WHEN it comes to the thorny subject of the EU, there will always be a large degree of entrenchment.

No matter how much progress David Cameron had made in his mission to seal a better deal for Britain, a third of the country would be unmoved in wanting to get out as soon as possible, while a third would remain committed to staying put.

As ever with politics, it is the other third, occupying the middle ground, who need to be won over and it is hard to see how Mr Cameron’s “package of reforms” is going to cause much excitement.

After months of negotiation, there are some minor changes around the edges but nothing of sufficient clarity to be seen as a game-clincher.

The Prime Minister insists that his efforts would make Britain “better off, more secure, more prosperous” in a reformed EU, which will include an “emergency brake” on migrant welfare.

But he was hardly going to emerge from his prolonged bout of arm wrestling and declare that he’d achieved nothing.

We do not doubt that Mr Cameron has done his best but, even if he had returned from his negotiations completely empty-handed, our position would not have changed.

The North-East is the region of great global companies like Nissan, Hitachi, Cummins Engines and Cleveland Bridge.

It is a major exporter, with thousands of jobs dependent on access to the EU, and we find it inconceivable that Britain would somehow be better off on the outside looking in.

The EU is far from perfect – no relationship ever is – and we expect Mr Cameron and his successors to go on fighting our corner.

But when the referendum comes, we sincerely hope the British people share our view that the pros of the EU outweigh the cons.