Honourable countries face up to the consequences of their actions. They don’t, like dilatory schoolboys late with their essays, simply ask for more time.
I voted for the Prime Minister’s deal today. But the Commons didn’t – and we now all need a positive alternative.
The new group’s platform is not very inspiring. But its biggest problem is it they won’t be very different from the Conservatives’.
No less than the ERG, the group of three sees everything through the prism of Brexit – which, let it not be forgotten, they voted to support themselves.
It would bring with it many compensations, including regulatory freedom, tariff income and £39 billion of cold, hard cash.
With 45 days left, unless workarounds or extra time can be found, uncomfortable decisions may have to be made on which Brexit Bills to prioritise.
He says that the party would be willing to explore approving the free movement of workers.
The challenge is complex. New factors such as poor EU migrants and increasing drug use are driving it.
Our party will not be able to speak for Britain as it really is, and as it will increasingly come to be, unless we make some efforts to reflect this in our membership.
Javid is right to bury the “tens of thousands” target – but he needs to set out a clear pathway to lower migration.
There is a now a window of opportunity for a better, more sensible and cross-party debate than the one we had in the referendum campaign.
The more one thinks about it, the more problematic it becomes.
Neither is at all likely indeed to succeed May if they nod reluctant assent to any scheme to sign up to the Customs Union – which might not succeed in any event.
Why should the EU offer any more to an inconstant departing member, which can’t be relied on to deliver ratification of any agreement?
Plus: We must be the Party for social housing as well as home ownership. And: why don’t we trumpet our history of social reform?