Sergei Gotsmanov

I am pointing out that the report you quote was a political document written and published at a point that was designed to intervene in favour of remain vote in the referendum - it makes some convincing arguments but also neglects to address key issues in the debate. How many reports do you read that feel it is necessary to distance themselves from the institutions they support to make their points more valid. If you are going to rely on them to mould your argument than you should expect people to point out that the authors and the publisher have a vested interest. You should adopt a more balanced diet of reading and maybe as GM pointed out you may start making more accurate predictions post Brexit.

It had its place in the debate but I think it should have declared the fact that it was written by Europhiles, released by the fervently remain LSE and published at the time to have most impact on the referendum. It was a political document, which is fine but it should be exposed as such. The toe curling protests at the beginning declaring that it is only partly funded by the EU discredit it further - one author even embarrassingly declares that he does not support the Euro and never did. What has that got to do with it.

and I would add that your paper was published in May 2016 just before the referendum. That would further undermine its impartiality.

I would maintain that if you ask people who back one side to write a report then it will lose some of its integrity. Maybe my rhetoric about EU funding was a little Daily Mail, you are obviously better qualified than me to say but LSE backed Remain vocally and as I understand it is funded by the EU. I can appreciate that questioning the ESRC's independence would be offensive to you. I understand that there is a difference between having a bias in opinion within an organisation and that organisation having an agenda in its research findings.

All the sources factually incorrect apart from yours which was written by Europhiles for an outspoken institution supporting remain.

Not on this scale https://order-order.com/2016/05/13/eu-paid-e160-million-to-pro-remain-groups/

They are funded by the EU.

What they lied on their CVs as well Shurlock! Google them I took that from their CVs! You are very naïve to just read one side of the story Shurlock. I read a number of sources and then make up my mind. Have you read 'light up and Live' a paper on smoking by Phillip Morriss or 'Topping up' by William Grant? Its changed my life.

Well shall we have a little look at the authors then; John Van Reenen – ‘Advisor to Chief Economist of DG Competition (since 2003), European Commission’ Jonathan Wadsworth - Research Fellow: Institute fur Zukunft Arbeit, (IZA), Bonn 2000- is that the same European University? Gianmarco Ottaviano - Senior Non-Resident Fellow, Bruegel, Brussels, Belgium So as they are all stakeholders in the EU; yes they would say that.

As Mandy Rice Davies would say 'they would say that wouldn't they'. For the other version read migration watch.

That evidence depends on who you choose to believe. So you really cannot see any correlation between the fact more people are coming to the country and thus using the NHS and the fact that the NHS is under pressure? Do you think that if our population fell by 330,000 each year then there would be the same amount of people using the NHS? I will of course acknowledge that an ageing population and a knackered care system play their part! You again make the assumption that you are either for or against migration - that could not be further from the truth, migration is a wonderful thing. Uncontrolled migration is scary.

Inflation is at 1.6% that is hardly a dramatic rise. Sterling fell but many argued that would be a good thing - bet the Greeks wished they could devalue their currency. You must have been encouraged by the Governor of the Bank of England's comments. At least he could admit he was wrong!

The tax returns of the mainly low wage Eastern European workers is hardly going to pay for the infrastructure needed to cope with the annual arrival of a city the size of Southampton is it? Perhaps you have seen in the news recently that there is an NHS crisis at the moment.

The assumption that people that voted leave are stupid does not reflect well on those that wish for us to remain in the EU. Ironically since the referendum virtually every prediction made by the remain camp has been wrong - who is it exactly that is stupid?

I don't really trust polls but to be fair I would expect that result when people are asked, do they want to have their cake and eat it? Do you think that when Osborne stood up and told us that there would be a 'punishment budget' he was telling the truth?

That punishment budget never happened did it or the economic Armageddon after we voted out. These were promised by the leaders of remain or were they lying when they told us that - it works both ways. If your population goes up by 330,000 every year as a result of migration then they all need to be housed, their children educated and access to the NHS. Are you telling me that this will not put pressure on public services?

I would argue that we need each other. What will happen to the French wine industry if they put tariffs on our goods, and the German car industry or the Danish bacon market or the Spanish tourist industry? The list goes on and on. We also contribute a sizeable amount to the EU budget so in terms of functioning they really do need us. Brexit is a crisis entirely of the EU's making. They chose to tell Cameron to get stuffed when he tried to raise legitimate concerns over the level of migration.

It exposes how the remain camp take quotes out of context to suggest that we did not know that leaving may well entail leaving the single market.

Totally and absolutely agree. He is somebody a team like Saints needs in our dressing room.

Welcome to Saints! You must be our only Argentinian supporter! We did have a player called the Torpedo once who was from your homeland - Arias somebody.

I am embarrassed to say that I am guilty of quoting the Telegraph with my original statement but what you have unearthed is different to saying what the EU pays its 47,000 civil servants

I was quite comfortable with their calculations - surely you should look at take home pay and tax rates etc? Isn't it sad that the EU refuse to publish details of the pay of their civil servants. Almost as if they have something to hide.

There is of course the argument that he was guilty of diluting what Cameron wanted to ask for. Ultimately this undermined what package Cameron could put to the people and that was what led to Brexit. Your astute and seasoned negotiator was ultimately the architect of Brexit. One less of the 10,000 EU bureaucrats who are paid more than our prime minister. Hopefully we will get somebody in who will bat for Britain.

Gutted for you. Please keep the faith! Supporting Saints is never easy but it does mean we enjoy the wins more than supporters of the more fashionable clubs!