Misconstruing Brexit

Mr Dyer’s column titled “Brexit blues sink in for May as deal reduced to farce”, ( Opinion, Dec 14), is as misleading as any politician’s waffle.

Interviewers get paid to ask awkward questions, politicians get paid to follow the outcome of a democratic vote and these days it appears political commentators get paid to misinform from whichever side of the fence they sit.

It is not important what Theresa May would vote, the referendum was a “once and for all” democratic decision and it is her job to get the best deal possible from a bitter European Union (EU) who are wondering where the money they squander will come from in future.

The situation regarding the border on the island of Ireland is intrinsically entwined with the trade deal that the EU refused to negotiate on until the UK agreed the divorce bill amount.

The EU sells the UK considerably more than the reverse so the biggest loser in any “no deal” is as likely to be the EU, and if that happens there will be no settlement payment either.

A WTO situation should not be dismissed, it is a valuable negotiating tool, and the UK could rejoin the European Free Trade Association (not the European Economic Area or EEA) until the EU see their error and make a decent trade agreement.

It is abundantly clear where Mr Dyer sits and anyone aware of the finer points of Brexit will see through his erroneous rhetoric.

PETER FAIRLESS