It's that time of year when the whole world feels as if its gearing up for a week away somewhere hot and sunny - but if you haven't got the time or the budget, don't despair. A short-break somewhere different can be just as reinvigorating, and at this time of year there's a huge variety of trips on offer - from the simplicity of a shepherd's hut to the swankiest of the swank; a break by private jet.
Never before have so many had to decide on something they knew or cared so little about. The "London bubble" is obsessing about the EU referendum on June 23. Parts of Twitter I see are hyperventilating with excitement over designation, debates, purdah, net costs and benefits, and the like. But the majority of the country could not give a fig.
If there is a Leave vote, there will be a period of uncertainty as Parliament tries to decipher exactly what a Leave vote means and how to deal with it. Whichever way Parliament tries to address the people's mandate, there will be loud cries of unfairness from all sides, and each cry of foul could slow down or derail whatever mechanism is used to give effect to the Leave vote.
Britain deserves a factual, broadly focused, debate featuring a wide range of voices: the voices of scientists and green campaigners, small business people and historians, pensioner advocates and youth activists, MEPs who can talk about the work they do and bureaucrats and campaigners who've worked in Brussels who can explain how the EU actually works. That's not what we've had up until now. But it isn't too late.
The brutal political violence inflicted by the EU on Greece, and the inevitability of expanded globalisation and corrupt trade deals, show us that this dream is not one we can achieve by remaining in the EU. The only way we can truly send the EU a message will be by voting to leave it on the 23rd June.
When I recently told a colleague that I want the UK to leave the EU, she expressed considerable dismay that someone of my background - mixed-race, working class, comprehensive education - was lining up with far-right racists. Such a misguided view of the people who support Brexit does a disservice to the millions of Britons up and down the UK, who are now in a majority that understands why it is morally, politically and economically essential for Britain to leave the EU.
Whether you're campaigning to leave or remain, surely we can all agree that asking the poorest in society to shoulder the greatest burden is a raw deal? But by refusing to address the very real consequences of EU membership, the maths of immigration, and the required investment in public services, a raw deal is exactly what's on offer.
Of course economic considerations influence political decision-making, but some are too fundamental to draw up a cost benefit analysis. At the heart of the issue is whether or not Britain should remain part of an expanding and undemocratic super-state. Democracy should not be sacrificed upon a cross of gold.
It is too simplistic, to say the least, to think that having filed for divorce with a vote to Leave we would get to dictate from the sidelines the terms and settlement to access EU markets following the separation. For all its frustrations, being part of the world's largest trading bloc, is critical for the investment projects that are so vital for success in the Northern Powerhouse. We need to remain to keep it that way.
Our democratic rights are all we have to protect us from tyranny and poor government. We must not sell them for the illusion of a pot of EU gold. People on both sides will try to use scare stories of immigration, risks to the economy, house prices, war and all sorts of other noisy issues, but, at its quiet heart, democracy is the defining issue of this referendum.