Behind-the-scenes intrigues over Brexit

The Brexit debate has been in abeyance for a few weeks while the protagonists take their holidays and prepare for the bruising endgame to come this autumn. But, as our Europe Editor reports today, matters have taken an unusual turn. The Commission in Brussels believes it has been spied on by the British intelligence services after details of highly sensitive EU position papers were made known to Downing Street within hours of being presented to officials.

Doubtless, some will think that on a matter of such importance it is vital that all the agencies of the state are deployed to ensure the UK is not outmanoeuvred in the negotiations. After all, as became apparent a few years ago when Edward Snowden blew the whistle on NSA surveillance activities, Barack Obama’s administration was tapping Angela Merkel’s telephone.

We cannot be too naive about these murky aspects of statecraft. On the other hand, could it be that an official from a country that rightly thinks the Commission is getting too big for its boots has alerted the British government to what was going on?

A more intriguing question is why Downing Street was spooked by the Commission presentation on the likely impact on European economies of pursuing the deal reached by the Cabinet at Chequers last month. This prompted the resignations of Boris Johnson as foreign secretary and David Davis as Brexit secretary. The latter’s principal objection to the agreement was that the EU side would simply not accept it. Indeed, that is the gravamen of the presentation Theresa May was eager to suppress.

It says that EU GDP would decline substantially if Chequers were the basis for a deal with the UK, suggesting it is a non-starter – as Mr Davis and many Brexiteers have argued all along. So why is Mrs May so keen for this not to be known? Her ministers have lined up recently to warn that the chances are growing of a no-deal Brexit, even though few preparations have been made for crashing out. This has been interpreted as a concerted attempt to get the EU to recognise that they need to talk seriously about the Chequers plan or risk chaos. But if there is no prospect of the EU agreeing it, who is bluffing here? If Brussels has concluded that even the uncertainties of no deal are better for them than the approach being pursued by Mrs May, then planning for such an eventuality needs to accelerate rapidly.