The same poll recorded another Lib Dem boost – their numbers are up in almost every region in the country. And despite Nigel Farage claiming the Brexit Party would take more votes away from Labour than the Tories, it doesn’t seem to panning out that way so far. As things stand Farage’s outfit is in danger of squandering Johnson’s hopes for a majority. But things can change quickly.

The disastrous polling for Labour in the North East point to the central problem for Corbyn in this election. He’s tried to neutralise the question on Brexit – by promising to renegotiate the deal and put it to a second referendum – but it doesn’t seem to be working. Leavers think he’s too remain, and Remainers think he’s too leave. How can he run a national campaign that keeps Labour candidates in Leave seats, and Labour candidates in Remain seats, in equally good stead? It may be impossible, which is why Labour is trying to shift the focus to other policy areas.

In Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon launched the SNP’s campaign this morning. Speaking in Edinburgh, and bidding to eviscerate the Tories North of the border, Sturgeon announced a so-called “NHS Protection Bill.” Sturgeon, it seems, is placing the NHS front and centre in her campaign – straight out of the playbook of Labour. Opposition parties point out that the SNP has presided over the Edinburgh “Sick Kids” hospital scandal. It had been due to open in 2017 and ministers are under-fire on safety concerns.

Scotland will be a key battleground as the SNP pushes to get a mandate for a second independence referendum. The SNP held the North-East Fife seat in 2017 by just two votes – so the Lib Dems are pushing hard for a victory there. It’s a three way way marginal. The Tories were third last time.

Meanwhile, in Northern Ireland things are looking increasingly tough for the DUP’s Emma Little-Pengelly in her South Belfast seat. Sinn Féin have stood aside to give space for the SDLP’s Claire Hanna. The seat will be a good case study in how Remain-pacts could shape things in the Northern Ireland.

More details of the televised election debates emerged today too. Corbyn and Johnson will go head to head on the BBC on 6th December, six days before the poll. A week beforehand there will be a seven-way debate with senior figures from all the major parties. It will unlikely be attended by the leaders of the main parties – in the Conservative Party’s case, Home Secretary Priti Patel is being touted as a likely candidate for these kinds of events.

First up however is the Question Time Leaders’ special – hosted by Fiona Bruce in Sheffield – taking place on 22nd November.

The Liberal Democrats are raising issue with their exclusion from the 6th December debate. Swinson said: “After three years of chaos, it is shocking that the Liberal Democrats – the strongest party of Remain – are being denied the opportunity to challenge Johnson and Corbyn on Brexit.”

Senior Tories are so encouraged by the manner in which Swinson’s media performances alienate voters that I’m told they want her on television more, rather than less. Let’s see.

The SNP is, in classic SNP style, feeling shafted as well. The Westminster leader, Ian Blackford, says Scottish voters are being short-changed. Mind you, he says this every day whether there is an election on or not.

Also wanting in on the action is Nigel Farage, who tweeted: “If Boris Johnson really believes that he has a great deal, let’s have a debate on it. Because I have read it – it’s not Brexit and it will not stand up to scrutiny.”

Boris thanked Bercow for his interferences in Brexit, “pounding every part of the chamber with your own forceful opinions like some tennis ball machine.”

But where Bercow frustrated Boris Johnson’s attempts to get Brexit over the line at every turn, he handed many a political gift to Jeremy Corbyn. The Labour leader’s tribute to Bercow reflected just that: “I want to thank you Mr Speaker for the way that you’ve used your speakership in the decade-long tenure you’ve had.”

“You’ve done so much to reform this House of Commons and our democracy is the stronger for the way that you’ve done it,” said Corbyn.

Bercow was not the only one enjoying a final PMQs. In the lead up to December’s election MPs have ben taking the opportunity to announce their intention to stand down – Father of the House Ken Clarke, most notably – and since the announcement of the election, they’ve been dropping like flies. Tory rebel Amber Rudd announced she was stepping down this morning, as did Theresa May’s former deputy David Lidington.

Johnson and Corbyn’s exchange had a feel of final showdown too.

Corbyn chose the NHS as his focus – an area where Labour traditionally easily out poll the Conservatives. He accused Johnson of selling out to Donald Trump with a deal that puts the NHS at risk. The NHS is underfunded, he said. It’s underperforming, it’s not safe in Tory hands, he claimed.

Corbyn’s approach is clear: Labour will not come out of an election fought solely on Brexit well – they lack the clarity of message that the Conservatives have alighted upon (“Get Brexit Done”) and could lose on both sides of the debate: Remainers think Corbyn’s a Brexiteer, and Brexiteers think Corbyn is a Remainer.

Corbyn will instead cast his net wider – talking about the NHS, schools, policing, local government and the environment. All of this is a ploy to deny Johnson a victory handed to him by a split Remain vote and clear, consistent messaging on Brexit.

Johnson thinks he can outfox Corbyn on those grounds too – despite the Conservatives aping the rhetoric of the Brexit Party to win the Leave vote, Johnson in the chamber today tried to hone in on the traditional Tory political calling card: that is, the Conservative Party is the party of the economy, jobs, growth, and fiscal responsibility. To that tune Johnson rebutted Corbyn’s claims that he was endangering the NHS, saying: “This is the party that supports wealth creation… For the last nine years this economy has been growing.” Meanwhile, Corbyn “would ruin this economy and ruin the ability to fund the NHS.” His government is putting in billions of pounds of funding into the NHS too, Johnson added.

And, where Corbyn accused Johnson of being in the pocket of Donald Trump, thanks to a so-called dodgy Brexit deal, Johnson retaliated by implying Corbyn was simply a Putin stooge, referencing Corbyn’s response to the Salisbury poisonings of last year. The pair fought it out almost as a proxy war between Russia and the United States.

As PMQs wound down, MPs finally filtered out of the chamber. Johnson and Corbyn had shown them a glimpse of what lies in store between now and December 12th.

Based on the Speech, we can assume the Conservative Party will run on a platform of being tough on crime (they announced proposals to increase sentences for certain violent crimes, for example); big on spending (more money for schools and the NHS, but little policy detail beyond that); and pro increasing the UK’s environmental commitments.

When it comes to Brexit, the speech majored on the government’s plans to end free movement. And it announced a financial services bill to keep the City open to international markets post the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

Jeremy Corbyn condemned the entire programme, calling it a “farce” and saying he will pursue an election as soon as the imminent threat of a no deal Brexit is eliminated. He added:

“There has never been such a farce as a government with a majority of minus 45 and a 100% record of defeat in the Commons setting out a legislative agenda they know cannot be delivered in this parliament.”

Meanwhile over on the congenital mainland, where the real action is this week, leaders are raising doubts that a deal can be struck by the EU Summit (and nominal deadline) at the end of this week. Simon Coveney, Ireland’s foreign minister and deputy to Leo Varadkar, indicated the UK needs to move further to facilitate a deal, and later added: “It’s too early to say whether it’s possible to get a breakthrough this week whether it’ll move into next week.”

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, said the “technical” talks from over the weekend were constructive, but that a lot of work needs doing.

It appears the UK has dropped its demand that the deal should offer Stormont a role in approving the withdrawal arrangements, handing a de facto veto to the DUP. While that concession makes the proposals more palatable to Dublin, it is politically difficult for Boris Johnson back at home, who will likely lose the support of the 12 DUP MPs in parliament.

But, the DUP are unhappy with most of the terms of the proposals – and Johnson may do better trying to win over more Labour rebels to his side, rather than pacify the DUP whose demands are unacceptable to all others around the negotiating table. DUP MP Jim Shannon said the proposed customs solution would not work because it would treat Northern Ireland differently to Britain: “It is simple. Are we being treated the same as England? No, we are not. Therefore, if we are not being treated the same as England, then we are not going to accept it.”

If Boris Johnson can’t strike a deal with the EU by the weekend, he will come under strong pressure to seek a Brexit extension, as he is mandated to by the Benn Act. But extending Article 50 beyond 31st October is something he has repeatedly promised he would’t do. Exactly how Johnson will square that circle is unclear.

Either way, if the EU and the UK negotiating teams manage to coalesce around some kind of arrangement, it will still come down to the wire both in getting it through parliament and passing the necessary legislation in time before the 31st October.

Parliament will sit this Saturday for the first time since the Falklands War in 1982, when all of this should come to a head. The noises coming out of Brussels seem to indicate Johnson most likely won’t have a deal by then – if that’s the case expect MPs to demand he seeks an extension and complies its the law. There is renewed talk of second referendums, and possibly even the no confidence vote Johnson has been waiting for.

What he needs to avoid all that is a deal.

Last night an anonymous No 10 aide sent a lengthy text to the Spectator containing the government’s position on the negotiations, and after a phone call between Angela Merkel and Boris Johnson this morning, a No 10 spokesperson said a deal looked “overwhelmingly unlikely.”

That Johnson’s proposals were unlikely to form the basis of a Brexit deal should not come as a surprise. Leo Varadkar was clear last week that the plans inadequately addressed the Irish border question, and handed the DUP an undue veto over the entire arrangements. When Macron waded in to the discussion, with raised eyebrows, any hopes a deal could be struck were scuppered.

The No 10 text message last night accused Leo Varadkar of going “back on his word” by attacking the proposals rather than using them as a basis for further negotiation. He was also criticised for pulling the strings of Michel Barnier – the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator. Crucially, the message made clear that if the Irish government WAS to return soon with an alternate proposal – a Northern Ireland only backstop, with a time limit (stop me if you’ve heard this one before…) – it would be rejected by No 10 and that would be the end of the matter.

The key message, then, is that these really are the UK’s final proposals… If the EU don’t want a deal then on its head be it. But it is not that simple: Johnson secured his tenure in No 10 by committing to taking to UK out of the EU “deal or no deal”, “come what may” by 31st October. But since the Benn Act was passed just two weeks ago he is mandated to seek an extension in lieu of striking a deal. As such, Johnson is in a bind. He won’t get a deal this month, and so will have to seek an extension. How can he avoid, then, reneging on his central campaign promise?

Obviously for No 10, the easiest way out of the quagmire is if the EU denies Johnson an extension, and kicks him out with no deal, a hard border, and everything that comes along with that at the end of this month. In this vein, the anonymous aide behind the message wrote that any EU member state which vetoes an extension will be given preferential treatment in the next stage of negotiations, and vice versa.

Whether that was a threat, or a bribe, what the message fails to grasp is that any decision taken by the EU Council on an extension will be a unanimous one. So this text message fails to change anything tangible when it comes to negotiations. But it is directed at something else entirely.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Johnson will have to delay Brexit. Not wanting to look weak, out of the playbook of his predecessor Theresa May, when Johnson has to come knocking for that extension, he wants to look like he was forced into it. His conversation with Angela Merkel this morning plays directly into that same narrative.

Merkel, a No 10 spokesman claims, said on the phone that a deal was “overwhelmingly unlikely” until Northern Ireland stayed in the customs union. While Merkel’s office have not released a readout of the conversation, saying they do not comment on confidential phone calls, there is a lot of speculation about No 10’s interpretation of events – with many commentators in Brussels and the UK alike surprised to hear that Merkel would adopt a tone many miles away from her usual diplomatic-to-a-fault style.

The blame game is underway, and the UK has tried to get a head start. An extension, with an election where the Tories run on a no-deal Brexit platform, seems to be the most likely outcome at this stage. For that to work Johnson wants to avoid looking like he’s given in to parliament, and come begging to the EU for an extension. It has to look like the fault of both the EU, who refused to negotiate with him in good faith, and parliament, who got in his way when he tried to deliver the Brexit people in the UK so desperately want… so the theory goes.

But Johnson’s tactics haven’t been lost on his opponents. President of the European Council Donald Tusk tweeted today:

“What’s at stake is not winning some stupid blame game. At stake is the future of Europe and the UK as well as the security and interests of our people.”

While Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer said that Johnson “will never take responsibility for his own failure to put forward a credible deal”, calling on parliament to “unite prevent this reckless government crashing us out of the EU”.

A far greater headache for Boris, though, is that his own Northern Ireland Secretary Julian Smith has been distancing himself from the events of today. Referring to what some see as veiled threat in the No 10 text message, Smith tweeted:

“I am clear that any threat on withdrawing security cooperation with Ireland is unacceptable. This is not in the interest of NI or the Union.”

Some are speculating Smith may resign over these developments, which would be a blow to Johnson whose first week in office was spent eviscerating the current cabinet to make way for an ideologically compatible grouping who would work as a coherent bloc.

But despite this, Johnson is currently soaring in the polls. His hardline tactics have been paying off – and there is no reason to think that the news from today will be any different. Johnson might not get his 31st October exit date, but if things continue going this way the UK might well end up with a no deal exit anyway. His job is to make it look like it was anyone’s fault but his.

Stewart was a prisons minister, and then International Development Secretary before making waves in the Conservative leadership contest with his quirky campaigning style. He would show up in a town, with little warning, and chat to unsuspecting locals about politics on Rory’s so-called “listening tour.” He’d then package up shots of it nicely for social media – becoming something of a Twitter celebrity and a sort-of cult figure for about one month in the fever dream that was the Tory leadership contest this summer.

No doubt he’ll employ this tactic for his mayoral bid, hopping from borough to borough, Hampstead to Bethnal Green, debating with locals about all things London. Crucially for Stewart, running for London Mayor will allow him to excuse himself from the Brexit quagmire dominating parliament and toxifying almost every politician in the eyes of much of the country.

But can he win? On first glance, probably not. Even though Sadiq Khan was a successor to Boris as Mayor, London is a Labour city, and the incumbent looks like a shoo in. “Boris Johnson The Conservative Mayor” was a strange incident – a victory of charisma and charm not a product of an affiliation to the party. So, the Conservative candidate Shaun Bailey – who has an interesting backstory but few of the instincts required of a politician – never really stood a chance, and thanks to Rory he might be better off cutting his losses and standing down now.

Stewart, it seems, will take votes off Bailey and probably slot into second place behind Khan. But, he might be in with more of a shot than we think. An angry electorate now uses these kinds of votes – in the same vein as European elections and local elections – to channel their views on national politics.

The party system has been disrupted since 2016 when the last mayoralty election took place. In that contest, in the first round, Labour got 1,148,716 votes (44.2%), the Tories 909,755 (35%), the Greens 150,673 (5.8%), and the Lib Dems 120,005 (4.6%).  Turnout was 45.3%.

This time the Lib Dems and the Greens could take serious votes off Labour. If Stewart can create a viral campaign aimed at moderate London and collect second preferences, in an era in which strange things are happening, he has a chance.

The wiggle room for Rory could reside in him neither being Labour or Tory. London is Remain, so Tories are out of the question right now. But Labour are still on the fence with their policy, and if Brexit isn’t resolved by the election in nine months time (honestly not unlikely…) Londoners could express some kind of Remainer-defiance that way. Or we could see Rory triumph under a backlash against Corbyn, who is mired in anti-semitism scandal and a lifelong eurosceptic.

Khan also hasn’t had a brilliant track record. He’s come under a lot of criticism for his record on policing and knife crime. He looks pretty ineffective, say his critics. Rory could capitalise on this.

But Stewart has other challenges. What does he offer? He isn’t fighting the hard left – Sadiq Khan is basically centrist, and it’s not like he’s taking on some right wing Brexit terror either – because no matter what Shaun Bailey’s views are, he was never going to win anyway. There are questions over whether he is different enough to energise Londoners, moving them away from the all too easy to harvest Labour vote.

So what is Stewart looking to get out of this? He is unlikely to win – Conservative MP for Penrith and the Border to London Mayor is quite the leap – but he was never going to win the leadership campaign either. Even though some of us thought he might for a few minutes.

His bid improved his national profile, and made him a recognisable face in UK politics.

A bid for London Mayor? Having been kicked out of the Tories by Boris Johnson, he might have struggled to win back his seat standing as an independent. Resigning from parliament to pursue a mayoral campaign ensures he can keep this public persona going, even from outside of the Commons.

And from there? We know Rory Stewart is endlessly ambitious. If he can maintain this presence for long enough, and capture the imagination of idealistic younger voters, by the time Brexit is all said and done there might be a better job waiting for him north of the river in the post-Boris era. That could be in the mid-2020s if Rory’s wing of the Tory tribe rejoins the main party.

Boris and Rory are usually referred to on a first name basis – that might not be the only thing they end up having in common.

Let us know your view. Send a letter for publication to letters@reaction.life

In parliament, it looks as if Johnson is getting key groups on side. Despite having no majority since expelling 21 Conservative rebels – the numbers very much might be there. They come from the DUP support, which in turn guarantees at least some ERG support, and then votes from Labour rebels (mostly those in Leave voting constituencies), and most of those 21 Conservative rebels – who supported May’s deal.

Even though Boris might just have the numbers, he has still been met with considerable opposition in parliament. Anna Soubry of Change UK, a Tory defector, congratulated him on striking a deal with the “ERG and DUP”, while Sylvia Hernon, an independent unionist MP, and the only Northern Irish MP in the chamber at that moment, said the proposal indicated that Johnson simply doesn’t understand the complexities.

But Mark Francois, stalwart of the ERG, has said that he thinks Johnson could get the numbers to get a deal over the line, with these proposals forming its basis. Crucially – the so-called “Spartans” of the ERG will only offer their support if the DUP are onside.

Which is just as well, since Arlene Foster has indicated her approval of the proposals, saying it is a “sensible way forward.”

“It allows the people of Northern Ireland consent in a way not provided by the anti-democratic backstop. We hope that people will look at it in a serious way.”

So long as the DUP is happy, Johnson can obtain something verging on parliamentary consent, it seems. But getting support in parliament, and having the EU sign off on the proposals are not the same thing.

In the same way that the Conservatives are largely beholden to the approval of the DUP, the EU is, at least in part, beholden to the support of Dublin. While both Dublin and the EU have expressed their gratitude that the UK has finally put forward tangible and negotiable proposals, both are clear that as they stand, the plans fall short of something they could accept.

Donald Tusk, President of the EU Council, tweeted:

“My message to Taoiseach [Leo Varadkar]: We stand fully behind Ireland.

My message to PM [BorisJohnson]: We remain open but still unconvinced.”

The European Parliament Brexit Steering Group said that this is not an agreement the EU parliament could consent to: “The proposals do not address the real issues that need to be resolved if the backstop were to be removed, namely the all-island economy, the full respect of the Good Friday Agreement and the integrity of the Single Market.”

Leo Varadkar said in a statement that the proposals fall short in all areas. He said he was glad that Boris Johnson made verbal commitments to avoiding any kind of border infrastructure as part of his proposal, but added that this statement directly contradicts the way the plan is laid out on paper. His deputy, and Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney told the Dáil this morning that “if this is the final proposal, there will be no deal”, citing the “fundamental problems” on customs and consent of Stormont.

On Stormont, he is referring to the condition of the proposal that gives the Northern Irish Assembly power to withdraw from the arrangements on an ongoing basis – something that would not only require more customs checks, but also a condition that effectively grants the DUP with a veto on maintaining regulatory alignment.

Trickily for Boris Johnson, it is precisely that de facto veto handed to the DUP that has won him their support. What is acceptable to the DUP then is fundamentally unacceptable to the EU and Dublin, and vice versa.

Arlene Foster, responding to Coveney’s statement said his remarks were “deeply unhelpful, obstructionist and intransigent… the Irish government’s preparedness to dump the consent principle for their country’s expediency is foolishness in the extreme and sends a very clear message to unionists.”

Boris Johnson’s entire political strategy with this proposal depends on him looking like he has parliament behind him – so long as that is the case, the EU, wanting to avoid no deal, will have to be open to negotiating with Johnson on these terms, runs the logic.

If they don’t, they will look like the clear obstructionists to an orderly exit from the EU, and the architects of no deal. However, they are also bound by certain principles themselves and commitments they have made to Ireland, which means they will only be able to sign Johnson’s deal with some further compromise. The more Johnson compromises, if he compromises, the faster his alleged support in parliament falls away. Both sides are trapped, and any wrong step could tip the balance into a no deal outcome.

But this year, despite his deft criticism of Labour, classic Johnson quips, and the general ease with which he brought the audience along with him, something felt off. Mired by personal controversies, under pressure to deliver the seemingly undeliverable Brexit, under fire from his parliamentary colleagues for his careless language, and the supreme court ruling against him, his levity felt misplaced.

Kicking things off Johnson thanked Theresa May’s husband Philip for his “patience” and “forbearance.” The subtlety of the not-actually-that-subtle coded insult really shouldn’t be lost on anyone. It’s probably for the best, then, that May was not in attendance but back in parliament, looking chummy with anti-Brexit and anti-Boris-Johnson Ken Clarke on the back benches.

The tag line of the conference – have you noticed? – is that the Tories have pledged to “get Brexit done.”

There it was again at the heart of the speech. “Let’s get Brexit done,” he said. “We can, we must and we will, even though things have not been made easier by the Surrender Bill.”

Just a week ago Johnson was confronted about his use of the term “Surrender Bill” – his description of the Benn Act that blocks no deal – by MPs concerned about death threats. He knew his audienc here, and felt no need to temper the language that got him into trouble in the first place. The crowd might have loved it, although it remains to be seen how that will play back at Westminster where he needs votes for his proposed Brexit deal.

The speech came with the usual digs at opposition, and Johnson is usually much better at it than his opponent Jeremy Corbyn. But last week Corbyn’s conference speech came hours after the supreme court ruling against Johnson’s attempted prorogation of parliament. Johnson had no such gift, but he still was agile in rattling off the deranged policy announcements – “damaging and retrograde” to use his words – Labour made last week.

“He wants a four-day week, which would slash the wages of people on low incomes; he wants to ban private schools and expropriate their property…”

That was Johnson’s strongest moment, promptly followed by his weakest, when he moved to the detail. He set out the basic skeleton of the offer he is making to the EU. It is understandable he didn’t want to dwell on it, both because it had already been pretty badly received by commentators in Dublin and Brussels, but also because paragraph upon paragraph about regulatory alignment and customs arrangements and general trading logistics are not often cause for great excitement.

But it was troubling that he couldn’t dive a little deeper on his Brexit policy. Perhaps he realises they were non-starters from the get go.

My takeaway, from both his proposition and his bare-bones mention of it in his speech, was that he’s not really after assent from the EU or Dublin anyway. Speaking to a room full of supporters, he wanted to look like he’s made a serious attempt at negotiation, and the EU have denied him.

“If we fail to get an agreement because of what is essentially a technical discussion of the exact nature of future customs checks… then let us be in no doubt that the alternative is no deal.”

If you want to get into the mindset of a fully paid up member of the Conservative Party then you should look no further than the crowd’s reaction to that moment. They whooped and cheered as Johnson essentially put his hands up and said “look, I’ve got some proposals and if they don’t like them then it’s not my fault.”

The problem is that a conference speech isn’t just about making friends with his fans already in the room. While a gaggle of young Tories seemed thrilled with the idea, the message won’t fly with the country.

He was sporadically funny, typically Johnsonian with one reference to an obscure Kremlin conspiracy (“the SNP may yet try to bundle him towards the throne like some Konstantin Chernenko figure”… me neither). But it was not an address that suggested this is a government with a strong grasp on what direction it is headed.

At a time when the stakes have never felt higher, when the prime minister’s popularity with some of his nervous parliamentary colleagues is faltering, he would have done well to adopt a touch more earnest tone – perhaps taking a page or two out of the playbook of his predecessor. But, that’s not what Boris has ever really been about. The attendees in Manchester left happy, but he’s got a lot more people to please than that.

In contrast, this year no ministerial speech has provided much cause for excitement. Chancellor Sajid Javid yesterday warmed the crowd with a touching interaction with his mother. Otherwise, ministers (who have been out and about on the conference fringe) have been briefed to say basically as little as possible. The excitement lies back in London, with the Remain alliance’s meetings and plots, the ongoing stories concerning Boris Johnson’s private life, and RTE Brussels correspondent Tony Connolly obtaining leaked backstop proposals.

The most excitement at conference has been off script. Veteran MP Geoffrey Clifton-Brown was sent home this afternoon for getting involved in some kind of altercation with security staff in the “international lounge.” Unfortunately for Home Secretary Priti Patel, this happened just before she was due to give a speech on the Tories’ toughening their stance on crime.

Everything could change tomorrow when Boris Johnson delivers his first conference speech as leader of the Conservative Party. No doubt he will go through the usual rigmarole of criticising Labour and the Lib Dems, reflecting on the Conservative track record in government on issues ranging from the economy to the climate to social care. But the focus will be on delivering Brexit.

Emblazoned across the conference hall, on nearly every surface, are banners reading “Get Brexit Done.” We might hope, then, that Boris will give us some detail on how exactly he intends to do that. But we will likely be hoping in vain. Set pieces like the leader’s keynote conference speech aren’t usually big on technical detail, and Boris Johnson is especially broad brush even at the best of times. We can expect him to rally the crowd over his intention to get Brexit over the line, “come what may”;  denounce those trying to thwart him; and generally try and inject that sense of “optimism” people criticised Theresa May for lacking.

Johnson thrives in this kind of environment, and that’s just as well – he needs a boost. The outcome of the wild month ahead is impossible to predict – but Johnson and No 10 will have to deliver a lot to survive in office. The EU council summit on 17th October is largely accepted as the cut-off date for Johnson to come up with a concrete deal. In the weeks before – later this week it seems – he’ll need to present Dublin with negotiable proposals, bring them back to parliament and win support from all sides of the chamber, and convince Merkel and Macron that he’s serious about getting Brexit done in an orderly way. A terrible day at conference tomorrow would scupper his hopes of that before he’s even started.

Unless, of course, Johnson and his right hand man Dominic Cummings have something up their sleeves – managing to get out with no deal, and without having to ask for an extension.

If there is a plan it’s being kept strictly under wraps. But tomorrow when he makes his first party conference speech in post, one which he has coveted for so long, he will be beginning the defining month of his premiership.

Let’s go back to basics. Johnson entered Number 10 on the pledge that he would take the UK out of the EU “do or die” on 31st October. His route to a no deal exit seems, for now, to have been scuppered. Parliament is denying the government an election until the threat of no deal is dead. A deal looks like the only way out of reneging on his central campaign promise.

If so, he needs to work something out with the EU, get the backing of Macron and Merkel, appease Dublin, somehow sell it to a Parliament where he has nothing close to a majority, and pass the necessary legislation, all in just over a month. The usual health warning applies: Johnson could be removed by Parliament at any time, and we might see an early election happen anyway, after the Commons has passed further watertight legislation that precludes a no deal exit on 31st October.

Working back from the crucial date of the European Council meeting on the 17th and 18th October, what does Johnson need to do before then? The backstop is the persistent thorn in his side. He needs to find away around the impasse which prevented Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement from passing three separate times.

So long as the backstop is there, there will be no majority for the deal. But, Dublin won’t back any deal without a backstop. A while back May floated the idea of a Northern Ireland only backstop, which was acceptable to the EU, before abandoning it altogether at the behest of the DUP, who propped her up.

Since Boris Johnson has no majority, having expelled 21 Tory rebels early September, the DUP are functionally obsolete to him. Could he sneak through a deal with a Northern Ireland only backstop?

Possibly. But Boris Johnson himself has said that’s not a route he’s prepared to go down. However, the general assumption is that he, alongside EU leaders, are working on a solution that operates like a Northern Ireland only backstop in everything but name. Call it the Special Political Resolution, New Economic Provision, or whatever. Change the name, change the font, and maybe then Johnson has something approaching a workable deal.

Then what has to happen? Let’s say that by somewhere around October 10th Johnson has some kind of formal proposition for the EU, they give their general assent, on the condition that Johnson could find a majority for it in the House. A bill could be introduced, taking in concessions on workers rights and so on to rebel Labour MPs who want to leave.

The EU, crucially, is unlikely to want to sign something that will suffer the same fate in parliament as May’s deal did.

So, we might see, before the Council summit on 17th October, Johnson putting the new proposition to the Commons either as a bill or even an indicative vote to prove to the EU that he can find a majority for this new and improved (but not much) version of May’s Withdrawal Agreement.

Will he get the support he needs? Since revoking Article 50 is official Liberal Democrat policy, its 18 MPs will vote against. And we can expect the same from the SNP, Plaid and the Greens. With the Change UK MPs, too, that’s 63 definite votes against the deal. If Labour find an excuse to whip against it, which they likely will, we can add 246 votes to the anti-deal forces. But there could be anywhere between 5 and 25 Labour rebels – those who hold seats in Leave voting constituencies, and those who have been long time eurosceptics, and those who just want this all to end. If all 288 current Tories support Johnson’s deal, he needs to find around forty votes for a safe majority. Those votes would have to come from the now-expelled Conservative rebels who voted for May’s deal earlier in the year, and the higher end of the estimated Labour rebels. Let’s not forget that we don’t know which way the Brexiteer Tory ERG group will go. Whatever votes he loses in the ERG will need to be made up by even more Labour rebels. It’s very tight – but the maths might work.

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking. If Johnson can prove the Commons is with him for a deal in an indicative vote, he can move his proposal to the EU Summit, sign it, bring it back to the Commons for a confirmatory vote, which he will expect to win having won an indicative vote and, miraculously, have passed a deal.

Then, perversely, he might even actually get away with requesting a short extension of a few weeks for the Commons and the government to get its ducks in a row, working round the clock to pass the necessary legislation, and leave the EU with a deal some short way into November.

If it sounds implausible that’s because it is a long shot for Johnson. But amid the chaos of parliament returning, and a somewhat humiliated if defiant prime minister, we shouldn’t forget that there is a landing zone for a deal. It is small but the possibility is there.

Let us know your view. Send a letter for publication to letters@reaction.life

Well  thank goodness for Boris Johnson, then.

Labour’s fights were rendered all but irrelevant, for now, when the Supreme Court deemed Boris Johnson’s prorogation unlawful. Everything about the atmosphere at conference changed. Corbyn now had on his hands an entirely different beast.

His keynote conference speech was bumped forward to this afternoon, originally scheduled for tomorrow, and sawn in half – the result being a much stronger and pithier performance than most observers have come to expect of Corbyn. And naturally, Boris Johnson dominated pretty much the whole thing.

So Boris Johnson broke the law, Corbyn tells the conference centre. Applause. He shut down democratic debate and eschewed accountability. Louder applause. But, he failed. Standing ovation and cheers from an audience in raptures – and he’s barely been on the stage for a minute. It became very clear to Corbyn in that moment that Boris had presented him with a lifeline: whatever the events of the previous days – internal wars right at the top of the party, deranged policy decisions, and failed coups – Boris messing up is the story. So long as Corbyn had enough fodder to bash the Tories with (and he did), the Labour conference will end on a triumphant note.

Corbyn leant into his populist tendencies. He criticised the “born to rule government of the entitled”, mused over the “elite” disdain for democracy. He gestured to the audience and said Boris “thinks he’s above us all.” He relied on an us versus them narrative – the oldest trick in the book – and it worked. But a packed out conference hall chanting the familiar “ohh Jeremy Corbyn” line didn’t let the party leader throw all caution to the wind.

Corbyn made very clear that there should be a general election, but not until the threat of no deal is completely gone. No one can’t trust the government not to spin this crisis for their own benefit, and manipulate the date of the election to drive the UK out of the EU with no deal, he said. It might be wise and cautious politics, but something about it felt off. Can Jeremy Corbyn credibly all but call the prime minister a criminal in a rousing speech, but in the same breath refuse to call a no confidence vote immediately? Apparently so.

The rest of the speech was littered with policy announcements that would have been better saved for a rainy day – flexi time for menopausal women, free prescriptions, restoring bus services across the UK, among others. They will be popular policies with traditional Labour voters and probably further afield, but they will be buried in the news of a dramatic day.

This really was one of Corbyn’s best performances to date. He seemed energised by the failures of his opponent. And the problem facing the Tories now is that it is difficult to remind people of what a shambles Labour conference has been otherwise, when Corbyn closed it with such verve. We’ll see what they come up with when parliament returns tomorrow, but if Corbyn maintains this form Johnson could be in for one hell of a shock.

The case was referred to the Supreme Court after being heard in the Scottish courts – a similar case brought to court in England did not find the suspension unlawful.

Labour MP Ian Murray, who was among those who brought the case in Scotland, said the result was an “astonishing rebuke to Boris Johnson for his disgraceful behaviour”.

Boris Johnson responded just after 1pm UK time, saying: “Obviously this is a verdict that we will respect and we respect the judicial process.”

“I have to say that I strongly disagree with what the justices have found. I don’t think that it’s right but we will go ahead and of course Parliament will come back.”

Since the judgement Speaker John Bercow has announced that parliament will return at 11.30am tomorrow, but that there will be no PMQs. Bercow did, however, hint at the possibility that MPs could submit applications for emergency debates under Standing Order 24. It was under an SO24 that Sir Oliver Letwin took control of the business of the house to pass legislation that calls for Boris Johnson to seek an extension to Article 50 in place of a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

We may see MPs attempt to pass motions preventing Boris Johnson from proroguing parliament again – which he is not prohibited from doing under this Supreme Court ruling.

Meanwhile, Boris Johnson is at the United Nations in New York. He was due to meet Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and President Trump; address the general assembly; and speak to US business leaders about Brexit. Whether any of these things will go ahead is unclear. And we still don’t know whether he will return to the UK for parliament tomorrow. ITV’s Robert Peston reports that there will be a cabinet meeting by phone later today.

Before the ruling was announced, Johnson said he would not resign if the judgement found his actions unlawful.

Jeremy Corbyn, speaking to raucous applause and a standing ovation at Labour Party Conference, called for Boris Johnson’s resignation. He said his prorogation “demonstrated a contempt for democracy and an abuse of power.” His keynote conference speech has been moved to this afternoon rather than tomorrow, presumably so he can be present in parliament when it returns to sitting.

Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s chief political aide, has come under fire from Tory MPs, with the Telegraph reporting that one unnamed MP said: “If there is one thing that is 100% clear after this it is that Cummings must go and now. It is entirely his failure and he must pay the price now.”

This is an unprecedented situation for the government and it is unclear what happens next. Boris Johnson is not technically prohibited from proroguing parliament again, although he is unlikely to do so, fearing likely criticism that he is further involving the crown in politics.

The crucial takeaway from the proceedings and conclusion is that the supreme court has formalised the government’s subservience to the Commons. That means if the Commons does not want a no deal Brexit Johnson could be out of options to get round them.

Conservative Party conference is due to take place next weekend and early next week – in such uncertain circumstances it is unclear how much of it will go ahead.

Let us know your view. Send a letter for publication to letters@reaction.life.

Tom Watson embodies a moderate Labour tradition – he has always been at odds with Jeremy Corbyn. And whenever the fight for the next leader of the Labour Party gets underway, he wants to be  positioned either as a contender or a kingmaker.

The Corbynite left, and Lansman in particular, don’t want their hard work undone by an ideological opponent taking over. And the failed attempt to oust Watson was just that – Corbyn’s ideological wing of the party trying to squander the influence of moderates who may reverse the impact Corbyn, Milne and McDonnell have made on Labour in recent years.

And with this move, all signs are pointing towards a party leader who is at least considering his resignation.

It failed. But this move wasn’t bad politics just because of that. It played straight into the Tory spin of the Labour Party as coup-mongering and divided – detracting from the fact that the Tories, too, are coup-mongering and divided.

Mostly, it was an unnecessary risk. The Corbyn-ising of the Labour Party doesn’t go away when Corbyn does. He and his ideas are still overwhelmingly supported by the membership and Momentum, the far left grassroots campaign outfit,  still exert disproportional influence.

The Corbyn-ising of the Labour Party doesn’t go away when Corbyn does. He is still overwhelmingly supported by the membership and Momentum still exert disproportional influence. Hampering a centrist like Tom Watson is unnecessary because so long as the membership still decide the leader, a proxy Corbyn will most likely win. This is, of course, in lieu of some serious charisma and leadership coming onto the scene, who will lap up the vote regardless, and drag the party back centrewards. The problem is that no one has managed to identify any plausible candidate.

So Corbyn is not in a bad position, assessed by the stamp he’s made on the direction of the Labour Party under his premiership. Whoever wins the next leadership contest need not be like Corbyn down to the letter, but will understand that to win over a membership overwhelmingly pro-Corbyn, they’ll have to lean into Labour’s further left instincts. For now – until someone arrives to reverse the trend – it looks as if Corbyn has succeeded in dragging the party in his direction. Trying and failing to throw Watson under the bus was messy, petty and a gift to the Tories.

Let us know your view. Send a letter for publication to letters@reaction.life

Swinson wasn’t shy about her aspirations in her first conference speech as leader of the Liberal Democrats today. The membership and MPs are clearly energised by their recent successes and hopeful for a future election. But Swinson might have set her sights too high.

“There is no limit to my ambition for our party,” she told the room, just after declaring her desire to be prime minister. She was met with raucous applause. But while there may be no limit to her ambition – she has talked of winning 300 seats in a general election – her party is certainly limited by political reality.

Winning 300 seats would require a seismic shift in the electoral landscape ahead of a general election. Currently the Liberal Democrats sport just 18. When it comes to wild political predictions, we are all, in these volatile times, fond of reminding each other that “stranger things have happened.” But in this case, stranger things really have never happened.

The party will pick up votes in a general election, of course. They’ll come from a section of would-be Conservatives voters, thanks to the Tories’ evolution into a Brexit party in all but name; and from some Labour voters who deem it to be a party too radical under Jeremy Corbyn. When Swinson quipped that she was neither an “entitled Etonion” nor a “1970s socialist” it might have seemed too obvious of a point to make. But emphasising that she is a far cry from Boris and Corbyn is designed to pick up exactly those voters who now find themselves politically homeless.

There’s a problem though. The big revelation of the conference was that the Liberal Democrats are now officially the party of revoking Article 50. The policy received wide support from conference attendees – but it has rightly resulted in raised eyebrows. The concern for the party must be that they won’t pick up any new voters – they are already the party of Remain – but they will certainly lose support from everyone else on the Remain-Leave spectrum. It seems, for now, like a wildly risky and poorly calculated strategy.

The defence is that the purity of the policy is refreshing. Swinson’s speech needn’t dwell on the complexities of holding a second referendum, nor meander over striking a deal with the EU that “protects jobs, the economy…” etc out of the playbook of Theresa May, nor rehash the Brexit “do or die”, “come what may” slogans now nearly synonymous with Boris Johnson. “Stop Brexit” was the message.

“The first task is clear. We must stop Brexit. There is no Brexit that will be good for our country…Brexit will put lives at risk. Brexit will hurt our economy.”

Beyond that the speech was light on detail. Climate change, mental health provisions, a distinctively Cameroonian “wellbeing” fund, more effort into reducing knife crime were all on the agenda. None of it was ground breaking. Nor election winning stuff.

Perhaps it doesn’t matter though – they aren’t going to win an election, they won’t win 300 seats – far from it in fact. The party is energised – but that has translated into Icarean levels of over confidence from Swinson.

1. The EU is determined to continue its war on big tech 

With the appointment of VDL’s deputy – Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager – as coordinator for the so-called agenda on “Europe fit for the digital age” it is clear that the EU does not intend to give up its focus on taming the likes of tech giants Apple, Amazon and Facebook.

Vestager already acts as the competition commissioner, and will continue that role. Putting both roles in Vestager’s portfolio will upset The White House – she has already earned the moniker “tax lady” from Donald Trump for the multibillion dollar fines she’s handed out to these tech companies.

The appointment is basically confirmation that the commission is intent on continuing and expanding the work of Juncker’s high regulatory standards for data compliance, and ensuring the compliance of Big Tech.

2. … Which could spell trouble for the UK 

As the EU ramps up its standards on data protection, the UK is going to find securing deals with both the EU and the US much harder.

American standards on data protection are generally lower than the EU’s – hence The White House’s likely upset at Vestager’s appointment. We can expect the US to demand the UK weakens its data protections as a condition of a trade agreement. But at the same time the EU will insist that the UK matches their’s.

The UK will have to choose to which regulatory orbit it wants to enter. It probably can’t do both.

It’s worth noting we are already expecting a similar trade off between low US standards vs tougher EU ones when it comes to agricultural produce.

3. Climate change to take centre stage

VDL’s other deputy – Executive Vice President Frances Timmermans – has been put in charge of managing climate change policy. Climate change was always likely to take centre stage on the legislative agenda, and the appointment of Timmermans confirms it.

Green parties have enjoyed an electoral surge across Western Europe in recent months – locally, at a European level, and in general domestic polling. Not to mention that in VDL’s native Germany the Green party are mounting a not-insignificant challenge to her party – The CDU’s – primacy. She has a vested interest in fighting off encroaching Greens in Germany. And, thanks to Green issues becoming an electoral question in mainstream politics, it makes sense for VDL to reflect that at a European level.

She needs to prove her own, the EPP’s and her commission’s environmental credentials for the domestic health of the CDU; and majoring on climate questions is an obvious route for VDL to prove her tenure as President to be a success.

4. Leo Varadkar has a serious ally 

Varadkar’s ally, and fellow Fine Gael member, has been appointed as trade commissioner. Originally nominated by Enda Kenny (Leo Varadkar’s predecessor), Phil Hogan used to head up the agriculture portfolio. Now, he’ll be instrumental in the next phase of Brexit negotiations, when they eventually arrive.

This will no doubt worry Brexiteers. Hogan, or “big Phil” as he’s known at home, has been highly critical of Boris Johnson, accusing him of “gambling” with the Irish peace process.

But it may not be all bad for the Brexiteers. He’s close with Varadkar, who has repeatedly told Johnson that Ireland will be the UK’s closest ally when it comes to trade post Brexit.

VDL said: “He will be a very fair, but determined negotiator.”

5. The EU will fightback against China’s Belt and Road intiative

Dubravka Suica, former mayor of Dubrovnik and member of the European Parliament since 2014, has been appointed commissioner for Democracy and Demography. It’s significant that VDL has given an enlarged portfolio to Croatia, indicating the Balkans are a priority for this administration.

The appointment could be an attempt to detach Croatia and surrounding countries from the creeping Chinese influence, specifically when it comes to the Belt and Road infrastructure project, which in lieu of high engagement from the EU could be all too much of an attractive prospect.

Johnson is frustrated at what he perceives to be Varadkar undermining him every step of the way – making his task on delivering Brexit impossible with his refusal to loosen the backstop. Varadkar is aghast at what he sees as the UK government’s refusal to acknowledge the sanctity of the Good Friday Agreement, and the economic catastrophe a no deal Brexit could bring to the island.

They are both a little bit right. But at a time when Anglo-Irish relations seem to have hit a serious low, there are signs that there is a way through this mess.

The view from Dublin is that Johnson doesn’t want a withdrawal agreement, and his talk of negotiations is just window dressing for a prime minister intent on delivering no deal. That may have been true two weeks ago. But whatever Johnson’s plan was no longer matters since parliament moved against him so decisively. Rebel Tory MPs have either been booted out of the party or are quitting of their own accord; and opposition parties are denying him the election he needs to get Brexit over the line before 31st October.

A revived deal seems like Johnson’s only option now. But with both Dublin and the UK bound by their fundamentally incompatible red lines it is hard to see what that deal will look like. Johnson can’t countenance a deal with a backstop and Ireland can’t countenance a deal without.

But to assume, then, that there is no possible deal is wrong. And, paradoxically, it could be Boris Johnson’s decision to kick out 21 of his own MPs and shrink his majority to -43 that makes it possible by accident.

Why? He no longer needs the DUP.

The confidence and supply arrangement with the DUP consistently bound Theresa May’s hands. When she floated the idea of a Northern Ireland backstop they immediately threatened to withdraw support and collapse her government. But now that Boris Johnson has nothing close to a majority the DUP are functionally obsolete when it comes to propping up his government.

Does that mean a Northern Ireland only backstop could be on the cards? That would mean checks on the sea border between Britain and Northern Ireland.

The DUP originally objected to that proposal under May because it put a border down the middle of the Irish sea, and posed a significant threat to the Union. Both of those things may still be true. And today the DUP’s Arlene Foster reiterated the DUP’s position:

“The Prime Minister has already ruled out a Northern Ireland only backstop because it would be anti-democratic, unconstitutional and would mean our core industries would be subject to EU rules without any means of changing them,” she said.

But, with Boris Johnson desperate not to renege on his promise to deliver Brexit by 31st October, Dublin theoretically open to a Northern Ireland only backstop, the DUP having no technical bearing on the functioning of the government, and a parliament terrified of a no deal Brexit – Theresa May’s deal with a backstop limited to just Northern Ireland, might just pass.

Boris Johnson needs to find a way through somehow. If Dublin is receptive – and they should be – could this be the compromise both sides have constantly mythologised about, but so far failed to deliver? In the weird world of the Brexit crisis, stranger things have happened.

Former cabinet minister Damian Green MP, chair of the group, wrote that the “purge” of “moderates” was wrong in principle and bad practical politics. He said: “We are now calling upon the PM to reinstate the Party whip to these colleagues.”

Earlier, during his first PMQs Johnson was not met with the usual cheer from his benches, customary for a new prime minister. Instead his cabinet were morose and tense – a far cry from the swashbuckling confidence they had in their first few weeks in post.

Adding insult to injury, former prime minister Theresa May looked incongruous on the back benches, sat between two MPs who were sacked last night – Ken Clarke and Antoinette Sandbach – seemingly enjoying the saga of Johnson floundering at the dispatch box.

Johnson had attempted to regain control of the situation, putting forward a motion to hold an early election on 15th October to the Commons just moments after MPs passed a bill to block a no deal Brexit. The bill demands Boris Johnson to seek an extension to Article 50 beyond the 31st October deadline in lieu of striking a deal with the EU.

The PM requires a 2/3rds majority of MPs to secure an election. But Labour, the SNP and the Liberal Democrats have all said they won’t support his bid – as they are concerned that Johnson might alter the election date allowing the UK to crash out with no deal on 31st October anyway.

It has been a historically bad start for the new prime minister – who became the first PM in history to lose his first two consecutive votes in parliament. On Tuesday evening, MPs voted by a majority of 27 to take control of the parliamentary agenda – prompting the government to expel 21 members of its own party for defying the whip. He lost again today 329 to 300 on the bill itself.

There was widespread Tory unease today at Westminster over the decision to effectively expel those 21 Tory MPs who rebelled against the government last night. The threats, designed to deter MPs from defying the government, backfired and strengthened the resolve of those anti-no deal Conservatives willing to sink their party’s majority in protest of no deal. Among the rebels was the father of the House and former Chancellor Ken Clarke, as well as many former cabinet ministers.

The full list of rebels who are now former Tory MPs is:

Philip Hammond (former Chancellor)

David Gauke (former Justice Secretary)

Dominic Grieve (former Attorney General)

Ken Clarke (father of the House and former Chancellor)

Sir Oliver Letwin (former Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster)

Justine Greening (former Education Secretary)

Rory Stewart (former International Development Secretary and recent leadership candidate)

Greg Clarke (former Business Secretary)

Sam Gyimah (former universities minister)

Antoinette Sandbach

Alistar Burt (former Middle East minister)

Stephen Hammond (former health minister)

Sir Nicholas Soames (former defence minister)

Margot James (former digital minister)

Richard Harrington (former business minister)

Guto Bebb (former defence minister)

Caroline Nokes (former PPS at Department for Work and Pensions)

Ed Vaizey (former culture minister)

Steve Brine (former health minister)

Anne Milton (former minister for women)

Richard Benyon (former fisheries minister)

All of the above MPs have been stripped of the Conservative whip and currently sit as independent MPs. Former party chairman Caroline Spelman voted alongside the rebels against the government today – but No 10 says that she will not have the whip removed.

Now, the opposition parties technically have the numbers to form their own government if they choose to – although that looks extremely unlikely. If they decided to vote together they would outnumber the Tories and the DUP by 22 votes, 320-298. But, last week Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson made clear she could not countenance a government which put Jeremy Corbyn at the helm – so such an alliance remains unlikely.

If Boris Johnson loses the vote to hold a new election – and all signs point to that – it is unclear where he goes next. He is stuck, having paved his way to No 10 on the promise of taking the UK out of the EU on 31st October “come what may.”

Lee said in a statement: “This Conservative Government is aggressively pursuing a damaging Brexit in unprincipled ways. It is putting lives and livelihoods at risk unnecessarily and is wantonly endangering the integrity of the United Kingdom.”

Lee had been touted as one among the growing list of Tory rebels expected to vote against the government tonight. If anti-no deal MPs managed to take control of parliament’s agenda this evening in a bid to stop a no deal Brexit, the chances of an early general election were evermore likely. However, now that Johnson has lost his official majority the likelihood of an imminent election is becoming increasingly certain.

MPs returned to parliament this afternoon for the first time since summer recess – just a week after Boris Johnson announced his plans to prorogue parliament, limiting the scope for anti-no deal MPs to legislate against a no deal Brexit. His plans have forced MPs to act quicker than anticipated – and all should come to a head this evening.

A coalition of anti-no deal MPs, including all opposition parties and a growing cabal of Tory rebels, will try to take over the business of the House of Commons via an emergency debate to pass legislation calling on Johnson to seek a further Brexit extension. If he is unable to strike a new deal with the EU, and pass it through the Commons, by 19th October the bill would require him to seek an extension to 31st January 2020. Alternatively – if Johnson can find a majority for no deal before then he could proceed with that, which is not-so-secretly understood to be the government’s preferred option.

The usual health warnings apply, however. Any requested extension to Artice 50 must be approved by all members of the European Council. Macron was hard to win over the last time (when Theresa May requested a third extension), and there are no guarantees that he, or another council member wouldn’t veto the request and kick the UK out anyway.

But it will likely never come to that. Boris Johnson ran his leadership campaign on a pledge of taking the UK out of the EU by 31st October – “come what may,” “do or die.” He indicated last night in a statement outside No 10 Downing Street that if MPs tried to block no deal he would seek a general election. An anti-no deal bill “would create paralysing uncertainty”, as Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told BBC Radio 4 this morning – not only is it clearly designed to delay Brexit, but probably cancel it in its entirety, he added. The best course of action, then, is taking the question back to the people in the form of a general election.

But of course there are more complications to come – this is Brexit, after all. For Johnson to call an early election he has to, under the conditions of the Fix Term Parliament Act, obtain the backing of 2/3s of the House – that means Labour will have to be onside. In normal times that shouldn’t be a problem. What opposition party would say no to a general election and a chance at power? But these aren’t exactly normal times, and despite Corbyn angling for a general election for nearly two years now there are whisperings that Labour is divided on whether to back Johnson’s call for one.

Corbyn has said he would be delighted to “take fight to the Tories,” while shadow Northern Ireland secretary Tony Lloyd said Labour would “not fall for Boris Johnson’s trick” by agreeing to a general election. The government has indicated the election would be held on 14th October, a few days before the crucial European summit. But – opposition parties do not trust Johnson not to amend the date of the election after it’s approved by parliament, pushing to to after 31st October, allowing the UK to crash out with no deal anyway.

Leader of the SNP in Westminster, Ian Blackford, wants a general election too, but emphasised that opposition MPs “need to be able to influence the date of that election.”

“We know exactly what Boris is up to” he added.

That could leave Johnson in a serious bind – having his route to no deal Brexit 31st October blocked by legislation, and not having the necessary support for a general election. There is an alternative suggestion floating around. The government could sidestep the now much-maligned Fix Term Parliament Act and table a motion for an election anyway. In that case he would require only the backing of half of MPs. But the catch – there’s always one – is that any motion like that could be amended by anti-no deal MPs to rule out no deal, or to bind Johnson’s hands on the date of the election.

So the government could be trapped. The so-called “aggressive operation” currently underway against potential Tory rebels was probably designed to avoid this outcome: reports emerged from No 10 that the government would deselect any Tories who rebelled against the government in the vote tonight, hoping it would deter their efforts to sully the governments move towards no deal.

However, in an astonishing interview this morning Philip Hammond seemed to indicate that this threat has only strengthened the Tory rebels’ resolve. He criticised the “rank hypocrisy” of Johnson’s administration for threatening to expel rebels considering Boris himself voted against May’s Brexit proposals. And, he added that he believed there were enough Tory MPs prepared to rebel for the motion to pass.

Rory Stewart, Philip Hammond, Dominic Grieve, Justine Greening and David Gauke are some of the bigger names among those who have confirmed they would defy the government this evening. Other possible rebels may include Guto Bebb, Ed Vaizey, Antoinette Sandbach and Kit Harrington. Eyes will be on David Lidington – May’s de facto deputy – who’s a known party loyalist, but also an anti-no deal advocate. If he rebels the depth of the rift in the party will be exposed as greater than possibly anticipated.

Behind all of this is Boris Johnson’s chief advisor Dominic Cummings. Cummings may have landed Johnson in a serious bind. But, Cummings is a serious strategical force – and if Boris Johnson was serious about his pledge to take the UK out of the EU “come what may” we shouldn’t underestimate the lengths the pair might go to.

Boris has said many times he wants a settlement: “I want a deal. We’re ready to work with our friends and partners to get a deal.” And his letter yesterday evening elaborated on the familiar lines: The backstop is unacceptable and it must go. To avoid a hard border the UK and EU should seek alternative arrangements before the conclusion of the transition period.

But Johnson’s team is under no illusion that the EU can offer him a deal on the terms laid out in the letter. Both sides are bound by their fundamentally incompatible red lines. Johnson’s requests are also internally inconsistent. He emphasised his commitment to avoiding a hard border in Ireland, but at the same time rebuffed the idea of remaining in a customs union, or having any kind of regulatory alignment. The solution then to avoiding a hard border lies in “alternative” arrangements which, as of yet, do not exist.

This was not a letter directed towards re-opening negotiating channels, but rather a ruse to allow Johnson to sidestep parliament. If Johnson managed to procure a deal he would have no choice but to put it before the Commons. But because of his barely-there majority any deal he presents – backstop or no backstop – looks destined to fail.

His perceived strength at home relies on him not making the same mistakes as his predecessor. Theresa May looked weak because she failed to get her deal through parliament three times. Johnson is savvy and shows every sign that hewon’t let himself be led down the same road. Yesterday, when pressed on whether he thinks negotiations will progress, he responded:

“Well, that is, I’m afraid, very much up to our friends [the EU], and I hope that they will compromise.”

By hinging a new deal on the EU’s willingness to compromise Johnson is setting up a situation in which he can blame the failure of negotiations (or lack of) on them. He knows the EU cannot countenance his demands and strike a deal that contravenes its own redlines; or one that relies on arrangements that do not exist; or one that doesn’t put up a hard border but instead compromises the integrity of the single market even further, and flies in the face of the internal laws and treaties upon which the EU is built.

The fact that the EU won’t give him a deal on the terms laid out in his letter is exactly what Johnson wants. His plan, unlike May’s, does not rely on EU flexibility, or capitulation – in fact, it relies on much the opposite.

He’s dressed up as a good faith negotiator looking for compromise from the EU when he knows he will never get it. Which means he’ll never have to see a deal fail in parliament. Instead he will say, in lieu of striking a deal, it is up to him to respect the mandate of the 2016 referendum and pursue no deal – backed into a corner by the intransigence of those on the other side of the negotiating table.

There is one flaw. It would be a clever strategy if it weren’t so transparent – the truth hasn’t eluded Dublin and it won’t elude the EU either.

Whatever the fall out of no deal, when it happens Boris will try to pin it on the EU. His sidestepping of parliament will be pinned on the EU and MPs too.

Will it work? It could be a win win for Johnson. Or, it could blow up in his face if the EU successfully deny him the narrative that no deal was its fault all along, or if opponents of no deal in the UK tell a clear enough story. Either way, the strategy should fool no-one.

It seems that ideological divides still run deeper than Brexit, no matter what the proponents of a Corbyn led GNU might want to believe. Conservative rebels including Dominic Grieve, Caroline Spelman, Oliver Letwin and former Conservative Nick Boles have written today to Jeremy Corbyn saying they are willing to talk about forming a temporary government, the implication being that Corbyn will be at the helm. But Swinson has made clear she cannot countenance that.

It is a strange move for the leader of the Liberal Democrats – or, the unofficial party of Remain. If she were to give her backing to Jeremy Corbyn to form a temporary government for the purpose of extending Article 50 she wouldn’t be giving him access to No 10 forever. After the extension was secured an election would be called, in which Labour has already stated they’ll campaign on holding a second referendum, which would have the option to Remain on the ballot. Nothing in there is contrary to Swinson’s interests – or the Liberal Democrats’ interests. In fact, for a party that claims its priority is to block a no deal Brexit, and then to remain in the EU, everything in that is entirely in her interest.

But, it’s not that simple. The temporary government only works if it can command a majority in the Commons. It’s hard to see where Corbyn would get those numbers from – there are plenty of Remainer Conservatives who would rather crash out with no deal than put Corbyn in No 10; and then there are the Labour defectors who left Labour partially in protest to the party’s handling of anti-semitism allegations – it’s hard to see them welcoming Prime Minister Jeremy; and at the moment it’s hard to know how many Tory rebels who are intent on blocking no deal will go through with the temporary government if it puts Corbyn in charge. In short – a Corbyn led GNU would struggle to command a majority.

Nevertheless, Tory rebels have said they’re open to dialogue on what this anti-no deal GNU might look like. Guto Bebb MP told BBC news today:

“A short-term Jeremy Corbyn government is less damaging than the generational damage that would be caused by a no-deal Brexit.”

That’s quite the statement from a Conservative MP. And it goes to show the absurdity of the whole thing. Currently some MPs are running away with the idea of a GNU, with few stopping to think about whether it will actually work. Perhaps Swinson is on to something.

New governing regimes often underestimate their opponents responding. New Prime Minister Gordon Brown in the summer of 2007 – when he developed a poll lead and flirted with an early election – was humiliated when the Tories under David Cameron fought back and forced Brown to scrap plans for an early contest.

Johnson ran for the Tory leadership on a promise that he wouldn’t call an election before delivering Brexit, fearing electoral wipeout at the hands of the Brexit Party. But with a working majority of one – that includes the DUP’s support and is set to be weakened by a growing number of likely Tory rebels – that election could be sooner than we think.

If there is a contest, what will happen? Right now the latest YouGov polling has the Conservatives at 32%, Labour at 22%, Lib Dems at 19% and The Brexit Party at 13%. But in these volatile times things can change quickly. Right up until the 2017 election the Conservatives were comfortably in the lead… until all of a sudden they weren’t.

This time, the Tory strategy relies on them winning the leave vote – taken from The Brexit Party and Leave-voting Labour heartlands. The theory is that whatever they lose to the Lib Dems will be won back there.

The calculation might work – but the Tories are struggling badly with the youth vote.

Knowing this, Labour the underdog is quietly preparing a manifesto with a serious offer to young voters – those below 40, who largely voted Remain, and who are turned off by the no-deal Conservatives – on housing, student debt, climate change and higher taxes for the wealthy.

With a new leader the Tories are feeling buoyant, for now. But while the Tories might try to eat into the Labour vote in the North, a traditional voting pattern is still a traditional voting pattern.

Labour is a formidable campaigning machine, despite the scandals of the Corbyn era. It is backed by serious Union money. And if Corbyn’s team can pitch a compelling vision to young voters who the Tories have decided to overlook, then the Tories could struggle to win anything like a working majority.

The usual health warning applies. The youth vote and the Remain vote overlap significantly. The anti-Tory vote is vulnerable to splitting across Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP and the Greens. However, with the sheer weight of Labour’s electoral infrastructure, the party has a chance, with a decent campaign to position itself as the stop Boris option.

Amid all the chatter about the threat posed by the resurgent Liberal Democrats, and the Brexit Party snapping at the Conservatives’ heels, the next twist in the tale could be a serious Labour fight back.