I WAS hoping that any response from Peter Hirst would have actually quantified what his purported benefits of the EU were to the ordinary citizens of this country.

Instead of which he simply provided a long list of policies and descriptions as if these were automatically regarded as being of benefit.

Well, Peter, not only are they not of any benefit in financial terms, some are downright dangerous to the wellbeing of this country.

Let’s have a more detailed look at some of his ‘benefits’.

First of all he is very enthusiastic about farming subsidies.

However, farming subsidies are lumped together with rural development, which in total amounts to around £3 billion per year, not all of which goes to farmers.

But in order to trigger that payment we have to pay in around twice as much. Thus, even if the farmers got all of that payment, which they don’t, then out of the EU the UK government would continue those farming subsidies at half the cost.

If Peter Hirst thinks that the EU system of us paying in twice as much as we get back is a wonderful benefit then he can stand at the bottom of our street anytime handing out £10 notes and I’ll give him a fiver for each one.

I notice he doesn’t even mention the fishing industry.

That was totally destroyed by joining the EU in the first place.

Thousands of jobs and family livelihoods were lost and we now no longer have a viable fishing fleet.

To add insult to injury there is one, just one, foreign vessel which hoovers up 34 per cent of our catch and drops it off at Rotterdam.

We don’t even get the benefit of our own fish.

Or does he think that is another benefit?

Peter is a strong advocate of the ‘free movement of people’. We’ve all become aware of the disaster of that policy in recent times.

The country’s infrastructure is collapsing under the sheer weight of numbers we’re forced to accept.

Our NHS is unable to cope, schools are bulging at the seams and now the national government is to force local authorities to concrete over green fields in order to provide housing.

Peter says the EU combats ‘people trafficking’. What? How?

We’ve all seen the news reports.

They are flooding into the Mediterranean states, many of whom are then ushered through the EU to the Calais camps for onward transmission to this country.

Peter says he also loves this country.

Well it’s a funny way of showing it by handing our sovereignty and freedoms over to an unaccountable, anti-democratic foreign power.

Can I suggest in future, Peter, that you concentrate on sticking to just three or four of your ‘favoured’ benefits.

Then quantify them to show just how they benefit ordinary citizens.

Don Micklewright Weaverham