Brexit’s breaking points

Trying to write the first draft of history on the EU referendum and the leader-ship mess that followed had both its dramatic and its comic elements. My phone never stopped ringing with Eurosceptics keen to tell me why their contribution to a meeting that had previously escaped my notice was the decisive factor in securing victory. But when a vote is so close — 52 per cent to 48 per cent — then it would not have taken much to push the result the other way.

Donald Trump’s victory adds some credence to the idea that Brexit was pre–ordained, part of a wave of history. But the campaign turned on several events that were the result of accident, farce or both. If a relatively small number of those who backed Brexit had voted the other way, Remain would have triumphed. Here are a few of the things that might have swung it for Remain.

1. A proper ‘deal’ with Brussels. After promising ‘fundamental reform’, Cameron’s deal came down to an arrangement on cutting migrant benefits — not even he boasted about his deal. His final negotiations unfolded like an episode of The Thick of It. He planned, in secret, to demand a cap — or an ‘emergency brake’ — on migrant numbers. Once it leaked and Angela Merkel said she would not support the plan, it was dropped. Cameron then stole an idea from the thinktank Open Europe to limit migrant benefits instead. Theresa May and Philip Hammond said he should not defy the Germans, and would lose if he tried. Cameron called them ‘lily-livered’ but too readily accepted the advice of civil servants like Sir Ivan Rogers and Tom Scholar that he could not defy EU law. In the end, it was Cameron who was lily-livered. The ‘deal’ reflected that. Rogers and Scholar are now advising Theresa May to rein in her demands.