Does Boris have anything resembling a plan?

Like many of you, I’m sure, the last three years, in terms of politics and the future of the UK, have been what we here at Reaction like to call sub-optimal.

If you are a Leaver, the problem is that, well, we haven’t actually left. A bit of a bummer, that. We’ve been stood at the exit for so long that Olly Robbins, our erstwhile chief negotiator, might as well have been issued with a uniform and drafted – appropriately enough, some would say – into the Corps of Commissionaires.

If, on the other hand, you are a Remainer, the last three years have gone from a bad decision, made at the height of a Ukip-inspired immigration scare, to the looming trauma of No Deal, in which, overnight, Britain becomes a European pariah.

For those of us stuck in the middle the response would normally be A Plague on Both Your Houses. The issue being Brexit, however, the middle is nowhere to be found. Unless you count those who didn’t bother to vote in the referendum in 2016, and probably wouldn’t get out of bed if the house was on fire, there is no middle ground.

The country is split down the middle. Not since the Civil War have two camps bent on taking over the governance of England been so well delineated or so resolved to achieve their end come what may.

All that the two sides can agree on is that the process up to now has been a shambles.

But, now at last, we are beginning to see the way forward. The finishing line is in sight. Boris Johnson’s years as the Dauphin of Downing Street are about to give way to a coronation in which, like Napoleon, he places the crown on his own head. As Prime Minister-elect (and I am discounting the possibility that it Has to be Hunt), he has promised to take us out of the EU by October 31. He has also said that the chances of a No Deal Brexit are a million to one, only to add that the one thing that could possibly prevent such an outcome – an amendment to the Irish backstop – is off the table.

So, unless Johnson does a 180 degree about-turn and argues from the sanctuary of Number 10 that October 31 was never more than a target date, the scene is set for an abrupt Halloween departure, with no divorce settlement paid, no trade deal in place and the future of the United Kingdom tossed into the empty air.

But there you go. The Tory faithful have made their choice, it seems, and their choice is Boris. Which begs several questions. If you watched this week’s London “hustings” on Sky, you will have been struck by the sheer joy exuded by the East London party members in the presence of their hero. They gave respect to Jeremy Hunt, who actually made a rational speech and answered questions directly and in detail. But when the candidate under the spotlight was the Old Etonian, Bullingdon Club Boris, they fell about with girlish glee – and I don’t just mean the women. He said hardly anything of substance and gave no indication that he had any plans in place to deliver a measured Brexit settlement. But the more he demanded the love, the more they gave it to him.

It beggars belief that Johnson’s unashamed tub-thumping should have won him the premiership at a time of national crisis. But as I say, there you go. That’s democracy for you.

Which brings us back to October 31. What happens at the stroke of midnight, as All Hallow’s Eve gives way to All Saints Day?

As Big Ben, or his temporary electronic equivalent, strikes the eleventh hour (the midnight in Question being calculated in Brussels time), what happens? Will the sky fall on our heads, or will life go on pretty much as usual?

The simple answer is that we won’t know the worst – or the best – until the time comes. But there is a legal and regulatory background to what will occur, for which Johnson and his allies must be prepared.

First, there will be no transition phase from EU membership to third country status. That is one of several babies thrown out with the bathwater. On Day One, starting with the first ferry to arrive at Calais, French officials, backed by observers from across Europe, will stop every single vehicle entering France from the UK to demand not only the passports of those inside (as now), but papers verifying that the correct procedures have been followed to expedite the entry of goods into the European Union.

Examination of the papers – always assuming that they are in order – need not take more than a couple of minutes. The problem is that that with the number of trucks using the Dover-Calais route now exceeding 10,000 per day, the resulting tailback in Kent could end up 20 miles long. To further complicate matters, UK port authorities and ferry operators said just this week that they will not allow lorries without proper papers to embark on ships bound for Europe. To do so would be to render them liable for the return-to-sender orders that would inevitably follow. But the only way they can know for certain that the necessary compliance is in place will be to examine the papers prior to boarding. The 20 miles now extends to 40.

Of course, as the days turn into weeks and both sides learn from the experience, delays and refusals will be much reduced. The tailback could end up no more then ten miles long. Later still – say in 2025 – electronic registration and trusted-trader provisions could knock off another five miles. What is certain, however, is that the delivery of goods from the UK to the EU, and vice versa, will in future be regulated by Brussels, not London, and that for years to come the Commission will be in no mood to do the UK any favours.

Why should it, after all? Johnson has said in the past that Europe can “go whistle” for its £39 billion divorce settlement. The EU, according to Jacob Rees-Mogg is not owed as much as a penny from Britain. Nigel Farage says that Europe should pay us billions, not the other way round.

But a deal’s a deal, isn’t it? Or is that old thinking?

The British Government signed up to a withdrawal agreement predicated on the payment of money owing to the EU as a direct result of its 45-year EEC/EU membership. If the money is not paid, if Brussels is told in effect to “go hang,” it would hardly be surprising if Europe took a tough line with the British when they return to the negotiating table, as return they must.

Mind you, Johnson’s position may since have evolved. He now appears to believe that the £39 billion should be held, as it were, in escrow, payable only when Brussels caves in and gives the UK the free and unrestricted access to the Single Market that it demands.

Well, as the Lib Dems might say, bollocks to that. Michel Barnier has told BBC Panorama that nothing means more to him than the integrity of the Single Market and that nothing will persuade him, or his EU masters, to grant anything to Britain above and beyond the withdrawal agreement that Johnson says is a dead duck. And if you don’t believe Barnier, listen to Ursula von der Leyen, the incoming president of the Commission. She told the European Parliament this week that she would be willing to grant London a further extension to Article 50 if Britain had something positive to offer, but she also made clear that the Theresa May withdrawal agreement was sacrosant and that there could be no question of altering the terms of the Irish backstop.

Tough times ahead for both sides? Yes. Undoubtedly. No question. But while the EU has done its best to factor in the losses it expects to incur from Britain’s departure, some of Britain remains stuck in the belief that German car-manufacturers will come riding to the rescue. This is a pipe-dream, long-since exposed as such by the Germans themselves. The fact is that, as far as the UK buggering off is concerned, European exporters may not be grinning, but they are ready to bear it. They are moving on. They are looking ahead to a future in which Britain forms only a small and diminishing part.  Britain, by contrast, is standing still.

And I haven’t even mentioned tariffs (due on UK exports into the EU from November 1, some as high as 24 per cent), or the potential plight of UK residents in Europe, or the disruption to UK industrial production as Just-in-Time deliveries end up in queues of trucks on either side of the Channel, or the months, extending into years, required to secure a new deal with the WTO and negotiate a viable trade agreement with Donald Trump’s America – or the potential break up of the United Kingdom itself as the Scots and Northern Irish look to their own salvation.

None of these eventualities, save that with the US over chlorinated chicken, genetically-modified corn and the admission of American insurance companies into the UK health system, would have arisen if the May deal had gone through Parliament. The transition period would have given Britain three years in which to iron out problems and to look ahead to a longer-term relationship with Europe. Instead, with Boris smacking his lips, the cliff edge looms.

Still … nil desperandum, eh? Maybe our blustering PM-elect really does have magic powers and maybe, like Orwell’s public schoolboys, he and Jacob Rees-Mogg can win what has proved an exciting game against the old adversary by an odd goal scored in the last half-minute.

But what if he can’t?