So much of the current discussion about our future relationship with the EU is about access to the single market. If we could have all the benefits of belonging to the single market without being obliged to obey its rules, be able to make our own laws, control our own borders, abolish the EU’s tariffs on our imports, make no contributions to the EU budget and make our own trade deals around the world, then I would support being a member. But such a package is unobtainable.

Of the realistic options, some people have argued that we should seek a deal like Norway’s or Switzerland’s. We should want neither of these. Rather, we should seek to be like all other countries in the world, that is to say, outside the single market but trading extensively with it. In realising this vision, our officials and ministers need to bear in mind six key points.

Single market membership is not the be-all and end-all

First, contrary to the propaganda, membership of the single market is not of overwhelming importance. If it were, how would it be possible for non-member countries from all around the world to sell to it so successfully, and why would its members be doing so badly? Why haven’t single market member countries been carried forward on a wave of prosperity created by the mutual recognition of standards and the absence of border checks?

The benefits of the single market have been sufficiently small that they have been outweighed by other factors: the macroeconomic disaster that is the euro and the micro-economic disaster that is the web of regulations, laws and interferences that reduce market efficiency across the union.

Tariffs might be a price worth paying 

Second, tariffs are not a big issue. By all means, let’s try to get a deal under which our exports to the EU face no tariffs. But this is not worth paying much for – or enduring much of a delay for. If our exporters end up having to pay the EU’s common external tariff this would not be a killer blow. The average tariff on manufactured goods is about 4pc.

If it comes to it, even the 10pc tariff on cars would be more than compensated by the lower exchange rate for the pound. And if the City loses passporting rights, that isn’t a killer blow either. The key requirement is to be outside the EU’s icy regulatory embrace. In the long term, securing this would be well worth enduring some short-term loss.

David Fuller's view

Roger Bootle’s analysis make sense to me.  However, we can expect international banks and many other City firms to take a somewhat different view.  They may only be lobbying in their perceived best interests, but we hear plenty of talk about partial moves to various regions of the EU.  Some of that may be inevitable but Mrs May’s Government will need to remain diplomatic and in close contact with these firms, while also holding its line on a reasonably swift and complete exit from the EU. 

Here is a PDF of Roger Bootle's article.