HENRY Cobden is right (The Yorkshire Post, July 2) in observing that very few, even Ukip, thought the 2016 referendum would end in favour of Brexit.
But the main reason it did was the arrogant ideological stance that the EU Commission adopted to oppose David Cameron. He went begging for a little compromise, but all he got was a few crumbs and a wall of intransigence.
Ever since the 1975 referendum, a large and growing segment of opinion in the UK – seeing how our sovereignty was being eaten away by the non-elected Commission that seemed to sideline Parliament – became more and more hostile to the EU’s machinations and its federalisation agenda.
And, as the EU grew, things worsened, for many of the new nations, whose cultural and economic circumstances were quite different to ours, started a migration exodus that hardly affected the liberal, pontificating metropolitan elite betrothed to utopian diversity and often professionally linked with the Brussels’ gravy train.
This self-serving group contemptuously ignored what was happening at ground level – the shambles in our inner cities of overcrowding and pressure on schooling, housing, hospitals, transport and crime protection.
There’s no doubt that not enough thought had gone into the difficulty of extricating ourselves from this oppressive behemoth. When UK big business structure is so interlocked with its European counterparts, the process of escape will entail a monumental effort of diplomacy, will and toughness.
But to reverse the Brexit decision as Remainers want would be worse than the feared cliff edge. It would be humiliating and bordering on enforced enslavement.
From: Neville Balmer, Sicklinghall.
THE term ‘Brexit’ has been around for so long it has become hackneyed and lost much of its meaning and intentions with both friends and foes alike.
Time for a new name – what better than ‘independence’? Definition ‘free from the control and influence of others’.
Anti-Brexiteers and the noble House of Lords would find it much more difficult to think of any good reasons why UK voters should oppose ‘independence’ and hand over ‘control and influence to others’. Game, set and match I think. They could even be accused of treachery for good measure.