With one day to go before Theresa May triggers Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, officially beginning the two-year countdown for the UK's withdrawal from the European Union, Brexit is on everyone's mind.
Sky News correspondent Michelle Clifford argues for the Remainers, saying not too late to go back.
"If the deals on trade, free movement of people, expat rights look iffy then wouldn't it make sense to say 'We've changed our minds'?" she says.
From a legal perspective, there is no reason why this cannot happen, she continues. The real issue is: should it?
Halting Brexit would obviously mean overruling the result of the July referendum while a second EU referendum is a "hot croissant", despite there being "plenty of people who voted 'leave' who are now not so sure".
Many of the promises made by the Leave campaign - £350m a week for the NHS, staying in the single market, stopping immigration - have been dropped, Clifford adds, asking: "Shouldn't there be the possibility of pulling back if what unfolds emerges as transparently damaging to the UK?"
Indeed, says The Guardian's Polly Toynbee, the sharp right-turn towards a hard Brexit was not what voters were promised.
The Ukip-tinged vision emerging now is "light years distant from the softly reassuring arguments Vote Leave made before the referendum", she writes.
"Before the referendum they said we'd stay in the single market and customs union," Toynbee continues, but less than a year later, "Brextremists" are "normalising the notion of no deal at all".
However, not all commentators are concerned by the prospect of seismic shifts in the UK economy and legal system.
The Daily Telegraph's top story today welcomes the opportunity to remove some of the regulations currently on the books and calls on the Tories to promise "a bonfire of EU red tape" in their 2020 manifesto and put Britain on a "radically different course".
Meanwhile, The Independent's Rob Merrick suggests the corners on that hard Brexit are rounding off.
EU sources claim Theresa May is "backing away from her threat to crash out of the EU with 'no deal' as she realises the huge economic damage it would cause", he says.
Brexit: 'No one has right to eject EU citizens from UK'
24 March
Jean-Claude Juncker has warned that the rights of EU citizens living in the UK and UK citizens living across the EU cannot be haggled over.
Speaking to the BBC, the European Commission President said no one had the right to eject EU migrants from their jobs and their homes after Brexit.
"This is not about bargaining," he said. "This is about respecting human dignity."
He also said he would feel "sad" when he receives Theresa May's formal notification of the UK's withdrawal from the EU next week. The Prime Minister is due to trigger Article 50 on 29 March.
"[It's] a failure and a tragedy," he said.
The EU's remaining 27 countries celebrate the bloc's 60th anniversary in Rome on Saturday - a celebration from which May will be noticeably absent.
"Of course we will miss her," Juncker said."I am everything but in a hostile mood with Britain. Britain is part of Europe and I hope to have a friendly relationship with the UK over the next decades."
Juncker denied the UK would be presented with a punitive bill for leaving, saying a final invoice would merely settle any commitments the country has already made.
As well as covering liabilities for projects that the UK has already promised to fund, the final total will provide pensions for EU officials who served during the country's membership.
Reports suggest the figure could be as much as €60 billion (£50bn), The Guardian says, although Juncker said the total had yet to be calculated.
On the future of the EU, the EC President said that if three or more countries decided to leave then it would collapse, but he did not think that would happen.
Still, writes BBC Europe editor Katya Adler, "the bloc's remaining leaders will look with furrowed brows towards the future" as they celebrate the EU anniversary.
Gina Miller says parliament 'voted against itself' on Article 50
March 22
Parliament voted against its own interests when it approved a bill allowing the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50, says Gina Miller, the businesswoman who took the government to court to ensure MPs had a vote on the decision to start the Brexit process.
"It has voted against itself, which is something I don't understand," she said yesterday at The Week Live in London.
Miller also criticised the decision to reject amendments added to the European Union (notification of withdrawal) billin the House of Lords.
"The two amendments should have gone into the bill," she said. "One is morality: we should have settled the EU citizens' status in the UK. The other is just common sense: that you have a parliamentary safety net where ministers will do their job of ensuring there isn't this power grab, so in my mind they voted against themselves."
She confirmed she was willing to go back to court if she felt the government was failing to respect January's Supreme Court ruling. "Oh absolutely," she said. "I will uphold the ruling in my case, which is that only parliament is sovereign when it comes to diminishing or taking away people's rights.
"We have numerous acts that need to be passed and if the government tried to bypass them or bring in a resolution, I will take them back to court."
Miller said she was also concerned by the diminishing role MPs were playing in the Brexit process: "We are now going into Brexit where I see power will reside with a few in Westminster and they will override parliament. I'm particularly worried about the process over the next 18 months or two years actually diminishing parliamentary sovereignty and MPs' powers and it very much sitting with the executive and the prime minister.
"It will be the executive - literally a handful of ministers - and the prime minister who will decide on our futures and decide which rights we keep and which laws we keep."
During the debate on regional power, moderated by TheWeek.co.uk editor Holden Frith, Professor Tony Travers of the London School of Economics said the Prime Minister's determination to take the hardest possible line may be an attempt to head off criticism from the Conservative back benches.
"I think what Theresa May is doing is building up a position from which nobody who is very pro-Brexit can say 'You're not trying hard enough,'" he said. "Signalling that we're going to do this tough is a way of ensuring that as she goes along she can say, 'Well, I did my best.'"
BBC accused of Brexit bias by more than 70 MPs
21 March
Iain Duncan Smith and Theresa Villiers among signatories attacking broadcaster's 'unfair' coverage
A group of MPs has written to the BBC accusing it of being pessimistic and skewed in its "bias" coverage of Brexit.
In an open letter, 72 politicians said the broadcaster had "unfairly" focused on regretful Leave voters, reports The Guardian. Signatories included former cabinet ministers Iain Duncan Smith and Theresa Villiers and Labour MPs Kate Hoey, Kelvin Hopkins and Graham Stringer.
They wrote: "The corporation's focus on 'regretful' leave voters, despite there being no polling shift towards remain since the referendum, has led some to believe it is putting its preconceptions before the facts.
"Meanwhile, the posturing and private opinions of EU figures are too often presented as facts, without the vital context that they are talking tough ahead of the exit negotiations."
They added that "licence fee-payers have the right to expect better" and warned the future of the BBC "will be in doubt" if it is not seen as "an impartial broker".
The BBC responded: "It is the job of the BBC to scrutinise and analyse the issues on behalf of the public and to hold politicians to account across the political spectrum."
"That is what the BBC has been doing. It is what the BBC will continue to do. It is precisely because of this that the public trusts the BBC."
BBC media editor Amol Rajan said the letter was best understood as a warning from the broadcaster's detractors that they expect a reasonable hearing in the Brexit negotiations in Europe.
In an editorial praising the letter, the Daily Telegraph said that "far from describing the opportunities that await the country outside the EU – or merely describing the positive vision of Brexit that Theresa May has offered – the corporation inevitably presents Brexit as a problem".
It added that BBC chiefs "must take this latest warning seriously. Brexit Britain deserves better from the BBC."
The letter received a mixed reaction on Twitter.
Channel 4 News anchor Jon Snow tweeted it was a "sure sign of pro-Brexit panic", while LBC's James O'Brien argued the MPs "should be encouraging senior ministers to do more interviews accentuating all the positives" of Brexit rather than complaining about the BBC.
Brexit 'will clog up parliament for two years'
20 March
Theresa May will trigger Article 50 to start the process of leaving the EU next week, but an independent charity has warned the "huge burden" of negotiating Brexit could leave little time for MPs to deal with other matters.
As many as 15 new bills will need to pass through parliament in order to take the UK out of the EU, the Institute for Government (IFG) says, with wide-ranging new laws needed to deal with areas "including immigration, agriculture and customs", reports Sky News.
Hannah White, director of research, said this would "leave very little space" for other business during the two-year negotiation period, which Downing Street revealed this morning will begin on 29 March.
She added: "Considerable time and resources will be soaked up and there will be precious little space left in the legislative programme for other legislation that departments might have wanted to see pass."
The IFG also warns that the government may have to use so-called "Henry VIII" powers, enabling them to independently repeal or amend legislation, "a move that inevitably means less parliamentary scrutiny", says the Financial Times.
Each piece will require hundreds of pages of secondary legislation, drawn up by lawyers and civil servants already tasked with putting together the great repeal bill, the mammoth piece of legislation which will sever the UK from EU law.
This is the second warning on Brexit issued by the IFC. Earlier this month, it joined forces with the UK in a Changing Europe think-tank to issue a joint report saying Whitehall was desperately understaffed for the challenge ahead and that existing responsibilities would have to be "delayed or dropped" to cope with the workload.
Brexit: Queen signs off on Article 50 bill
16 March
Royal assent leaves Theresa May free to kick-start UK's departure from the EU.
Theresa May has been given the go-ahead to start talks to take the UK out of the European Union after the Queen formally approved the Article 50 Brexit bill this morning, Sky News says.
The Sun reports "there were cheers in the House of Commons" as Speaker John Bercow confirmed the Brexit bill had passed safely into law.
In theory, the Queen could have exercised her theoretical power of veto by withholding royal assent, although no monarch has done so since 1708. As a constitutional monarch, she must remain politically neutral; however, her personal opinion on the UK leaving the EU has drawn a great deal of media interest.
In May, press watchdog Ipso ruled the Sun had breached accuracy guidelines with a front-page headline claiming she "backs Brexit".
The article cited several occasions on which the Queen had apparently privately criticised the EU, although some of those present on the mentioned occasions denied she made any such comments.
Royal assent was the final hurdle for the European Union (notification of withdrawal) bill, which passed through both houses of parliament on Monday.
The bill's passage was delayed slightly when the House of Lords voted for amendments to be added, including a guarantee of rights to EU citizens living in the UK.
However, when the Commons refused to accept the changes, the peers backed down and the bill went through in its original form.
The government has previously indicated that Article 50 will be triggered in the last week of March.
Once this official notification of withdrawal has been given, UK and EU negotiators will have two years to draw up a deal for the country's future relationship with the bloc.
May gets her way after House of Lords passes Brexit bill
14 March
Peers in the House of Lords passed the Brexit bill last night, clearing a path for the government to trigger Article 50 and begin the process of leaving the European Union.
The Lords "accepted the supremacy of elected MPs", says the Daily Telegraph, backing the bill by 274 votes to 188 after dropping two amendments introduced last week but rejected by MPs earlier yesterday evening. The measures would have secured the rights of EU nationals in the UK and guaranteed parliament a "meaningful vote" on the final Brexit deal.
Lady Smith, Labour leader in the Lords, told The Guardian that continuing to oppose the government would be playing politics because MPs would not be persuaded to change their minds.
"If I thought there was a foot in the door or a glimmer of hope that we could change this bill, I would fight it tooth and nail. But it doesn't seem to be the case," she said.
However, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron accused Labour of giving up the chance to block a "hard Brexit" and warned that the passage of the bill without protections for EU nationals would leave "families fearful that they are going to be torn apart".
He added: "Shame on the government for using people as chips in a casino and shame on Labour for letting them."
The bill will now be sent to the Queen for royal assent, which is expected to be granted today, granting Prime Minister Theresa May the authority to trigger Article 50.
That will "not happen this week", says the BBC, citing Downing Street sources. May is instead "expected to wait until the end of the month to officially notify the EU of the UK's intention to leave, thus beginning what is expected to be a two-year process".
UK could trigger Article 50 tomorrow if Brexit bill passes
13 March
Theresa May could trigger Article 50 as early as tomorrow if MPs and peers reject all amendments to the Brexit bill today.
According to Metro, speculation is mounting that the Prime Minister will formally announce the start of leaving the EU when she meets MPs on Tuesday to brief them on her discussions at last week's European Council. If so, it would be far earlier than her original deadline of the end of March.
"Preparations are understood to be at an advanced stage, with [May's] opening demands in the Brexit negotiation already drafted," reports the London Evening Standard.
European Council President Donald Tusk last week told a press conference: "When the UK notifies [its triggering of Article 50], it is our goal to react with the draft negotiation guidelines for the 27 member states to consider.
"For this, I think we need more or less 48 hours."
Speaking to the BBC, Brexit Secretary David Davis called on parliament to give May a clear run at the two-year negotiation process once formal negotiations begin.
"Please don’t tie the Prime Minister’s hands in the process of doing that for things which we expect to attain anyway," he said.
International Trade Secretary Liam Fox refused to clarify the timing of further developments, but said leaving the EU without a fully formed deal would be "bad for Britain" and that it was "not in anybody's interest" for the negotiations to end in failure, reports Sky News.
However, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said the UK "would be perfectly okay" if no agreement were finalised and that the situation would not be "as apocalyptic as some people like to pretend", Business Insider writes.
Today sees the EU (notification of withdrawal) bill return to the Commons after the House of Lords last week voted for amendments to guarantee rights and protections for EU citizens living in the UK and to give parliament a "meaningful" vote on the official negotiations.
MPs are expected to overturn the changes later today, after which the bill returns to the Lords.
Chief Brexit negotiator wants Britons to keep EU perks
10 March
The European Parliament's lead negotiator on Brexit wants to ensure Britons can keep certain EU membership perks, such as freedom of movement.
Guy Verhofstadt, who says leaving the bloc is a "tragedy" for the people of the UK, hopes to convince EU leaders to allow people to keep certain rights if they apply on an individual basis.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, the former prime minister of Belgium said: "All British citizens today have also EU citizenship. That means a number of things: the possibility to participate in the European elections, the freedom of travel without problem inside the union.
"We need to have an arrangement in which this arrangement can continue for those citizens who on an individual basis are requesting it."
Verhofstadt, leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Group in the European Parliament, also said MEPs could veto any deal brokered by the European Commission and the UK.
He added that he had received more than 1,000 letters from people in the UK concerned about the state of their relationship with the EU after last June's referendum and said the EU needs to be "open and generous" to those who hadn't voted for Brexit.
Meanwhile, the question of whether the UK should pay billions of euros to the EU to secure Brexit is "taking centre stage", says the Financial Times.
Michel Barnier, the EU's chief negotiator, says the so-called "divorce bill" could be as much as €60bn, but the sum has been rebuked by Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson.
He said: "It is not reasonable, I don't think, for the UK, having left the EU, to continue to make vast budget payments.
"I think everybody understands that and that's the reality."
Lord Heseltine sacked over Brexit rebellion in the House of Lords
8 March
Prime Minister Theresa May has sacked Lord Heseltine from his role as a government adviser after he joined the peers' rebellion on Brexit in the House of Lords.
Peers last night backed an amendment to the Brexit bill that would require the final terms of the government's EU negotiations to be put to separate votes in both the Commons and the Lords. The measure was approved by 366 votes to 268.
Heseltine, a prominent figure in the governments of Margaret Thatcher and John Major, said it was "entirely right" for him to be sacked, adding: "I'm sorry that the expertise which I have put at the government's disposal over the last six years has now come to an end."
The issue will now return to the Commons, despite MPs having "already rejected calls for the 'meaningful vote' clause to be included in the legislation", the BBC says.
Brexit Secretary David Davis said the government will seek to throw out the amendment as well as a previous one guaranteeing rights to EU citizens living in the UK.
Downing Street argued "giving parliament a blanket right of veto was against the national interest and would weaken May's negotiating hand".
However, May faces a "fresh battle" with Conservative MPs, says The Guardian, with a number saying they plan to back the Lords amendment unless they are given verbal assurances they can vote on the outcome of her negotiations with Brussels.
"We want to remove any uncertainty about securing a parliamentary vote in a timely manner that covers a deal and no deal," said Neil Carmichael.
Fellow Tory Anna Soubry said: "I just want people to be true to their consciences and true to our long-cherished belief in and defence of parliamentary sovereignty. We run the real risk that in the event of no deal we will have a hard Brexit, which my constituents did not vote for.
"It is appalling that parliament will deliberately be excluded from determining our country's future in the event of no deal."
May faces second Lords defeat: Will MPs be allowed to 'cancel' Brexit?
7 March
House of Lords debating on the European Union (notification of withdrawal) bill resumes today, with peers considering an amendment that would potentially give MPs the right to veto a future Brexit deal.
Theresa May's bill passed unamended in the House of Commons last month, but it is having a trickier time in the upper chamber, where Labour and Liberal Democrat peers outnumber the Tories.
A return to the Commons is already guaranteed after peers voted for an amendment confirming that EU nationals residing in the UK would be allowed to stay after Brexit.
Now several influential crossbench peers have indicated their support for inserting a second amendment, which would give parliament the power to accept or reject any deal reached at the end of the two-year negotiating period with the EU.
The Prime Minister has indicated that MPs will be offered a "take it or leave it" vote on the final agreement, says the Financial Times, potentially cutting the UK adrift without any deal in place if MPs do not accept the proposed terms.
However, supporters of the amendment will make the case that parliament "must have the authority to send ministers back to the negotiating table to secure new terms", the BBC reports.
Crucially, if no satisfactory deal can be reached, MPs would have the option of voting to abandon Brexit altogether and revert to EU membership under current terms.
The Spectator's Liam Halligan believes giving politicians the potential to "cancel" Brexit would be disastrous for the nation's political, social and economic stability. "The UK would become paralysed by political splits and confusion," he says.
In addition, the knowledge that the final say would rest with MPs, who overwhelmingly voted for remain, would give EU negotiators "every incentive to offer us a stinker of a deal", he adds.
Brexit: Government faces defeat in Lords over EU nationals
1 March
Theresa May's Brexit bill faces its first defeat today, with the House of Lords expected to back a cross-party amendment to ensure that EU citizens residing in the UK retain their rights after the country has left the bloc.
"Home Secretary Amber Rudd had sought to reassure members that EU nationals' status would be a priority once Brexit talks begin," says the BBC, but it appears this was not enough for Labour, the Lib Dems and a number of cross-bench and Tory peers, who plan to back changes to the draft legislation.
The move would see the bill, which authorises the government to trigger Article 50, return to the House of Commons, where MPs could remove the amendment.
It comes as a change in residency rules provoke a "wave of panic" from EU nationals, reports The Independent.
Under new powers brought in at the beginning of February, EU nationals could in theory be deported or forbidden to re-enter the UK if they do not have comprehensive sickness insurance (CSI).
The Home Office is yet to comment on the regulations, but barrister Colin Yeo, who wrote the briefing, said he doubted the changes would have as serious an impact as feared.
He said: "I don't actually think the Home Office is going to enforce this against say, the French wife of a British citizen. I think they're using it against people they don't like, like Polish rough sleepers."
Yeo believes the government has drawn up the new rules without realising the power it has granted itself and the impact on EU citizens in the UK. "This is going to make people feel very insecure," he said.
New analysis of the government's migration data by the Liberal Democrats has shown more than a quarter of EU citizens have had their applications for permanent residency rejected since the UK voted for Brexit.
There are roughly 3.6 million EU nationals currently living in Britain and if the government was to require all of them to apply for permanent residency, "the refusal rate could mean 800,000 EU citizens were left without certainty as to whether they can stay in the UK post-Brexit", says The Guardian.
Brexit will 'end freedom of movement as we know it'
27 February
Brexit will "end freedom of movement as we know it", but the number of immigrants entering the UK will not dramatically fall once the UK leaves the EU, the Home Secretary has suggested.
Speaking on ITV's Peston on Sunday, Amber Rudd said the government was "against cliff edges" when it comes to reducing immigration as she laid out various options being considered after Brexit.
Asked by Robert Peston if the UK's "drawbridge" will be immediately pulled up to stop migrants coming in, she said: "We are going to work with businesses, with employers, to make sure that the immigration system we put in place does enable them to continue to thrive and continue to grow."
Last week, Prime Minister Theresa May ordered ministers to draw up a two-stage plan to deal with EU nationals already in the UK and set up a visa regime for those who arrive later.
According to The Sunday Times, "the biggest shake-up of immigration policy in a generation is expected to see multi-year visas handed to migrants who get jobs in key sectors of the economy", including technology, social care, agriculture and leisure industries, "but limit access to benefits for new arrivals".
One anonymous minister said: "The simplest way is to have five-year visas. You're welcome to come if you have a job where we need you, but you don't get benefits and then you leave."
Under plans advocated by senior ministers, the government would seek to take the political heat out of immigration by setting up an independent body to advise on how many visas should be issued.
May has in effect ruled out an Australian-style points-based system and Rudd is thought to prefer a permit system, where the government would control how many EU citizens enter the UK every year to take up a job offer with a UK company.
Her comments follow similar remarks made by Brexit Secretary David Davis last week in Estonia. He said the door would not "suddenly shut" once Britain left the EU and it would take "years and years" for UK businesses and the NHS to replace EU staff in areas such as hospitality and social care.
"Don't expect just because we're changing who makes the decision on the policy, the door will suddenly shut: it won't," he said.
However, this apparent watering down of the Tory pledge to reduce immigration to tens of thousands forced Conservative Party chairman Patrick McLoughlin to insist May is still committed to bringing down the numbers. He said Davis's comments had been taken out of context.
Official figures, which last week showed net migration into the UK had dropped by 50,000 since the referendum, show more than 215,000 EU nationals work in health and social care. Some 59,000 are directly employed by the NHS, including one in ten doctors. Europeans also make up nine per cent of the construction industry and 14 per cent of accommodation and food services.