Turkey applied to join the EU in 1959. It has therefore taken 57 years between their application and the opening of the negotiation process. The negotiation process nowadays typically takes around 10 years for countries which are in a significantly better position than Turkey (economically, politically and geographically). Negotiation with Turkey is highly unlikely to be completed in a minimum of 15 years and that assumes they would instigate all the reforms needed which, for now, seems unlikely. They would also need to provide guarantees to secure their external border, which in reality they never could do.

And, even if they did everything required, all countries have a veto. France has already promised that they would hold a referendum on Turkish accession before deciding.

It would therefore be highly foolish of the UK to say they would veto it, when they don't need to at this stage (and unnecessarily damage bilateral relations).

Turkey is a complete red herring and the fact is that Gove and Johnson both know that and are deliberately misrepresenting the situation.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

(Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)

True, and they are much more likely to join well before Turkey (Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Bosnia). The main difference is that their total combined population is 17m. whereas Turkey has a population of 80m.

Bringing all of the above counties would not change the external borders of the EU at all - it would just fill the gap between Croatia, Greece and Bulgaria. Turkey would add well over 2000km to the external border of the EU.

So quite rightly it is the focus of attention compared to the others and a large part of the reason why their membership is a long, long way away.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

(Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)

The thing is, as things stand, Turkey have visa restrictions on entering the UK. Even if Turkey did join, That wouldn't change unless, we agreed to become part of Schengen.

"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead"

Stan Laurel

[Link]

These describe the 35 chapters. To save you the trouble I will cut and paste number 24 entitled Justice, Freedom and Security.

EU policies aim to maintain and further develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice. On issues such as border control, visas, external migration, asylum, police cooperation, the fight against organised crime and against terrorism, cooperation in the field of drugs, customs cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal and civil matters, Member States need to be properly

equipped to adequately implement the growing framework of common rules. Above all, this requires a strong and well-integrated administrative capacity within the law enforcement agencies and other relevant bodies, which must attain the necessary standards. A professional, reliable and efficient police organisation is of paramount importance. The most detailed part of the EU’s policies on justice, freedom and security is the Schengen acquis, which entails the lifting of internal border controls in the EU. However, for the new Member States substantial parts of the Schengen acquis are implemented following a separate Council Decision to be taken after accession.

Now looking at that do you think Turkey can convince all 28 nations, including Cyprus and Greece, who have foreign policy issues with Turkey since 1974, that they have complied.

''Sadly, Turkey is looking more like an Islamic dictatorship these days.''

Where does that help Turkey fulfil the criteria? Will you now not 'get so hung up on Turkey' and realise, as Slovenia Dave has explained so well, that there is more chance of Turkey winning the Euro footie than of it gaining entry into EU for the foreseeable future. Considering it applied in 1957 what is the definition of 'fast tracked?'

Chapter number 23 is a beaut.

[Link]

Entitled Judiciary and Fundamental Rights.
EU policies in the area of judiciary and fundamental rights aim to maintain and further develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice. The establishment of an independent and efficient judiciary is of paramount importance. Impartiality, integrity and a high standard of adjudication by the courts are essential for safeguarding the rule of law. This requires a firm commitment to eliminating external influences over the judiciary and to devoting adequate financial resources and training. Legal guarantees for fair trial procedures must be in place. Equally, Member States must fight corruption effectively, as it represents a threat to the stability of democratic institutions and the rule of law. A solid legal framework and reliable institutions are required to underpin a coherent policy of prevention and deterrence of corruption. Member States must ensure respect for fundamental rights and EU citizens’ rights, as guaranteed by the acquis and by the Fundamental Rights Charter.

Where does closing down a newspaper that was an opposition voice fit into this. That happened in the last 12 months. Oh yes, good times are coming to Turkey, the EU is begging her to join with their super standard human rights and respect for independent judiciary.

Want to know the chapter that's been completed in the last ten years?

Science and research.

Yes, that political hot potato.

I don't know how I'm going to vote. How many flipping times?

What, other than the left wing arguments for leaving that I've mentioned, reasons are there to leave? Use facts if possible not conjecture.

And don't say take our country back.

Which are? Use bullet points if you wish. Remember, facts not conjecture.

I have been doing that for the last week.

Well all of the reasons you've given are consequences of Tory policy. Any others?