Nearly every negotiation comes to a crunch moment, following which it is highly likely to end in agreement or alternatively be doomed to failure. When we Tories were negotiating our coalition with the Liberal Democrats, the crunch came over whether, in return for them backing us on the economy, tuition fees, Europe and many other issues, we would offer a referendum on electoral reform.

We decided there was so much at stake, and the prize of ousting Gordon Brown was so worthwhile, that we would indeed give them such a referendum. That decision was vindicated when the sensible voters rejected changing the voting system, leaving the Liberals following most of our policies with little in return, and therefore well and truly kippered.

The Brexit talks are now quite clearly coming to such a crunch, where the UK has to decide whether a major and unpalatable concession is worth making in order to secure a large number of highly desirable objectives. In this case, the potential concession involves the vexed subject of money. To the average voter it is readily apparent that the European Union wants our money and we don’t want to give it to them, but exactly why they want so much of it so adamantly must be just as obscure as why Liberals have a passion for different voting systems.

Are they trying to punish us? They certainly don’t mind us being in an awkward spot, but that is not the whole explanation. Are they demanding “money for access” to their markets? That would seem a bit rich when we would give them access in return.