No, I didn't miss the bits about the impact assessments, but it depends what angle you are looking from. I wouldn't want to put any information out there if I were negotiating that might undermine my position, or be leaked to the EU; and with the wide range of variables, how can you have a definitive assessment?
As for DD not being the brightest star - I have to say that if those who wish to remain think the EU is a fluffy bunny benign entity, then they need to give their heads a wobble. It is about power, and power corrupts. It is about making money and concentrating power in the hands of the unelected EU Presidents and Commissioners.
Those who say 'reform from the inside', that will never happen. Those who weren't listening when Barroso said it was an empire, need to do some digging, and those who missed Juncker saying in 99 'We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.'
2005: 'If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'.
2007: "Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?"
"There is a single legal personality for the EU, the primacy of European law, a new architecture for foreign and security policy, there is an enormous extension in the fields of the EU's powers,'
2011: ' I'm ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic, but I want to be serious [...] I am for secret, dark debates.'
2015: 'There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties,'
As is often said on here, when someone tells you who they are, listen. I have been listening for a long time, and I do not like what I hear.