It is hard to avoid the impression that leaving is being undertaken in a spirit of damage limitation rather than a spirit of opportunity.
The Cabinet must have a clearer collective idea than it does now of what it wants to gain from a deal – and, in particular, how it intends to handle regulatory divergence.
MigrationWatch has suggested that those EU migrants with skills in short supply should be able to come to the UK for a time-limited period after Brexit.
If we are also out of CAP, CFP and direct ECJ jurisdiction, able to negotiate our own trade deals and in the Single Market, it might not be such a bad outcome after all.
It would be the easiest, least disruptive, and most productive way for this country to genuinely leave the EU until we have a bespoke UK-EU deal.
I believe that there will be a growing clamour for any deal to be put by referendum to the British people before the final decision is taken.
The Government needs to make a decision on our post-Brexit economic model, reinvigorate the Conservatives in office – and win the votes of the next generation.
The suggestion here seems to be to keep current and future EU law – and thus the ECJ. We would accept EU laws as they developed without a say.
This way we can secure full Single Market access, rather than settle for a free trade deal that would be suboptimal and take too long to negotiate.
Has anyone told Barry Gardiner about this latest change? Only last month, he wrote that staying in the Customs Union would be “a disaster”.
The EU’s own court would not be an appropriate arbiter for a post-Brexit agreement. And the existence of the EFTA court shows another way is possible.
For all the talk of an “off the shelf” solution, those available would cross Brexiteer red lines.
A six-year move from referendum vote to full sovereignty, rather than a sudden ripping away of all ties, is surely what a successful departure looks like.
She cannot be a stationary establishment figure when faced with the restless mood of the voting public. She must move forwards – or we risk a 1997-style wipeout.
There are some risks to trade, but they should be rationalised and addressed rather than overhyped.