Why it's Chequers or nothing

[Angelicinnocent]

I've seen in the news that several Brexit figures are urging a Canada plus deal but May is saying "no it's Chequers or No Deal". Bearing in mind that the EU have already said no to Chequers, why is this the case?

Surely Canada plus (which the EU has said could be done) would be better than No Deal.

I'm heading to work so will catch up later but I'd be grateful if anyone can make sense of this for me.

My aibu is to not understand why other solutions are not being considered when Chequers is a bust.

Surely Canada plus (which the EU has said could be done) would be better than No Deal.

Regardless of its merits (or lack of them), a Canada type deal could only be done if the UK govt were to accept the Irish backstop. Which they say they won't.

This puts Canada as far out of reach as any other deal.

I must confess I had assumed that with Canada plus, there would be no need for the backstop.

The necessity of preventing a border between NI and ROI rules out pretty much anything except staying in the single market and customs union. A point which should have been made much more clearly before the referendum. Any other arrangement will require the backstop, which means either we all stay in the SM/CU or NI stays in the SM/CU with a sea border until such a time as the mythical "technological" solution to the border has actually been invented.

Because the hardliners in the Tory party will never accept anything else.

The backstop is very much required with a Canada-type deal! Even more so than Chequers.

IMO any type of deal will require the NI backstop, because of what has been said by government ministers about reneging on any agreement. The EU will want absolute guarantees on the Irish border question.

The chequers proposal is the only “deal” that us workable. It is not favourable to most (if any) involved, but the only one tabled that remotely comes close to resolving all issues.

That said, it is not liked by brexiters who want a “hard” Brexit. Not welcome by other EU states who will find it difficult to implement and administer, and obviously, not particularly wanted by many remainers who feel that it is just a sticking plaster that keeps some some essential Europe-wide services and cooperation working without the benefits of EU membership, but all the costs of being “independent from EU”.

It is the only solution that technically works across the board though. It is a universal compromise that sees no particular sector ruined and shares the pain equally.

My personal opinion is that compromise results in a scenario that nobody wanted. We should be completely in or completely out and and put up with the pain and try and make it work. However, with the vote being so close splitting the country almost 50/50 there is literally no mandate for this.