Some people got seriously excited about this tweet and see it as a confirmation that "something is moving". I'm (very) sceptical about it, for several reasons. /1
Let's assume that this encounter was authentic and the Tweet represents accurately the chat between those two diplomats. /2
1) The editorial change of Mail: Generally speaking, just because headlines change doesn't mean HMG policies change. Of course it has an impact, but far less direct than people assume. A mere change of tone doesn't change the lyrics. /2
Besides, from that what is known (or gossiped) about the editorial change in Mail it can't be assumed that we will see drastic changes. It's a newspaper having to sail to readers, drastic changes in content and framing will drive them of. /3
Going from 'no deal isn't too bad' and 'better no deal and out but enslaved and in' to 'no deal is a catastrophe, better stay if we can't leave on our terms is a very long way. /4
Let's have a look on those shifts in public opinion and it's relevance for HMG: From somebody who is doing research on campaigns, I can't see any significant changes which would drive HMG back to EU (Remain or EEA). You might as "why?". /5
Recent changes are mostly from don't knows and the ones without opinions towards "remain". The ones voting for Leave are mostly stable in their opinion and have little to no regrets. /6
Why does this matter?: Tories experienced a significant shift in their electorate in GE 2017 election. People voting for them were rather positive or even convinced Leavers. Given that those are, from what we know, currently not motivated to change opinion there is a problem. /7
Even if the public hates to Leave, if the key electorate of the governing party / parties really wants to leave you will want to make sure that you leave if you intend to to get re-elected. /8
Some people would argue that the policy change might make Conservatives electable again to them. Question would be whether this sentiment is shared among the public to an extend that it outweighs loses from this policy change. /9
This also doesn't consider that it's not just the electorate which matters. Each MP'll want to have a look whether his/her voter in his/her constituency backs thi that's change. Bear in mind that the Tory electorate and held Tory seats might be different the averaged public. /10
And even if there is a change on mood, it'd not be enough. For one Tory MPs need to be selected by party members from their constituency. Tory grassroots are mostly ardent Leavers and true BeLeavers. You don't want to p*ss them off since they can end your career. /11
And even if they would be ok with it, there are a lot of politicians who really believe in what they do. Frank Fields and Kate Hoey should have known that they risk being deselected but they stand by their position anyway because an MP has no imperative mandate. /12
They can do whatever they like to do as long as they are MPs and this means they stay and decide until the next election. A lot of Tory MPs, some MPs from Labour and all DUP MPs are staunch Eurosceptics to Europhobs. Killing their lifetime chance to get UK out is much to ask. /13
And even if MPs and public and key electorates are ok with Remaining, it doesn't that you will since it needs two to Tango. /14
EU might be okay with receiving UK back but UK did a lot of damage and cost EU lots of resources. Besides, it's not even clear whether there are more tantrums or mood changes. Not to speak about questions of further integration where UK might be unhelpful. /15
EU might want to make sure, that those open bills are sufficiently paid and matters of integration can be adequately tackled. Just Remaining might not be an option since A50 as such doesn't offer the option of staying. /16
In the worst case ECj would need to decide and even if you can stay, not clearing the open bills and matters outlined could means that UK might be isolated (politically) for quite a while. Staying will be rather much of rejoining and will need negotiations. /17
In short: those diplomats probably didn't offer much of an insight. This would have been weird anyways, while key decoders of HMG are political actors, diplomats are supposed to be neutral (hence normally excluded from the inner circle of deciders). /18
What they basically said is there interpretation from public events, not a professional or profound analysis. I would be careful and not get excited. No deal is still more likely than any deal (or remaining). 19/19
