Thread by @Usherwood

Important shift in tone, but Q is whether this is structural or tactical

(More likely the latter)

1/

https://twitter.com/Sime0nStylites/status/1462322745803423744

A couple of weeks ago, Art.16 use was being talked up a lot, as well as role of CJEU. And yes, I thought it would happen too

So what's changed?

2/

Fundamentally, nothing

Frost's critique hasn't moved (as seen in his less emollient interventions) and no sign that negotiations have changed any basic elements of NIP

3/

What had changed is context

Sleaze and trains have proven unexpectedly (for him at least) problematic for Johnson, so one argument is that he has enough not to add to the pile by kicking off a major dispute w EU (esp. one he's unlikely to win)

4/

That's nicely rational, but lived experience of this govt is that such models have ltd traction.

No good reason to think such a hard-headed re-evaluation has occurred, esp in a hard version that takes Art.16 off table for good

5/

At most, Johnson might have told Frost to back off for a while, and got Gove to make nice sounds, but absent associated substantive action in negotiations/implementation, probably safest to assume this is ephemeral

6/

Talk of a new model of permanent negotiation, to keep things up in the air, would make sense as a less unstable approach than the guns-blazing way of the sumer, but too early to know if this is the case

I'd also have doubts Johnson could balance on that line, long-term

7/

So, probably fairer to assume is that this is a bit of UK regrouping ahead of some new gambit, rather than a major sea-change

/end