Hammond Warned Voters about No Deal Before we Voted in the Referendum

Here we have the then Foreign Secretary talking specifically on the record, on 2 March 2016, at Chatham House and setting out the alternatives to voting to remain in the EU.   When, now over 3 years later, he tries to claim that "nobody voted to be worse off" let us just remind ourselves of his conclusion:

"Why should we take a leap in the dark?  Why would we risk the effect of years of uncertainty on the British economy.  Why would we take that chance with our childrens' future,  risking our influence our prosperity and our security when by voting to remain we can have the best of both worlds in a reformed EU rather than the worst of both outside."

That sounds like a warning that voting NO was voting to be poorer, in his words, the worst of both worlds outside the EU - and we still voted NO.

Earlier in the same speech he refers to an exit from the EU on WTO terms as "the default option." It was quite clear then, as it is now, that a WTO exit was the default option so why is he not being honest with us now and backing the Government to force the EU to negotiate an honourable deal instead of proposing a deal at any price which he knows will never be acceptable either to our precious parliamentarians of the hapless citizens who elected them?