Report comment

I wasn't saying that those who disagree with me have the mentality of 14 year olds: I was lamenting that so much of the debate, including on these pages, is no higher than that level. And I do appreciate that some 14 year olds are pretty sharp.

At least my comments have prompted some more considered reflections! When it comes to the specifics, I am neutral as to what should be kept and what discarded from the corpus of EU origin law we presently have. Each law should be assessed on its merits, and dealt with accordingly. On employment laws (since specifically mentioned) I think there is a wholly rational case for making employment rights less liberal post Brexit than in the EU: we will wish to distinguish ourselves as a good - better - place for business and trade, and reducing regulation in that area seems an obvious thing to do. There may be political difficulties of course, as the 'JAMs' Mrs May seeks to appeal to may be unhappy with reduced rights.

And while we had a fully functioning set of laws before the EU, that was a long time ago, and no UK Government has ever resisted passing more laws. There is no chance that all EU origin laws will be repealed, and that we revert to some pre-lapsarian legal paradise.

As for the Euro, it is jolly convenient if travelling in Europe, but as a concept it plainly doesn't work. It bolsters the rich, like Germany, and further impoverishes the relatively poor, like Greece and Italy, which cannot (for example) devalue to make their exports more attractive.

Personally, while I voted to remain, it was not out of conviction but because (a) the arguments relied on by the public Brexiteers were manifestly wrong or wholly speculative (if that was the best they could come up with, it wasn't very enticing); and (b) the law of unintended consequences: I considered that there would likely be unforeseen and damaging consequences of exiting, and the risk wasn't worth it. But it was a marginal decision, and now we have voted to leave, I am happy to leave. Like I think almost everyone else, I would like to know more about what Brexit really means, not to thwart it but because I sincerely hope that the Government is looking at this coolly and rationally, and has a realistic plan to achieve what is best for Britain. I appreciate that all this can't be discussed fully in public, given that so much is yet to be negotiated, but the Government's virtual silence - and the nonsense of the Leave campaign (equalled, for balance, by the nonsense of Project Fear) - is concerning. (A few more positive straws are appearing now though, I note.)

As for the NHS, it would be nice if the net saving from the EU were to go to the NHS, but don't bank on it. The present Government has cut NHS spending (as a proportion of GDP) and had plans (before the fall in sterling) to cut it yet further this year or in 2018. Don't forget we have a Tory Government, and will certainly have one for the next Parliament too, so at least 5 years and possibly 8, if not longer. Aside from any post Brexit wish to attract foreign investment and trade through lower tariffs and taxes, the Tories are more committed to reducing taxes in any event. That'll be where any saving goes. As for the NHS? Compulsory insurance within 10 years, perhaps starting with a wholesale revision of National Insurance, but ending up as a blend of public and private insurance, with private insurance predominant.