I'm at home today, looking out of the window on a Britain that suddenly feels a bit chillier, and there is something missing. That's right. There's no street party outside for British Independence Day. Ukip haven't got the trestle tables and the bunting out. There's no PA system knocking out Vera Lynn. The mini pork pies and cans of IPA are conspicuous by their absence.

That's all very sarky from a Leave voter, and I don't mind admitting to how I cast my ballot a year ago. I wanted to leave the EU. I thought the country would be better off out. Now I am not so sure. The reality of what is unfolding looks uglier.

Many Leave voters are starting to feel as though they weren't told certain things in the referendum, especially about the economy, that are just starting to become clear. This even includes what Brexit means for immigration – including whether we’ll end up with a weaker NHS, dearer taxi rides and costlier fresh fruit and veg when the supply of European hard workers dries up. Leave voters were not told about the divorce bill or the full implications for Ireland or Gibraltar. Nor that entire industries, from finance to cars, would suffer death by a thousand cuts as investment drifts away from Britain across the Channel.

In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions Show all 12 1 /12 In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions European commission member in charge of Brexit negotiations with Britain, French Michel Barnier listens at the President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker speaking at the European Parliament in Strasbourg Getty Images In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions Frank-Walter Steinmeier, President of the Federal Republic of Germany, delivers his speech at the European Parliament in Strasbourg EPA In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions European Union's chief Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt, President of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), addresses the European Parliament during a debate on Brexit priorities and the upcomming talks on the UK's withdrawal from the EU Reuters In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions Michel Barnier, European Chief Negotiator for Brexit reacts during a meeting at the European Parliament in Strasbourg EPA In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions Member of the European Parliament and former leader of the anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP) Nigel Farage wears socks with Union Jack flag at the European Parliament in Strasbourg Getty Images In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions Nigel Farage, United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) member and MEP, addresses the European Parliament during a debate on Brexit priorities and the upcoming talks on the UK's withdrawal from the EU Reuters In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions European commission member in charge of Brexit negotiations with Britain, French Michel Barnier gestures during speeches at the European Parliament in Strasbourg Getty In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions The President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker (L) speaks with European commission member in charge of Brexit negotiations with Britain, French Michel Barnier at the European Parliament in Strasbourg Getty In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions European Union's chief Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt, President of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), addresses the European Parliament during a debate on Brexit priorities and the upcomming talks on the UK's withdrawal from the EU Reuters In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions Member of the European Parliament and former leader of the anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP) Nigel Farage gestures during speeches at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, eastern France, on April 5, 2017. The European Parliament will on April 5 lay down its "red lines" for negotiations over a Brexit deal, on which the assembly will have the final say in two years' time. / AFP PHOTO / Sebastien BozonSEBASTIEN BOZON/AFP/Getty Images Getty In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions German president Frank-Walter Steinmeier delivers a speech during a plenary session at the European Parliament in Strasbourg Getty In pictures: European parliament Brexit discussions The European Parliament in Strasbourg, eastern France Getty Images

No one said that taking back control would mean we'd be poorer – well, "Project Fear" tried to, but it didn't work.

Many, me included, thought a Leave vote would mean we could keep many of the trading and economic advantages with few of the downsides in a new deal because we were such an important European market. We thought things would be nicer. We thought German carmakers and French vineyards (and carmakers) wouldn't let the worst happen. We thought there'd be more cash for the NHS.

It doesn't look that way now and Theresa May's after-dinner speech to fellow heads of government was only a joke in the sense that she was politely listened to before being gently ushered out of the EU leaders' meeting, like the token drunk at a wedding reception. It demonstrated graphically how weak a hand the UK has in these talks, with their artificial tight two-year deadline and “cliff edge” consequences, which would mean whole swathes of trade and commerce seizing up at Customs. After all it has taken us a whole year to agree precisely nothing.

So why on earth did I vote Leave?

I hope I did it for rational reasons, some if not most of which are still right. Voting Leave for me wasn't, for example, a vote against immigration – but for a more rational policy. There is no good reason why an unskilled Bulgarian should be favoured over, say, a skilled South African health worker. We need both and need to decide what ratio we want. However, I admit much of the Leave vote was just a racist backlash: but even there you need to recognise the strength of that opinion in a democracy, if only for fear of worse.

One Tory MP once put it to me simply: that if we didn't leave "there'd be an explosion". I happen to think mass migration means a bigger more powerful economy able to afford care for its elderly; but I too fear the baser instincts that have been exposed in the past year or so. Many Leave voters, as was well reported, felt no one was listening to their concerns, and I doubt that anyone on the liberal left would if it hadn't been for the Leave vote. Perhaps Jeremy Corbyn will be the answer to all that, unlikely as it seemed a short time ago.

Donald Tusk says May’s offer to EU citizens will make things 'worse'

For me it was a marginal decision. On the one hand the EU was and is a vast prosperous market and the single market is a remarkable if not unprecedented achievement. On the other hand it is riven by financial crises and some economies are terminally sclerotic. The EU is yesterday's growth story. From the 1950s to the 1970s parts of the EU were like China and India today – exciting dynamic economies that Britain needed to link to. Now Italy and France aren't quite like that, and we do need to reorient the UK to faster growing markets around the world.

The EU is protectionist toward the rest of the globe just as it is open within itself. It cannot survive as a high-cost, indebted, unstable island lacking competitiveness without impoverishing its people, and it has proved highly resistant to sensible reform.

EU rules mean that the British can't negotiate their own terms with third parties or liberalise their own economy to make it much more competitive globally. The structure of the euro means permanent disaster for the EU, even though we've not seen a banking crisis or a country going kaput for a while. That fundamental weakness in the EU economy – the euro – hasn't gone away just because things have gone quiet. We were outside the euro, yes, but badly exposed to the damage it created. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, by the way, has written the definitive book about this.

Therefore last 23 June, we had an economic choice. Be part of a big, rich, slow growth economy in relative decline, or join poorer but rapidly expanding markets. Stay in the EU, enjoy stability but be permanently part of a slow growth zone of decline, albeit a rich one, or take the risk of joining the world economy's fastest growing nations, but with less access to our existing largest existing markets. To me, in the long term the option of plugging into growth stories in Asia, Africa and South America is the more compelling, including movement of people. Free trade and cheaper food and goods is also attractive.

But the medium-term costs would be horrendously high – something few Leavers admit. It would be even more painful than the inflation and unemployment suffered as a result of joining Europe after 1973. Now, as in those days, you need to take a view about whether the costs outweigh the benefits. To do that you need more clarity and the opportunity to make a decision on the actual terms offered by the EU. That is the logical thing to do. Yes, that means a second referendum in 2019, with or without a post-Theresa May general election attached to it.

The trick in the negotiations would be to get the best of both worlds, to “have your cake and eat it”, as Boris Johnson used to say. It doesn't look like we will. The talks may prove more advantageous than looks likely now, and we will learn more in the coming weeks, and in the coming months about new trade opportunities.

At the moment the balance is moving away from Leave as the costs and the damage piles up. I’m not sure I would vote Leave again. I’m sure I want another vote. It will come, and Jeremy Corbyn should promise one. It's the only way the country can get through this.