The Brexit Irish border problem: Is there a way back?
David Davis is scrambling to answer questions thrown up by the DUP's rejection of the Government's draft Brexit proposals.
Tuesday 5 December 2017 18:55, UK
The moment Brexit "fantasy met brutal reality" is how Labour described the chaos over the聽Irish border.
During an urgent question in the House of Commons on Tuesday, shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer claimed the Prime Minister's promise to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland is impossible to deliver.
This is due to Theresa May "recklessly" committing to leaving the EU's customs union and single market, Sir Keir said.
He and backbenchers from all sides of the Commons described Monday's events as a "humiliation" and an "embarrassment" for the Government.
Some demanded the Prime Minister change course on Brexit - or "rub out the red lines", as Conservative Anna Soubry put it.
But Brexit Secretary David Davis responded by claiming the positions were not just Mrs May's red lines.
Leaning almost wearily into the despatch box, Mr Davis repeatedly stated that 85% of MPs were elected last June on manifestos committed to leaving both the single market and customs union.
Indeed, Mr Davis pointed to the words of shadow chancellor John McDonnell, who has previously said remaining in the single market would disrespect the Leave vote in the EU referendum.
The Brexit Secretary went on to claim it was misleading of the Opposition to suggest there had been any intention to allow Northern Ireland to diverge from the UK.
The plan, he said, was never to leave Northern Ireland in the single market and customs union while the rest of the UK left.
"No UK government would allow such a thing, let alone a Conservative and Unionist one," he declared.
That prompted MPs to ask: how can he square that position without committing the whole of the UK to aligning with EU regulations?
It was on this issue that the parliamentary war of words became more about a form of words; specifically, "regulatory alignment".
This is a phrase the Government is clearly latching its hopes to, despite the unravelling of talks on Monday.
Mr Davis explained the phrase in greater detail than he had ever done before.
He claimed "regulatory alignment" is not the same as "harmonisation".
In other words, it is not the same as a customs union.
Instead, the Brexit Secretary claimed it meant having shared goals, but using different mechanisms to arrive at a shared end point.
"It's not the single market, it's this House choosing laws in such a way to maximise our ability to sell abroad," Mr Davis said.
In other words, the Brexit Secretary accepted that whatever is needed to maintain a frictionless border will need to be agreed on a UK-wide approach - something which was far from obvious on Monday.
But while Mr Davis seemed to suggest the whole dilemma had been overblown and wilfully misinterpreted by the Opposition, the DUP's leader in Westminster made clear his party's refusal to accept the deal was down to an "ambiguity" in the text.
The party's Westminster leader Nigel Dodds told journalists the DUP had only received the text being presented to the EU late on Monday morning, and let it be known almost immediately that they found it "unacceptable".
It's unclear why the DUP had not been made aware of the wording before the Prime Minister settled into the working lunch with European Commission president Jean-Claude Junker, in which Mrs May intended to sign off on the deal.
Was she hoping to bounce the DUP into agreement, because she knew they would oppose the wording?
Was this simply an unforced error by her Chief Whip? Is there a way back?
These are the questions now being asked.
Another is whether Mr Davis' explanation in the Commons that "regulatory alignment" was always meant for the whole of the UK will bring the DUP back to the table as well as satisfy the Irish Government and EU, but also assuage the growing fears of Brexiteers that the UK is capitulating in negotiations.
It seems unlikely.