Trade argument in Brexit debate a big red herring
Thank goodness for some common sense from Sammy Wilson MP (News, January 21) regarding the possible Brexit from the EU.
The UK contributes over €14.5bn a year to the EU. It is approximately equal to the whole Northern Ireland Budget for 2015/16. In return, the UK receives slightly over €6bn a year from the EU.
So, in effect, in the event of a Brexit, the UK Government could double the current level of EU funding and still be €2bn better off each year. Any suggestion of a detrimental effect on trade is a big red herring. We buy French wines, Spanish tomatoes, Italian olive oil because we like them.
In the event of a Brexit, no one would believe that we will stop purchasing these things, so why do leading economists suggest the opposite - ie that EU countries will stop buying Comber potatoes, Armagh apples or farm-assured quality meat?
EU politicians are in a high-stakes poker game with David Cameron, whereby they could lose 10% of the annual EU budget in the event of a Brexit. It would be suicidal for them to then enter into a trade war and risk losing a further £19bn in trade each month (Office of National Statistics figures).
EU membership is akin to gym membership: we join with good intentions, but at some point reality dawns that we are not getting our money's worth.