W CALVERT (D&S Times, Nov 4) suggests that those of us who would prefer the UK to remain in the EU are unable to state any of the advantages of continued membership.

I will name but a few: improved environmental protection, better job security and employment rights, the freedom to live work or study in other EU countries, the Erasmus research program which benefits UK universities and scientific research (and thus the population as a whole), higher and better emission standards for vehicles (with consequent improved in air quality), the recovery of fishing stocks, better management of the natural habitat which help both farmers and the conservation of endangered wildlife.

And to crown it all, peace and stability on a continent which in the last century was ravaged by two world conflicts, to say nothing of the near seamless integration of the former eastern block countries into a prosperous union following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

We are not in the monetary union, we are not in the Schengen Area, we have full control of our borders with most immigration to the UK from outside the EU.

There is a membership fee to be paid to be in the EU, but it is a small price which is well worth paying.

We pay taxes to local and national governments and we also pay a form of taxation to the EU. The difference is that the EU spends money on things our own governments would otherwise ignore and, just for the record, our region benefits proportionally more from EU inward investment than it does from UK government spending.

Those who wish to leave were vocal in criticizing what they saw as the ‘undemocratic’ European Parliament, yet are now screaming loudly when some of us are demanding that our own Westminster Parliament be allowed to scrutinize the process of leaving the EU. It is not simply a matter of handing in our membership card and waving a cheery farewell.

Many of the arguments put forward for leaving were a tissue of lies and I’ve asked Leavers on many occasions to give me an example of an EU law they take exception to, or an example of EU red tape and bureaucracy which is strangling industry, and I have yet to hear a single one put forward.

The referendum result was not decisive but if the Leavers are so convinced of their arguments, why do they object to a second referendum on the terms of our exit?

I love my country which is why, as one of the 48 per cent who voted to remain, I will not be silenced.

Dr Andrew Newens, Darlington