OK, time to explain to @Number10press what this slide meant.
It's quite scare people didn't understand this, especially Number 10.
It's quite scare people didn't understand this, especially Number 10.
This was a slide for a presentation to the Council. This is significant, because Michel Barnier does not have the authority to tell the Council what is on offer. 
The negotiating directives for any deal would have to be agreed by the Council as per Article 118 of the TFEU
It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the slide set consists of precisely 2 slides. One being a disclaimer saying it is for presentational purposes only and it was never mean to prejudice future negotiations.
So to go through what this slide says. The first graphic is obviously the EU. It's where we start.
The second is the EEA, which is one method that the EU currently trades under. Each has separate protocols, and underneath you can see where Theresa May's red lines affect the option.
The next is the Swiss method of having multiple bilateral deals. This is another template that the EU trades with, Underneath there is a list of things that makes this option not suitable with regards to Theresa May's red lines.
Next we have two templates for bespoke free trade agreements.
The Ukraine deal and the Canadian deal.
The Ukraine deal and the Canadian deal.
The next is the DCFTA template, another trade option that the EU trades with the various problems with Theresa May's red lines underneath.
Followed by the Canadian bespoke template, which it concludes is the only template or adopted method of trade used by the EU that does not cross any of the red lines set out by Theresa May.
And so, this slide is highlighting the different options the EU currently trades with in respect to the red lines.
What the EU is offering *IS* the Canadian template, because the Ukraine template crosses red lines that the UK has set.
But templates are bespoke, and it's not a pick and mix when it comes to chapters in a Canadian deal.
Added to the fact, if politicians thought the EU were proposing CETA, then why did they then not raise any issues when the EU said they were going to attempt to negotiate zero tariff and zero quota?
CETA is not zero tariff, so obviously the deal being proposed was going to be different and there were going to be different trade-offs.
If Number 10 haven't got this, then they have a pretty big apology to the British public for not paying attention.
/End
/End
