Chris Grayling is one of the least useful voices on the Europe debate that exists - he is simply ideologically opposed to being part of the EU and looks for issues to support his presumption.

Nor can we simply accept endless migration from across Europe with no ability to slow or stop the resulting growth in our population.

Let's take just one issue, immigration, which you say is "endless" and actually look at the detail of the 2014 figures:-

In total 641,000 immigrated to the UK in 2014 during 2014; 323,000 left the country.

• 193,000 of those arriving were students;

• 83,000 were British citizens returning or those born elsewhere coming home;

• 25,020 were asylum applications; and

• 119,883 immigrated on work visas.

That amounts to 420,903 people or around two thirds of all immigration, all of whom would be unaffected by an EU exit. If you break down the numbers further you find that an EU exit would less than 100,000 people. When you consider that 323,000 British citizens left the country you realise that we actually benefited from immigration.

thanks to changes to the Lisbon Treaty, countries like ours can now be outvoted every time by members of the eurozone on new European laws. We cannot be left in a position where we have no ability to defend our national interest.

We have an opt-out from European policies concerning asylum, visas and immigration and the treaty changes actually provided new opt-outs on any policies in the entire field of justice and home affairs.

We also gained a written guarantee that the treaty cannot be used by the European Court to alter British labour law, or other laws that deal with social rights.

Unanimous votes are still required in the areas of tax, foreign policy, defence and social security.

In essence Grayling's complaint is that in a few areas, issues which already affect all EU countries as a whole we have to negotiate with others to get what we want. We would still have to work together on these global issues even if we left the EU.

I could go on...