THERE are many voters who believe that the EU is imperfect and is in need of serious reform.

Fat chance.

The latter day disciples of its founding fathers have their vision and are pursuing it with zeal.

Just look how little reform David Cameron was able to achieve.

But neither does the idea of voting to leave the EU appeal to these would-be reformers.

So, consider this: The electorates of other EU countries, following the UK’s lead, are beginning to call for in/out referenda of their own.

A UK Leave vote would accelerate this process, particularly as the Article 50 (EU withdrawal terms) changes significantly on December 31, 2017, after which date the withdrawal process becomes much more onerous.

A rash of withdrawals would provide the opportunity to create a bi-modal Europe: an ever closer Eurozone for the Zealots and a European Community for the Reformers.

A tweak to the EEA agreement would, in the meantime, retain the single market access for all concerned during the period that the new terms were being thrashed out, thus ensuring that there was no possibility of the economic shock we are (erroneously) being led otherwise to expect.

Concerns of these reformers over workers’, consumers’, social, human, civil rights, etc, that have already been won would disappear because the re-negotiators would almost certainly wish to retain them, at least in principle.

Environmental issues as well as product specification and safety matters would still be dealt with collectively but on an international rather than a supranational (one size fits all) basis.

This should appeal to younger voters who would have the chance to design a ‘Europe’ more to their liking, yet one with which their elders would still feel comfortable.

On this basis, only if you wish that the UK ceases to be a self-governing nation-state and become subsumed into a European Empire (a perfectly laudable aim), should you vote to Remain.

All other outcomes are better served by voting Leave and progressing from there.

John S Churchill

Uplands