So another Government minister has broken ranks with the PM's 'my deal or no-deal' policy.
PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW:
The defence minister, Tobias Ellwood, has joined fellow ministers Amber Rudd and David Gauke in claiming in a Times article that a no deal Brexit on WTO terms is not an option.
He did though say that it was right for the government to be spending money and time on it and make the necessary preparations for what he calls a disorderly no deal Brexit, but "the damage this worse-case scenario would cause means all efforts must be made to avoid it" he said.
He then went on to say that our defence would significantly degraded by lack of UK access to many international security programmes and that security information exchange would halt until we had new agreements in place.
"We would immediately reduce our ability to tackle threats from terrorism to cybercrime, modern slavery to fraud." He said.
Now this has all been comprehensively debunked by the likes of the former head of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove who is part of the Veterans for Britain Brexit campaign group.
And while Tobias Ellwood is saying that Theresa May is writing in the Express saying that the nation should drop the 'Leave' / 'Remain' divide and come together to find common ground in a UK wide effort to rebuild the country as it leaves the EU.
And she also talked about all the domestic issues like the NHS, housing and schools that had been put on the back burner and now needed to be dealt with.
And at the same time, government sources say they are now confident that MPs will return from the Christmas recess sufficiently spooked by the no deal Brexit scenario to vote for the PM's Brexit deal – even if the vote has to be held twice.
Ministers have also been summoned to an emergency meeting of the cabinet on the 2nd of January, one week before Parliament is due to reconvene after the Christmas break on the 7th of January.
How can Theresa May and her government team be so confident?
She only has 317 Tory MPs at the moment and needs the ten DUP MPs in a confidence and supply arrangement to take her over the threshold to win votes in the House of Commons.
But without something concrete and legally binding from the EU saying that the Irish backstop is temporary and giving a time limit, you have to wonder if the DUP can be convinced to keep that support going.
One has to assume that she will also be relying on some Labour Party and other opposition support to counterbalance the potential loss of the DUP and the number of Tory Brexiteers who may vote against her deal.
Or the more likely explanation is, that it is all just government bluster.
Because I cannot believe that any MP in their right mind would sign up to Theresa May's deal, as it is total EU vassalage and if they do not realise that then they are not fit to hold the positions they do.
Also, let's look at the mechanics of her 'deal'. It is not actually a deal. If the MPs do agree to her proposals, then starting from the 30 March 2019 the UK will enter a customs union as part of a transition phase without a final deal agreed. And any final deal subsequently agreed would be put in place at the end of the transition phase less than two years later. Or more likely the Irish Backstop would kick in and we'd never be able to leave the so-called temporary customs union arrangement.
That means we will be straight into a very intense set of negotiations that will mirror what we've been through over the last two years. So, far from dealing with domestic legislation, we'll probably be trying to negotiate and find out what the UK will be doing in two years time with the opposition and pro-EU types continuing to undermining this country at every turn.
The whole of Westminster will likely be buried in Brexit for most of that time.
Then, when the deal is done there will be calls for – guess what – a referendum on it!
So, what Theresa May has done is not agree a deal with the EU, she has only agreed to set the ground very loosely and in a non legally binding way, to talk about doing a deal and those talks could go on and on and on.
Wouldn't it just be far simpler to obey the result of the 2016 EU referendum and leave on WTO Brexit terms at the earliest opportunity?