As those who have read my recent posts will know I am of the opinion that it is for Parliament to determine whether we remain a member of the EU, after admitting that holding a referendum was a mistake.

That though looks unlikely to be the way forward as my opinion is clearly not shared by enough MPs. Observing the way things are progressing I think I can see an end game beginning to emerge and wonder if my analysis is shared by others.

The current series of meetings with senior Parliamentarians looks unlikely to bridge the very wide gaps, especially with Corbyn refusing to participate. May cannot rule out a "no deal" Brexit, either legally or from her negotiating position, so we are going to have a continuing stalemate for the coming week or two.

I therefore think that Parliament will vote to give itself control of the process and start to issue instructions to the Executive, as has been heavily suggested in the past week. Corbyn doesn't want this, but many in his party do. This I think will end up with us requesting a delay to the implementation of A50, which will be granted, and us holding a new referendum to determine the current mood of the country.

I am not in favour of any referendums, and hope this will be the last we ever hold, but we need a route out of the impasse.

It should be remebered that this wouldn't be a "second referendum", ie asking the same question a second time just to get a different answer. In fact it would be the third referendum on our membership. We voted to stay in, in 1975, with twice as many deciding to remain as wanted to leave. Compared to the tiny margin in 2016 this was overwelming. OK, this was the EC/EEC and not the EU but it is nonetheless instructive. Such a huge margin was not enough for the anti Europe lobby, who continued moaning and campaigning until Cameron buckled and tried to marginalise them for ever.

So a new referendum to determine how people feel now that we have 2 years more experience of what coming out actually might entail would seem to be a logical move. In view of the fact that this would be the third in a series of referendums I see no justification for any complaints. If Parliament consulted the people twice before, why not again, when there is no consensus amongst themselves? Those convinced that leaving is still the wish of the people need have nothing to fear.

The next big question is what the options might be. That will cause some blood to boil.

What a long winded way of saying that you want Parliament to renege on it's referendum promise just because you and your remain friends didn't like the result.

As those who have read my recent posts will know I am of the opinion that it is for Parliament to determine whether we remain a member of the EU, after admitting that holding a referendum was a mistake.

That though looks unlikely to be the way forward as my opinion is clearly not shared by enough MPs. Observing the way things are progressing I think I can see an end game beginning to emerge and wonder if my analysis is shared by others.

The current series of meetings with senior Parliamentarians looks unlikely to bridge the very wide gaps, especially with Corbyn refusing to participate. May cannot rule out a "no deal" Brexit, either legally or from her negotiating position, so we are going to have a continuing stalemate for the coming week or two.

I therefore think that Parliament will vote to give itself control of the process and start to issue instructions to the Executive, as has been heavily suggested in the past week. Corbyn doesn't want this, but many in his party do. This I think will end up with us requesting a delay to the implementation of A50, which will be granted, and us holding a new referendum to determine the current mood of the country.

I am not in favour of any referendums, and hope this will be the last we ever hold, but we need a route out of the impasse.

It should be remebered that this wouldn't be a "second referendum", ie asking the same question a second time just to get a different answer. In fact it would be the third referendum on our membership. We voted to stay in, in 1975, with twice as many deciding to remain as wanted to leave. Compared to the tiny margin in 2016 this was overwelming. OK, this was the EC/EEC and not the EU but it is nonetheless instructive. Such a huge margin was not enough for the anti Europe lobby, who continued moaning and campaigning until Cameron buckled and tried to marginalise them for ever.

So a new referendum to determine how people feel now that we have 2 years more experience of what coming out actually might entail would seem to be a logical move. In view of the fact that this would be the third in a series of referendums I see no justification for any complaints. If Parliament consulted the people twice before, why not again, when there is no consensus amongst themselves? Those convinced that leaving is still the wish of the people need have nothing to fear.

The next big question is what the options might be. That will cause some blood to boil.

What a long winded way of saying that you want Parliament to renege on it's referendum promise just because you and your remain friends didn't like the result.

Long winded appears to be the norm with this fella.