Dave's renegotiations look like a signpost towards #brexit to me

Were these 'ambitions' for the reform of the UK's relationship with the EU worth waiting for? Do they actually mean anything? Will they be delivered upon in reality?

Let's take them one at a time:

Protection of the single market for non EZ countries? The EU cannot afford not to trade with the UK. It has a £46 billion annual trade deficit with the UK in favour of the EU. If Dave thinks we'll have to fight to continue to trade with the Eurozone when our not trading with the Eurozone would leave the EU as a basket case economy, he has a pretty bloody crazy view of international trade. This is completely a non-issue. The EU cannot impose tariffs against UK trade by international law and even if it changed the rules it would be committing economic suicide were it to do so. Brexit would make absolutely no difference to this position.

Boosting competitiveness? The EZ is fundamentally anti-competitive, insular and protectionist. It facilitates the continued 'rape' of Africa and stops Africa from trading its way into the first world. Brexit would eliminate EU red tape at a stroke and allow us to trade on fair terms with the rest of the world.

Exempting Britain from ever closer union? Is Dave saying here that if we stay in we'll lose the pound, have to take on the Euro and become part of the single state unless we secure a reform that says otherwise? If he is, we should be told about this. I don't think there is any possibility that we would acquiesce to these events, now or ever. So why do we need 'reform' in this area unless he's not telling us something? And the EU has publicly stated that ever closer Europe, a federal state with its own anthem, flag, army, financial arrangements is it's fundamental goal. Why are we trying to stay in to help pay for this when we absolutely do not want it to happen?

Restricting EU migrants' access to in-work benefits? What does 'restricting' mean? And no mention of our ability as a nation to protect ourselves from being overwhelmed by Angela's hordes? Restricting means reducing so that the UK is not such a welfare-driven open-door magnet for uncontrolled immigration from poorer EU countries. Saying 'we're not very nice, please don't come here'. And the response is, as always, 'you might not be very nice, but you're a hell of a lot nicer (much more benefits) than our countries of origin, we'll come anyway'. It does not add up, in any way, to control of our borders.

And that's it Dave?

Given that if we leave, the EU will crumble economically and financially (so you hold all the cards), this is all you can hope to achieve?

Every single one of these 'aspirations' for EU reform would be better delivered by brexit. And every single one of them will be fudged and at best partially achieved by some sort of bungled, nod and a wink reform process.

Really Dave these are not 'starting points' for renegotiation; they're all absolute worst case scenarios even if you actually achieve them in full.

None of them are anywhere near enough to justify an 'in' or 'remain' vote at the coming referendum. None of them deliver what the UK people need and none of them will be of any help to the countries that are currently suffering under the yoke of the current German-driven take-over of Europe.

If you think that we will see these minor and largely irrelevant measures as proper 'reform' or in the long-term interests of the UK, you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Thanks for reading.