What a shambles. The state of British politics is laughable to the extent that jokes about Gareth Southgate taking charge sound appealing.

It took Theresa May two years to get her Cabinet together at Chequers to draw up not a final offer but an opening gambit for negotiations. Yet it fell apart after just 48 hours. The Prime Minister should have reached this point a while ago and Article 50 should not have been triggered before we were in a position to negotiate.

The ideological tunnel vision of the hard Brexiteers was never going to survive contact with real-world economics, particularly with no Parliamentary majority. So now Boris Johnson, David Davis and others are throwing a tantrum, leaving behind the mess they helped create .

So what should Her Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition do? We should do what an Opposition should do first and foremost: put the interests of the country before ourselves. Both front benches, faced with this unstable political environment, have chosen fudge and “constructive ambiguity” to try to appeal to all sides. But that is not leadership. It is putting short-term political gain ahead of what is right for the country. So Labour must now be unequivocal that the Chequers “agreement” clearly fails Kier Starmer’s “six tests” for a Brexit deal.

By abandoning the services sector — 80 per cent of our economy — it cannot deliver “exact same benefits”. There is no detail on migration, nor do the proposals fully safeguard rights. The Treasury itself revealed in its analysis that a free trade agreement-style deal would cut tax revenues by £57 billion each year by 2033 — that’s equivalent to a third off the NHS budget.

Labour should be frank with the public that a bespoke “have-our-cake-and-eat-it” proposal is unlikely, or it could at least accept a backstop of an existing structure such as the European Economic Area. The EEA Single Market is still Brexit but it offers the “least worst” option if combined with a Customs Union. As a minimum, Labour should state that the deal must allow participation in the Single Market, as trades unions and the overwhelming majority of Labour supporters believe.

We know a deal such as this is not perfect. Britain would lose a seat at the table, even if we could maintain access to key trading markets. So whatever deal is negotiated, there is only one question: is it as good as — or better — than what we have now for jobs, for the economy and our ability to invest in our public services?

We owe it to the public to let them make an informed choice. The route for we politicians through this Brexit mess is to put the country’s best interest first, ahead of ideology, party politics or electoral advantage.

Whichever way people voted in the referendum, they expect that of us.