From: Ken Cooke, Ilkley.
FOLLOWING his embarrassing visit to Luxembourg, it was widely reported that Boris Johnson does not properly understand what the EU Single Market is. Considering that is what he is trying to ‘leave’, it reflects abysmally on the entire Brexit project.
Wikipedia summarises: “The European Single Market, Internal Market or Common Market is a single market which seeks to guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour – the “four freedoms” – within the European Union.”
This internal market is a tremendous benefit for the economies of all members, though it comes with costs associated with managing it and agreeing on terms and conditions. These include quality standards for goods of all kinds: from food and drinks to all types of machinery, including cars, and chemicals and medicines. The terms also extend to workers’ rights and consumer protection.
A single or internal market is what we have within the UK – between our member nations and between counties. It is also what the USA has between its constituent states. It might be obvious, but it should not be taken for granted. A single market shared by 28 nation states is a historical wonder.
Brexiters want the benefits of the EU Single Market without contributing to the costs and Boris Johnson said as much after the 2016 referendum.
The best deal is the one we already have – as a member of the EU.
From: Mary Wilcock, Scotland Lane, Horsforth, Leeds.
REGARDING the calls for a second referendum, most of the people I know say they wouldn’t vote again. If we were not listened to the first time, what guarantee have we that a second one would be any different?
Many of our elected MPs have ignored the wishes of the people who elected them so we have no faith in any thing they say. Why then go to the expense of doing it again?
From: Canon Michael Storey, Healey Wood Road, Brighouse.
COUN Tim Mickleburgh (The Yorkshire Post, September 19) has suggested that I only considered the 2016 referendum as a “mere statistical survey, which can be undone by more up-to-date research”. The point I was trying to make might be best illustrated by asking Coun Mickleburgh if, had he decided something in 2016, was he bound by it if he thought, in 2019, that he had made the wrong decision three years previously?