There are two options under consideration. One in particular, the partnership model, is unworkable and unacceptable. It should be put out of its misery.
“Are you seriously saying we should not have a system that checks whether people are legitimately in this country?” our Executive Editor asks the Guardian columnist.
One or the other would be easier to solve – and politically helpful to at least somebody. As it is, our immigration system exhibits the worst of both worlds.
One of the few positive things to come out of the appalling affair is the way it revealed the British people are far from the anti-immigrant caricature some paint of them.
Aggressive Home Office measures appear to be designed by people who wrongly assume that illiberal ideas must appeal to the primitive desires of the masses.
Dublin threatens to cut off its nose to spite its face, apparently in a misjudged attempt to pressure the UK into abandoning Brexit. This is a serious error.
Countries with which we strike future trade deals – the top priority for Party members according to our survey – should be treated more favourably than those with which we don’t.
If there’s to be no border in Ireland, and Britain is to leave the Customs Union and Single Market, it follows that there must be a customs border on the Irish Sea.
Many voters – Leave and Remain – appreciate his spirit of boldness, and want to move on from past divisions, not reopen them. There are opportunities to be grasped.
For political reasons some ignore practical solutions and pretend the current EU arrangements are perfect. Such obstructionism helps no-one.
Overall, our new report suggests that public attitudes towards immigration – and indeed leaving the EU – are not fuelled by racism or intolerance.
The Opposition claims to honour the outcome of the referendum, while opposing the UK taking back control of its laws, its money, and its borders.
A sensible solution is achievable, but unnecessary brinksmanship and over-the-top rhetoric helps nobody.
After leaving the EU, we must ensure we are well-positioned in terms of regulation, taxation, immigration and – crucially – foreign languages.
Without a firm, stated base, we are vulnerable to being pushed around by the Commission. Ministers might find it uncomfortable to talk numbers, but they must.