Also, Tony Connelly, in an updated report this morning says even in the 95% there are items not finalised like aviation, energy, road haulage and rules of origin. These sections still contain square brackets, meaning they are linked to getting agreement on the level playing field.
The problem for Johnson is that the 5% also contains the seeds of his own destruction. The lies told in the referendum campaign that he spearheaded have come back to haunt him. Assuming the 95% contain the things the UK either desperately wants, just wants or can tolerate, the price they will have to pay is accepting the EU position on the 5%.
I expect the deal to be quite a good one - there will be disruption while businesses and the freight industry get used to the masses of extra paperwork and extra costs. Trade will fall significantly and will never recover to what it was, but nevertheless it will be relatively manageable.
So, the government will have to make a decision. Do they concede on the 5% to get the prize of the 95%? I really don't think they have a choice. But in the medium term it will hurt as people begin to see through the lies - and it will be Brexiteers shouting betrayal from the rooftops.
The LPF issue is the following of EU rules by another name. Governance is even worse because the EU will be able to punish transgressions in a way they could not as a member. Fish is resolvable but politically explosive. The ERG will never agree to anything except total independence and hence, the PM's rather unpalatable choice is either laying waste to huge sections of the economy (in a no-deal outcome) for which we are totally unprepared or facing down the ERG. The choice for him and the Tory party is clear but the ERG will never forgive him or Gove and he may not last beyond 2021.
Assuming a deal is agreed (and I still think there will be one) the UK is going to find itself bound to EU rules both now and in the future. It won't be via the ECJ but through another independent body with a governance mechanism that allows the EU to apply sanctions in one area for transgressions in another. Don't stick to the rules on fish? Expect sanctions in the energy market, that sort of thing. Lower environmental standards? Equivalence for the financial sector will be withdrawn and so on.
We will have become a vassal state.
The UK is trying to appear blasé about the time in the belief that the EU has less flexibility in the approvals process but Brussels is now looking at legal ways to implement an agreement in a fast track way and I assume they will do it. But the UK is actually under more time pressure since a no deal outcome will see us suffer far more. In the end, both sides will need to agree an extension that is certain.
All the talk of prospering mightily and there 'will be no extension' is just bluff - inwardly Gove must be terribly worried. What if the EU or one of the member states objects to an extension? Some diplomats have already mentioned that a no deal Brexit might focus minds in London.
You can only conclude the British tactics are ridiculous and only indicate the weakness of our position.
The EU are never going to be 'bounced' into a bad trade deal. They would probably go for no deal but simply don't want to be seen as the side pulling the plug to avoid giving Johnson an excuse to blame them for the disruption and chaos. This is the only problem and it's just a presentational one. I am not sure people in the UK would all blame the EU anyway. Johnson's approval rating is pretty bad from everything else - including the recent Priti Patel scandal.
Plus, and this is something I have always believed since the referendum itself and reinforced in lots of street stall events - I think many remainers have always sub consciously assumed that Brexit is what leave voters wanted. And therefore, after Brexit the nation will be just as divided as it was before. I don't think this was ever true. Leave voters wanted something - change, an improvement in their own lives, an escape from the perceived intrusive bureaucracy of Brussels, more incandescent light bulbs or UK fishing and so on, add your own personal favourites.
Brexit is not going to deliver anything that was promised - not one. Neither side will be happy. Most things will get a good deal worse and won't get better, even in the long term. The difference between the two sides is not leave or remain but between those who realised we were being conned in 2016 and those who didn't. This will be the story after January and the nation will be united in a growing anger against the charlatans who led us into the wilderness.
Finally, can I point you to an article by Bobby McDonagh, a former Irish ambassador to the EU: To fish or cut bait: the Brexit endgame, on the Encompass website. It is an extremely perceptive article about sovereignty and should be read in Downing Street - but it probably won't be.
