The UK should remain a member of the Customs Union

I'm glad to hear that you have come to the conclusion that we cannot judge what people actually want over the customs union. My original point was that there is diversity of opinion and that there is no mandate to take us out. That doesn't mean that there is a mandate to stay but that one cannot stay we voted to leave the customs union. My point still stands. So really this debate rests on who can prove that remaining in the customs union is good for our economy since we consider that we have no idea what the general public would want. You clearly want (and rightly so) to make this an economics debate. If so then I'm afraid you have a really tough case to prove. Despite the calls from major businesses such as Innocent Drinks, Nissan, Rolls Royce and major economic authorities such as the IMF, the World Bank, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Brexit Committee and the civil service all arguing that we are better off in the customs union there are many other blindingly obvious reasons for why you would want to stay in that union. Let's face it: the Leave campaign knew that their economic argument was weak and that the Economic argument to remain was much stronger. That's why Leave made it all about immigration. The customs union, although not the same as the EU membership, is along the same lines. The economic difficulties are similar. The reality is that customs declarations costs are a real pain in the backside for companies wanting to trade abroad. Just look at this great article from the impartial and highly respected - Institute for Fiscal Studies: https://www.ifs.org.uk... It will cost, according to the EU's own economic affairs committee "25 billion a year to our economy. That will end up hitting our wages and our living standards, our schools and our hospitals. This is no mild threat. The reality is that British people will suffer if we leave. Your alternative is far less tangible than the solid and reliable status quo. We heard about tariffs and that setting our own tariffs is advantageous. Firstly, I would generally agree. However, our economy is similar to the European economy. Furthermore, we are allies and have the same interests. When Germany and France put tariffs on Russia over Ukraine the UK does too. We don't need a different tariff strategy because our interests are so similar. It makes absolutely no sense in this case. British people don't want chlorinated chicken. The same goes for other Europeans. Why should we adopt a different customs standard? Next you mentioned the idea of signing ambitious new trade deals. You argued that other small countries have made good deals and that this means we can to. It is true that small countries have made good trade deals. Firstly, 3 examples of this is not evidence of a trend. Secondly, look at the small print of those deals. The reality is that Switzerland and Iceland and others like them have had to make huge concessions to their bigger partners. I point you to our attempts at a deal with India. What do the Indians want? : more concessions over immigration. It is undeniable that negotiating a part of the EU is a much stronger position. The EU can stand up to the likes of Trump over a trade deal. Poor old Mrs May doesn't stand a chance. The terms would be bad for us. The EU also does have very good agreements with the USA and China. If I was Xi Xingping I'd much rather sell my products to a market of well over 500 000 000 than 65 000 000. Furthermore, the EU is right on our doorstep and not half way across the world like Australia is. Europe is so much more important to our economy than Australia would ever be. Yes of course 17% is less than 83% but we will not get good deals with all 83% whereas we have a fantastic deal with 17%. Now saying that damaging 44% percent of our trade is hyperbolic is really silly. 44% is absolutely huge in trade terms. And don't take my word for it. Just read what any economic institute has to say. Furthermore, a lot of our trade with the other 56% relies heavily on our access to the 44%. You wonder why the economy grew so well in the 1980s. One reason was that The City of London became a trading hub for the Asian and American markets who wanted access to Europe. The Uk's trade with non-european countries is often based on the fact they want to sell to Europe and go through a nice English speaking country. Even on its own 44% is crucial (it's almost half after all) and added on to my previous point it is even more important that we protect that trade we already have. In conclusion, the European Union is absolutely crucial to the success of our economy. It's constitutes much of our trade and is our nearest and dearest market. We therefore need to prioritise it. The reality is that leaving the Customs Union will heavily damage our trade with both the EU and the EEA (which includes EVEN MORE PEOPLE). Therefore, we need to make sure we stay in the Customs Union. The downside of this is that we will have less tariff control. However, since we have such similar interests and this has never been a major problem this isn't a major downside. This Brexiteer fairy land of glorious trade deals all over the world is nonsense. We know that smaller countries get poorer trade terms and that the EU is a much better market to get access to for rising economies like China. Therefore, let's stay in the Customs Union to make sure we get access to the much better deals that they can negotiate on our behalf. Rees Mogg and others like him take this position not for the sake of hardworking British people who he knows will be damaged by leaving the Customs Union but because he favours an offshore tax haven capitalist paradise. In the real world, it will be one of fewer jobs, lower living standards, poorer public services and yet more poverty (as if there isn't already enough). Don't let's order a pizza thinking it'll be great and then it arrives covered in pigeon poo but we eat it anyway.