DAVID Mundell has left the question of his potential resignation over a no-deal Brexit hanging precariously in the air.

As many as eight senior ministers are said to be now considering their positions should the Prime Minister fail to stop Britain crashing out of the EU without an agreement.

The Scottish Secretary has argued that a no-deal Brexit would be “catastrophic” for the Scottish and UK economies and that it would pose the “biggest threat” to the Union. Joining up the dots does not seem difficult to do.

Already a number of his Cabinet colleagues have dropped heavy hints that they could simply not continue in office should it materialise that Britain was heading for a no-deal outcome.

They include: David Lidington, Theresa May’s de facto deputy; Amber Rudd, the Work and Pensions Secretary; Greg Clark, the Business Secretary, and David Gauke, the Justice Secretary.

Mr Mundell is believed to be among four others, who would also find nigh on impossible to carry on regardless.

When asked by The Herald if he had personally considered resigning over Brexit, the Scottish Secretary said: “I have always focused on outputs. I wanted the best deal for Scotland; a deal that delivered for fishing communities, a deal that was the best outcome for the UK and the continuance of the UK and this deal, compared to a no-deal, delivers that.”

When it was pointed out his answer was not a denial that he had indeed considered resigning, Mr Mundell half-smiled and replied: “It was an explanation of my position.”

Later, a senior Whitehall source did little to disabuse people of their suspicions.

Asked if the Secretary of State might be among those who would resign if the Prime Minister failed to secure an agreement with Brussels, he stressed: “He is very strongly opposed to a no-deal Brexit.”

Dominic Grieve, the former Attorney General and a leading Conservative Remainer, was a little less ambitious in his estimations, suggesting only six Cabinet ministers could resign if a no-deal outcome was on the cards.

He said his understanding was that if by the end of February, there was no agreement with the EU and the Article 50 process was not extended, then the ministers would go.

He explained the numbers would be “about a dozen or even more,” including “half a dozen” from the Cabinet.

But to misquote Lady Bracknell: to lose one Cabinet minister may be regarded as a misfortune to lose six or eight would be a ?!x@#%£ nightmare.

Mr Grieve, asked if the loss of such a number of senior ministers could bring down the Government, replied: "Yes, it could,” adding with a deal of understatement: “And this isn't a desirable outcome."

While Andrea Leadsom, the Commons Leader, stoically maintained the Government line that a no-deal outcome remained on the table as the default option, Alistair Burt, the Foreign Office Minister, responded forcefully to David Davis, the former Brexit Secretary, who claimed the PM was ready to take Britain out of the EU without an agreement.

"No. We won't,” declared Mr Burt on Twitter. “We are not leaving without a deal. If you want to leave, you'd better agree one. In the next fortnight would help."

Earlier this week, a Cabinet source suggested that to avert a Cabinet rebellion Mrs May would produce a “form of words” before the crunch Commons vote on February 27, which would reject the prospect of a no-deal outcome.

The minister might have been speaking more out of hope than of certainty but made clear from his perspective the vote in 12 days’ time would, finally, be “the moment of truth”.

At a Westminster briefing, the PM’s spokeswoman was asked if Mrs May believed she had to secure concessions from Brussels before the February 27 vote. She replied: “We are looking for changes to the backstop, to deliver those as soon as possible so we can bring the meaningful vote back.”

Asked if as soon as possible meant before February 27, she snapped: “It’s as soon as possible.”

The spokeswoman, quizzed further about whether Mrs May believed she could keep her Cabinet intact after the "moment of truth" vote, noted how this was a hypothetical based on questionable fact and stressed: “The PM is focused on securing changes to the backstop so a deal can be passed.”

She explained that after another Government defeat in the Commons, Mrs May was entirely focused on the only proposal MPs had backed: changing the backstop.

After yet another Commons defeat for the PM and her colleagues, Brussels has been left scratching its head.

George Katrougalos, the Greek Foreign Minister said the parliamentary vote was part of the "contradictory message" Britain was sending out.

He mused: “It complicates even further the situation. It's very, very difficult to be optimistic about Brexit under these circumstances.”

Nathalie Loiseau, France's Europe Minister, expressed an equal measure of frustration with the Brits, urging them to "hurry up" and decide whether they wanted to leave the EU with a deal or without a deal.

"It's time for our British friends to decide whether they want to leave amicably or brutally," she declared candidly.

Next week is set to see a gear-shift in the Brexit process as Mrs May travels to Brussels for more talks with Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission President, while her Cabinet chums Stephen Barclay, the Brexit Secretary, and Geoffrey Cox, the Attorney General, will also be in the Belgian capital to talk to senior EU officials about those elusive “alternative arrangements”.

Even Jeremy Corbyn will be on the continent, having talks with Mr Barnier that will, no doubt, be helpful to the Government’s cause.

With less than six weeks to go to Brexit Day, Leo Varadkar popped up yesterday to insist neither Ireland nor the EU would be the first to blink in the Brexican stand-off.

The Taoiseach boasted the EU27’s solidarity had been “strong and resolute”. And in words directed at you know who, he added: “Those who think it will break at the last moment are in for a nasty surprise."