Remain, and audit the EU

Sir, – Having voted to Remain I have taken a keen interest in news and opinions of those of both sides of the Brexit ‘‘debate’’ (is there one?) and am somewhat flummoxed and very disappointed by the lack of decision, procrastination, lack of leadership and tenuous arguments of all concerned, as well as the unseemly infighting in government circles.

It has taken two years to get to this point, which should have been discussed at length before the referendum, and then declared in an obvious Statement of Intent (my phrase) put to the country many months ago.

The “offering” from Chequers and later, plus the late distribution of the White Paper in the Chamber, adds the dimension of Whitehall “farce” to the mix.

It all only points to our semi-detachment from the EU, and the Common Rule Book implies that we would be carrying out the administration for both the UK and the EU.

Where’s “Brexit” in that?

UK businesses wishing to make a five-year plan must be very concerned for themselves and their employees.

Either the whole idea should be scrapped or we, the UK voting public, should have another vote when it is eventually announced what “Brexit” really means. Does anyone know?

My preference would be to remain at the EU table with the whole EU bureaucratic machine having to undergo a business and financial audit, as many members, including the UK, are very unhappy at the extortionate sums to be paid to it.

Beth Boylen.

40 Fintry Place, Broughty Ferry.