit “won’t be Armageddon” [Grayling] or “a Mad Max-style dystopia” [Davis]. Is this really the outcome of Brexit anyone locally voted for or now wants?
Personally, I’ve yet to speak to even one Leave voter who voted to Leave in 2016 deliberately to be worse off after Brexit or to have rights ripped away from themselves, their children and grandchildren to travel, study, work and settle in any of the 28 EU member nations, albeit with no conceivable net benefits.
However, it’s clear that many Leave voters locally still believe that they, their children and grandchildren will somehow be better off after Brexit.
However, when I ask them precisely how they and their families will be better off after Brexit, answers come there none.
Typically, they say: “We’ll take back control of our money, laws and borders.” To which, I reply: “Well, how will this benefit you specifically?”
Perhaps readers of The Voice can help answer this question: “What specific benefits for individuals, families and workplaces locally can conceivably come from Brexit?”
Alan Meekings
by email
