Recent posturing, language and argument at Westminster have been thoroughly criticised in the media. Frankly the posturing and so on is nothing like as severe as that which even I have heard before; for example Mrs Thatcher during the miners' strike in 1972, or earlier parliamentary arguing in 1956 during the Suez crisis under a different prime minisiter.
A difficulty now is that the majority of the population voted to quit the EU which the majority of MPs now equally clearly do not wish to do. Add to this the problem, that quite apart from the EU "red lines" type of negotiation, which essentially involves drawing a tight red circle around the UK and refusing to move their circle, this is not an issue which so far as I can judge is capable of compromise.
The referendum which was the largest in British history, provided for remain or quit and was said by MPs generally before the result of course, to be one the decision of which they would accept.
Now many MPs argue that the UK did not vote to leave without a deal yet they do not argue that the vote signified that UK could remain in the EU without a deal either - no in my view it has to be fully in or fully out.
The Lib/Dems current position is that they consider the referendum should henceforth be ignored; honest at least, but hardly a reflection of the majority outcome to the referendum.
The BBC too clearly prefers to remain. The Beeb's focus for weeks on the possibility that the Brexit groups may have spent more than permitted on their campaigning was not balanced by information about the remain spending, being three times that of the Brexit parties spending.
The question of the failure for many years by the EU to have their accounts properly audited and signed is never mentioned by the BBC these days at least so far as I have seen or heard, yet coupled with the fact of our huge contribution to the EU, that dreadful failure is of itself good reason for the UK to exit asap.
I conclude the above despite my having voted remain in the actual referendum.