Hello my name is David Ronsman and this is Talking Politics. Back to Brexit. Are we finally approaching the endgame?

Talking Politics is brought to you in partnership with the London Review of Books. As politics speeds up, slow down with a subscription to the LRB where Brexit and Trump are only part of a picture that includes, well everything else.

Read relevant pieces and subscribe at a special rate at lrb.co.uk forward slash talking.

In a moment we're going to hear from Helen and Chris but first we wanted to check in with Kenneth Armstrong who is our resident expert on European law and appropriately or ironically he is in Brussels this week.

So we asked him to give us some thoughts on his phone and here I am on my phone letting you know that after Kenneth it will be Helen and Chris.

Short extension in the face of a rejection of the withdrawal agreement. I'm not sure is really going to do anything other than push back the cliff edge.

The vote that I think there was more significant on Wednesday was the significant vote against the Labour amendment on its old tarant of vision for the future relationship based on a customs union regulatory alignment with a single market etc.

That then suggests that what we still only really have in play is some version of the Prime Minister's deal and whether that can at some point command a majority.

I've been in Brussels this week and one of the things that somebody said to me yesterday is that this was all supposed to be the easy part of things and the real negotiations were yet come in terms of negotiating the future relationship which was to happen once the UK leaves.

Now given that MPs have rejected the Prime Minister's version of that so far given that MPs have also rejected the Labour alternative vision of what that looks like given that they've all said that they don't want to eat in no deal Brexit.

It's not completely obvious that there is a consensus that will then help drive those negotiations forward and that's very very risky.

Helen Thompson and Chris Bickerton with me as you just heard Kenneth Armstrong is in Brussels.

Let's just pick up on a couple of the things that Kenneth said there.

So we've still got this question about sequencing. I mean I think Theresa May in a way this week has had a kind of minor victory and that she has at least got the sequence so that nothing definitive about what the CUP amendment was pushing for has been established simply that there will be a vote on a possible extension after there's been a vote.

On no deal after there's been a vote on her deal so her deal would have to fall then no deal would have to fall and I think we can take it for granted that no deal would fall becomes is not going to support no deal.

But we still don't know then what the terms of the vote for an extension would be and there is this question and kind of touch on it which is there's a case for a short extension if her deal passes but it's not clear that there's a case for a short extension if her deal falls.

And it's at least possible presumably that the EU would reject a short extension.

So if her deal passes it passes me will come back to that but if her deal falls and no deal falls what are the terms of the vote for an extension what is the case for an extension.

There has to be I think if you listen to what some of the EU member states are saying it has to be based on something other than a desire to continue negotiating what is currently being negotiated or has been negotiated but was then rejected.

So something new from the British side a concrete demand which would be for instance we need to extend article 15 order to give us enough time to arrange a second referendum given what some Donald Tusker said in the past I'm sure that would be received favorably.

That would be more than three months.

Problems about how long it is or to do with the European parliamentary elections complicates things.

...