The EU's chief negotiating team is living up to the threats they made to Britain before Mrs May's decision to trigger Article 50. Many commentators thought Brussels was bluffing and that when it came down to negotiations, the trading bloc would realise that it needed the UK more than Britain needed the EU.
Nearly two months into discussions and it seems the British negotiating team's efforts are fruitless. Not only is the EU's deputy negotiator mocking the UK for burning all of its bridges with Brussels, but France and Germany have lined up in support for calls to cancel Brexit altogether, should the majority of the British people decide.
To do so would be an error of detrimental proportions.
It is about deciding what type of deal is best for the UK
This debate is no longer about who campaigned for or against Brexit; it is about deciding what kind of deal is best for the UK. Ultimately, a soft EU exit no longer fulfils that criteria. Britain would have no choice but to accept the free movement of workers, something many voters resent. There are no guarantees that this country would be exempt from that rule like Lichtenstein is. And while this option would provide the British with influence over which EU laws they accept through the European Economic Council, it still means they do not have any input into how that legislation is made.
Instead of having to accept the supremacy of the European Court of Justice over British law, we would have to listen to the European Free Trade Agreement Court. Of course, Britain would have the freedom to negotiate its trade deals and end the hated Common Fisheries and Common Agricultural Policies through the 'Norway option'.
Mrs May must ignore all the figures pushing for a 'soft' Brexit
Mrs May must ignore all the figures pushing for a soft Brexit. David Cameron recently suggested this would be the best deal for Britain, yet he ruled out the 'Norway option' altogether when he was prime minister. It was his failure to draw up contingency plans that have resulted in the EU's negotiating team failing to understand what the UK Government wants to achieve from these discussions, arguing their position is muddled and confused.
Despite this, that is not a reason to cancel Brexit altogether. This would lead to swathes of electors feeling betrayed by the establishment on a scale not witnessed before. It could result in UKIP winning a substantial number of seats and shattering the country's political balance. This could mean they wipe out the main parties in constituencies across England and Wales.
Discussions with Brussels are proving to be fruitless. It is time the Prime Minister walks away from these negotiations and trades with the EU on WTO rules. Whether Mr Davis can miraculously achieve a free trade deal or not, he should not surrender to the wishes of France and Germany and cancel Brexit.
