The past few days have been significant for the UK?s intended departure from the EU, for at last the politics of Brexit have caught up with the hard law and policy realities.
For two years there have been two separate and distinct Brexit processes. The first is the domestic negotiations between Theresa May and the prime minister?s political supporters in government, parliament and the media. The second is the negotiations between Britain and the EU within the framework provided by Article 50.
Until now, when the two have touched on each other, there has been enough vagueness and political agility to push them apart again, if only for a while. But the Chequers meeting on Friday, with its agreed proposal, and the subsequent resignation of three pro-Brexit ministers ? David Davis, Boris Johnson and Steve Baker ? indicates that a clash, which may or may not lead to reconciliation, cannot be delayed any longer.
At home, Mrs May has to keep her government together, and to maintain support from backbenchers and the mainly pro-exit popular press. Almost every Brexit move she has made, every expedient, is understandable (if not justifiable) in this domestic political context. Each of her speeches and ministerial appointments were for internal political consumption. The ?red lines? of no freedom of movement and no jurisdiction for the EU courts were plays to the audience.
In Brussels, the government kept doing enough for the Brexit negotiations to continue. The UK gave in on the sequencing of negotiations and on post-Brexit financial contributions. And, having no alternative, the country gladly accepted the offer of a standstill (though called a ?transition?) period. It even accepted the December joint paper on the terms of withdrawal, without appreciating the implications for the Irish border issue. Each of these climbdowns was represented to the UK media as a triumph.
The Brexit Files: how to solve the Irish border problem
But at some point there had to be a reckoning. And as the law and policy issues being dealt with in the exit negotiations are more concrete than the superficial politics of Westminster and Fleet Street, it was always the latter that would have to give way.
The Chequers proposal has been summarised in a three-page document, with a longer white paper expected to be published this week. The summary is the first official UK document about Brexit properly to engage with its problems. The position set out on goods and tariffs has the merit of recognising there are issues to be resolved in respect of the Irish border, and cross-border supply chains more broadly. The acceptance of a continuing role for EU jurisprudence is sensible and welcome.
Assuming the white paper accords with this summary then at least Britain has a negotiating position for a deal. The proposal is unlikely to be accepted by the EU. There is nothing serious about services and freedom of movement, and the mention of a ?mobility framework? may as well be about a Zimmer frame, as it means nothing at law. But it is a start, even if some 15 months after the Article 50 notification was made.
Because the cabinet must now address substantial matters, it is unsurprising that there have been ministerial resignations. Creative ambiguity can only take so much reality. There is finally something a pro-Brexit politician can be against. The resignations are a sign that the government is at last approaching the tasks at hand.
Recommended
UK Politics podcast
Cabinet chaos special
Although there is still a risk of there being no deal, there are other possibilities now Brexit is taking a definite shape. There is a heightened chance that there may be an extension of the Article 50 period or of the transition period, or even of a revocation of the Article 50 notification itself. Such outcomes are still unlikely, as parliament is determined to fulfil the supposed ?mandate? of the referendum result.
But there is still a mismatch between domestic politics and the Brexits that are on offer. The fact that one has caught up with the other does not mean it will be simple for Brexit politics to yield to Brexit law and policy reality. This would require leadership and transparency: two qualities absent in Mrs May?s approach to Brexit.
The white paper will be crucial. It needs to be endorsed at home and credible for the EU27 ? and neither can be taken for granted. Already the resigned ministers and Tory backbenchers are saying that it cannot be supported. The EU27 are being more conciliatory, but they are waiting to see what the paper says and will not be swayed by the three-page summary.
If the white paper fails either of the tests of Westminster or Brussels, there will be a significant problem. There is little time left for any alternatives. And there certainly has been no detailed or practical plan from pro-Brexit supporters.
If the white paper does pass the tests, it will be only the start of a mature negotiation. Britain would be expected to give way on services and freedom of movement. Pretty soon, Brexit would be in practice if not in pure legal form indistinguishable from EU membership but without the representation or influence. A Brexit in name only.
This is the prospect now before the UK: a Brexit not worth the time or effort, and not accommodating the demands of Brexit supporters in the media and politics. The alternatives are no Brexit, a delayed Brexit or no deal (for which the UK has made no real preparation). Brexiters are like the dog that caught the car. Now the dog must work out what to do next.
