Dia Chakravarty:

This is how the Government will seek to resolve legal disputes with the EU postBrexit: by looking “to tailor a bespoke dispute settlement mechanism” outside the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). That’s according to the justice minister, Dominic Raab.

It’s a clear position, expressed simply, and shouldn’t leave anybody in any doubt about what the Government is seeking to do. If the negotiations go to plan, we will end up with an arbitration mechanism unique to us, whereby the Supreme Court will be the ultimate arbiter of our laws after Brexit.

Why, then, does the Government’s position paper on the issue not communicate this with the same clarity? Instead, it sets out “a number of existing precedents” where arbitration processes have been agreed by the EU and third countries, some of which involve roles for the ECJ that would be unacceptable for Britain – immediately confusing the situation, and opening the Government up to the criticism of blurring previously declared red lines, while lacking the unity, imagination or courage to state a position and stand by it. If this is a ploy to protect the fragile peace in Cabinet by attempting to keep both the Brexit and the Remain sides sweet, I fail to see how it can work.

Whatever the position paper says, Mr Raab, who did the media rounds on the matter, and the Prime Minister leave very little doubt about what the Brexiteers favour – an off-the-shelf model will not do. Unless the Government now backtracks on this (which it surely cannot get away with unscathed), it can offer little comfort to those hoping for a nominal break with the EU and its institutions. It is simply not good enough for the Government to have a clear strategy if it fails to communicate it clearly.

As the British team of negotiators readies for the third round of talks in Brussels this coming week, the Government needs to instil a sense of confidence in citizens that our civil servants are being provided with the strong leadership and the clear direction they need to face their EU counterparts.

The other side has mastered this approach. As the dispatches of the City of London’s Brexit envoy, Jeremy Browne, recently revealed, the EU27 are not nearly as united as Michel Barnier would have us believe. Yet they present a united front, flirting with the line between confidence and arrogance, and boldly assert their demands (some of which are as extraordinary as EU citizens’ rights continuing to be interpreted and enforced by the ECJ in post-Brexit UK). It would be no bad thing if some of that grit rubbed off on our own side, and it must come from right at the top.

Which brings us back to the much-discussed topic of Theresa May’s leadership. It is now more than two months since the general election. The fact that Mrs May has remained in office is perhaps a testament to the ruthless pragmatism of the Conservative Party and the strong sense of public duty with which she is widely credited.

It is now time to dig deeper into that reserve of duty and provide the leadership the country needs to see it through these negotiations. Mrs May must put up a brave front in the face of adversity, just as Mr Barnier does.