Mr Reeves’ letter last week deserves a reply.

He asks: ‘Why object to leaving the EU without a deal when [Opposition politicians] are unable to say what deal would satisfy them?”

But many opponents of no-deal do say what they prefer.

One choice is to leave the EU but stay in the single market and customs union.

Another choice is to keep the good deal we currently have and stay in the EU.

His letter goes on to say ‘the EU continues costing us money’.

But our own government’s ‘impact assessment’ of 2018 says that no-deal is the costliest of all possible outcomes.

It will cost us twice as much as Mrs May’s deal and five times as much as Norway’s current deal with the EU.

Staying in the EU with our current deal is the cheapest.

His letter also says ‘we cannot help our own companies because to do so would contravene EU competition rules’.

We can help, but it is complicated.

But remember that it was our own Mrs Thatcher who, in the 1980s, fought hard to impose these rules on giving state aid to stop countries unfairly subsidising their own companies. She succeeded.

We can hardly complain now about the very rules that the UK fought so hard to create.

As for ‘having to go to France to build a new power station at Hinckley Point’, the UK no longer has the technical expertise of the French and we needed to borrow Chinese money to help build it.

But seeking foreign help has nothing to do with the EU. It was our government’s choice. – Elizabeth Heylings, Mitcheldean.