We have become used to the theatrical nature of how deals are negotiated in Brussels. When Sunday’s meeting between the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier and the UK’s Brexit secretary Dominic Raab collapsed, many believed that this merely created the brink from which EU leaders would pull the deal back when they met on Wednesday evening.

While still a possibility, it is proving increasingly unlikely to be the case. Instead, it is reported that plans are being scrapped for a November Brexit summit, where a draft declaration on the EU’s future trading relationship with the UK was due to be made public, due to lack of “decisive progress” on the withdrawal agreement.

There is no doubt that the political scrambling will continue in the days ahead in order to try to cobble together a deal or even a “form of words” that provides both sides with some sort of political cover.

Nowhere is the need to get it right better understood than on the island of Ireland, where the political, societal and economic impacts are far greater than in Britain or any other EU member state

But perhaps at this point rather than rush a deal it would be in the best interests of all parties to draw breath and simply ask the question: why rush this? Of course, the answer lies within Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, where the two-year time frame is outlined. However, while Article 50 may have come into force in 2009 under the Lisbon Treaty, it was originally drafted in the early 2000s in response to concerns among mainstream EU leaders at the potential that existed then for dictatorial regimes to secure power in some member states. It was never drafted with the intention of being used as a mechanism to shape the complex negotiation process of a member state extracting itself from the European Union.

Given what is at stake, how could anyone claiming to have the interests of EU or UK citizens at heart object to pausing the process and accepting that more time is needed to get this right? While we can point fingers as to who is to blame for why we have found ourselves at this juncture, it will be of little benefit.

Single market and customs union

In reality, few fully appreciated the extent to which the single market and customs union have woven member states together and created such a level of interdependency across all levels of business and society.

As we now know, trying to unweave this interdependency in a period of just two years in a manner which does not do untold damage to either party is simply not achievable.

Nowhere is the need to get it right better understood than on the island of Ireland, where the political, societal and economic impacts are far greater than in Britain or any other EU member state. A possible reintroduction of a hard border in Ireland was described by academic Dr Katy Hayward, from Queen's University, as reopening a “gaping wound”.

Given what is at stake for citizens on both sides of the border and the direction in which negotiations are currently heading, political parties north and south should not be behind the fence in using their political influence to call for cool heads.

It is time to question politicians as to the logic of continuing on a journey that sees us trying to shoehorn highly complex negotiations, the outcome of which will have far-reaching and long-lasting societal and financial consequences for many EU and British citizens, into a timeframe that is unachievable.

Extension to the withdrawal period

It is time to seriously look at the option of securing unanimous approval across member states for an extension to the withdrawal period.

Let’s ensure we reach the right outcome rather than achieve a quick deal. The UK has been a member of the EU for over 40 years – why does it need to have an exit agreement reached within just two years?