//NJ; sorry to bother you at this time of the morning, but could you perhaps telll us any tangible benefits so far, or if not, any in the near future? I need cheering up! :-)//
We’ve done this once or twice before. It’s not what we’ve done (or will do), it’s what we can do without reference to an unelected supranational body.
// Is it because it was so obvious, that no one thought to mention it before 23rd June 2016 ? ;-)//
I think one or two people did (plenty of sources are available). The fact is that even with these difficulties highlighted (ad nauseum) over 17m people wanted out. There is simply no point going on about this. It’s done; we’ve left. Instead of being pragmatic the EU (entirely predictably) will make it as unpleasant as possible in order to discourage any other members from doing the same. You must ask yourself, why would you want to belong to a club which treats one of its most prominent former members (and one of the largest contributors to its coffers) with such contempt?
//At that time no one could have envisaged how obstructive the EU would be.//
I think it was almost guaranteed, Danny. They could not understand why we wanted to leave and that was the basis of the whole problem. The EU doesn’t engage with either its members or its trading partners. It dictates terms. If you want an example of this, look up how the “negotiations” are going between the EU and Switzerland. Switzerland currently operates on the basis of a number of bilateral agreements with the EU. This doesn’t suit the EU and the negotiations, such as they are, have developed in disagreement, rancour and threats. That’s how the EU conducts its business with its “partners.”