Since George Osborne became editor, the Evening Standard has become a must-read for its clear analysis of the harm of Brexit and its recognition that the Brexit likely to be on offer will bear little resemblance to any of the Brexits promised in 2016.

Nonetheless, the Evening Standard does not take that analysis through to its conclusion.

So it is good that the Evening Standard published this letter from London4Europe Committee member Michael Romberg urging the case for a referendum on the terms of Brexit:

Your leader once again cogently sets out not only the harm Brexit will cause but also that the reality of Brexit is going to be far different from what Leave voters were promised [“Fantasy that leaving the EU can be cheap”, Comment, July 12].

It is no surprise that you also report David Davis’s bemused recognition that no other country will follow us down the route of leaving the EU.

We must not be so in awe of the referendum result as to fail to follow through on your analysis. Certainly, the vote in June last year was a major public democratic event. It should determine what happens next and it is right that the Government is negotiating Brexit. But a vote on an idea cannot require us to implement a plan that even now does not exist.

There should be a referendum on the final terms of Brexit which would mean for the first time voters would be able to make a decision on Brexit, knowing what it would entail.

Michael tells us that his last line got the chop, but the message is nonetheless clear. But for completeness, this is what the Standard might have added:

MPs and peers of all parties can amend the Government’s “Repeal Bill” introduced on Thursday to provide us with that referendum.