soft Brexit

Without question now, Britain is not ready for the negotiations, having spent the past year largely avoiding a real debate on the topic, other than a vague argument over the merits of a “hard Brexit” (as a clean break from the European Union is known), versus a “soft Brexit,” which would require more compromise.

2017 June 9, Steven Erlanger, Katrin Benhold, Stephen Castle, “The British Election That Somehow Made Brexit Even Harder”, in The New York Times

The debate over the right terms and conditions for Britain’s departure from the European Union is often simplified into two clashing concepts: a soft Brexit and a hard one. The first tends to be favoured by those who voted Remain in the 2016 referendum, the second by those who voted Leave. Yet what is the real, practical difference between the two? And can bits of both be combined to some degree?

2018 June 25, J. P., “How a soft Brexit differs from a hard one”, in The Economist

Labour's vision for a soft Brexit would have seen Britain remain closely aligned with the EU customs, tariff and regulatory regimes and the continent's single market. Such a relationship would have meant that Britain would continue to allow EU migrants to live and work in the United Kingdom, while withdrawing from the EU legislature.

2019 February 28, William Booth, Karla Adam, “UK Parliament votes down Labour's bid for a soft Brexit”, in New Zealand Herald, archived from the original on 11 Mar 2019