Forget goodwill, it is the EU that is the nasty party in these fruitless Brexit negotiations

SIR – The Prime Minister is taking a huge gamble trying to beat the EU’S nasty game of continuously changing the Brexit negotiating rules.

As Ambrose Evans-pritchard rightly sums it up (“It is dangerous for our economy to rely on EU goodwill over Brexit”, Business, February 22), there is no goodwill, just empty words.

The gambling stakes will get higher the nearer we get to March 29 2019, so the Government should very seriously consider relying on WTO rules, which will become by far our best option, and it should start preparing now.

At the final moment, does the Government want to be offered a Norway option with nasty knobs on, a Turkey deal with EU added trickery, or a Canadian arrangement with vital bits cut out? Suzanne Greenhill

Bishop’s Cleeve, Gloucestershire

SIR – If anyone doubted the nature of the EU establishment’s approach to Brexit, the appointment of Martin Selmayr as secretary general of the EU Commission (report, February 22) should help to clarify their thinking.

Mr Selmayr is an unabashed federalist, notoriously without scruple regarding the achievement of his political aims and vehemently opposed to Brexit. From his new position of unelected power, he will be able to exert a poisonous influence over Brexit negotiations, supported in his machinations by those British politicians and civil servants whose true allegiance is not to the United Kingdom but to some imagined higher European ideal.

It should be anticipated that, as a result, we will see even greater mendacity, bullying and impossible demands from Brussels. The tragedy for our country is that, in this tremendous struggle, its leaders, who ought to be acting like lions fiercely protecting our independence and our rights, appear rather to be behaving like nothing so much as a flock of confused and frightened sheep. Terry Smith

London NW11 SIR – They showed me two sealed boxes and invited me to choose.

It really was so simple, how could anyone refuse?

The one was labelled Brexit, the other one Remain,

Pick one, they said, or else your chance may never come again.

I understand the labels, but they don’t help me decide.

Before I choose I’d like some clues – what is it that’s inside?

“It’s clear as day,” said Mrs May, “an idiot could figure,

The labels are too small for you? Perhaps you’d like them bigger?”

“Oh, I can read the labels,” I hurry to explain,

“I need to know the contents, or I’m tempted to abstain.

Take Brexit for example, what does that indicate?”

“Oh, Brexit – that means Brexit – please try to concentrate!”

OK then, I try again: “Remain – what’s that about?”

She says: “It’s obvious to me, can there be any doubt?” “Well yes there can, and rather than give meaningless replies,

Give us the facts, we’d like brass tacks – evasion sounds like lies.”

So in the end I gave my vote, a little box I ticked,

But as events unfolded, I wondered what I’d picked.

While politicians argue, and as confusion grows,

We might begin to wonder if anybody knows. John Gordon

Datchworth Green, Hertfordshire

SIR – While I was having my coffee yesterday morning and reading the section “A year in politics” in Stop the World I Want to Get Off: Unpublished Letters to The Daily Telegraph, I was wondering what this Government would be dealing with at the present time if it was not so tied up with negotiating the terms for leaving the EU. Minette Dogilewski

Bembridge, Isle of Wight