Brexit recap.

Just your regular reminder that unless the Government wants otherwise, the UK will leave the EU at 23:00 on 29th March 2019.

If there is no agreement on everything the EU says needs to be agreed, then there will be no deal, and the UK leaves anyway. Unless is asks not to, UK will exit without a deal

The EU27 and the EU Parliament must vote to ratify any deal and transition agreement. If any one fails to ratify, UK leaves anyway.

The transition agreement must be ratified by the EU 27, the EU Parliament and several regional Parliaments and Assemblies.

Michelle Barner conducts negotiations on behalf of the EU 27 and EU Parliament.

He has clear terms of reference and objectives from the above.

If he steps outside that mandate, then there would be no ratification.

He regularly meets with the EU 27 and Parliament to update progress. Or lack thereof.

The EU are negotiating based on UK's A50 notification letter, and where matters are not clear, from the PM's speeches and announcements.

Any change in terms of negotiations by UK would have to be officially notified by letter to the EU, probably by resubmitting the A50 letter. That would have to be accepted by the EU 27 and the new ToR for Barnier agreed and accepted.

Negotiations must be complete by the end of September, or October at the very latest to allow for ratification. No ratification by anyone, no deal.

Most non EU countries are waiting to see what "deal" the UK gets with the EU before agreeing anything with UK.

Most countries, India for example, want relaxation in visa regulations to allow more of their citizens to travel to UK to work.

UK is hoping to roll over trade deals it has with other countries, through the EU, once Brexit is complete. Japan says it wants to renegotiate parts of the deal it has with the EU, when it comes to UK, but is open. South Korea says no. The more countries that say no, then the more that will have to be negotiated. Simultaneously. Up to 750.

The US has said that it wants relaxation in the amounts the NHIS pays for American medicine. And UK will have to accept lower food hygiene standards; chlorinated chicken, etc. If it does, then there has to be origin checks on those goods at the border with the EU. This would apply to any goods that do not or might not meet EU standards.

International trade is, and always has been, a balance between control and trade; the more you want of one, the less you have of the other. Wanting trade and control, is more cakeism.

"Frictionless trade" requires legal alignment in single market rules, customs union rules and VAT equivalence. Failure to have agreement in one of these three fields will result in "friction", or infrastructure on borders, longer clearance times, increase paperwork and red tape and serious threats to just in time supply chains.

The Japanese Ambassador to the UK as said without frictionless borders, there will be no Japanese manufacturers in the UK in a decade.

There probably isn't time to raise primary legislation on a second referendum.

Then there would be the issue of the question(s), who sets them and would Parliament agree on them?

The Government's own figures show that in a decade, Brexit would cost between 3% and 15% of GDP.

The Government has tried to disown its own figures. Repeatedly.

There has been very little scrutiny of the Government's plan by either the Commons or the media.

The NI/Irish border issue still has not been addressed.

Citizens rights are still unclear, with the EU sceptical on any UK promises after the Windrush scandal.

Either the border between UK and EU will be along the NI/Irish Border, or in the Irish sea between the island of Ireland and Britain. Either is unacceptable, and probably would bring down the government. As a backstop the UK has agreed that NI will stay in the Single Market, and the EU is not keen on allowing Britain also to stay in.

The UK has two plans, which would take a decade each to implement, and that the EU has already rejected, Ten months ago.

I could go on.

And on.

And on.