Well, there you go. After ten months - including the collapse of the assembly and an unexpected election - of talks, further talks, additional talks, side talks and talks for the sake of talking, we appear to be precisely where we were when the entire rigmarole began.
Actually, that's not entirely true. In his statement on Wednesday, James Brokenshire confirmed that an executive was unlikely any time soon; but added that anything he did in the meantime shouldn't be construed as direct rule. In other words, we're in some sort of 'Limbocracy' (and thanks to Professor David Whitehead for tweeting that wonderful description); one of those parallel universes that used to pop up in Star Trek episodes, where everything was a sort of parody or misunderstanding of what was happening on earth.
Here's what Brokenshire should have said: ''You are clearly incapable of reaching agreement and equally incapable of forming a government in which ministers take personal and collective responsibility for key issues like health, education, infrastructure and the economy. From midnight, the NIO will take on that role and responsibility. Consequently, your position as MLAs, along with title, staff, offices, expenses, salaries and access to Stormont, will cease. The NIO will not be facilitating any further inter-party negotiations; that will be left to you. If, whether it be three weeks, three months or three years, you can reach an agreement together which embraces a programme for government and a cast-iron guarantee that it will be delivered, then, and only then, will power be returned. The people of Northern Ireland deserve government and certainty; they deserve continuity and decision making.''
I've been arguing for a very long time in this column that it struck me as increasingly unlikely that a stable deal (by which I mean one that will withstand contact with the next problem, while addressing and resolving a heap of unresolved issues) would be concluded. Mind you, I still thought they would settle for the usual sticking plaster standby to keep them going for a while. The fact they couldn't even manage to do that after ten months, suggests that the chasm of disagreement between them is even wider than I imagined it to be.
The other thing worth noting is that the DUP and Sinn Féin - along with around 65 per cent of those who could be bothered voting - have abandoned the pretence of a give-and-take approach to negotiation. Everything that goes wrong is entirely the fault of the other side. Everything is black and white. You cannot negotiate against that background, because the very essence of negotiation is that it begins with the acknowledgement that compromise, caution, delay and parking of key demands are all required. Negotiation also requires a willingness to give something to the other side. But none of that is happening.
Which isn't surprising, of course, because, as I've also been arguing for a long time, this is end game territory. Which means that a lasting deal isn't, in fact, even possible. Just look at the responses to Wednesday's announcement. Michelle O'Neill: ''The rights we seek are for the benefit of all sections of society and threaten no-one. Marriage equality, language rights, the Bill of Rights and the right to coroner's inquests are supported by a majority in the assembly and wider society. The issue of rights is not going to go away. The DUP and British government know this.''
And then Gregory Campbell: ''With regard to an Irish language act, it already receives ample public funding for those who wish to speak it or learn it. It already is catered for in ways that no other minority language is. We cannot and will not be party to an agreement that elevates the Irish language not only above all others, but above health, education and other vital public services.'' Nor will the DUP be supporting a Bill of Rights.
I don't see those squares being circled. I don't see a meeting of minds. I don't see a compromise that the parties can sell to their grassroots. Foster knows that unionism - at least a thumping majority of those who vote for the various unionist parties - are opposed to even limited accommodation for the Irish language. And I don't see the DUP returning to an assembly (40 designated unionists out of 90 MLAs) in which the petition of concern has, from their perspective, been 'reformed' into virtual redundancy.
O'Neill, meanwhile, knows that republicans - most of whom believe that the DUP has blocked progress since St Andrews - will not tolerate a softening of her position.
So, as I say, little chance of stable, consensual government emerging. But - and it's an important but - what should really worry the political parties and the two governments is the fact that increasing numbers of people really don't care if the assembly collapses. Ironically, it's that worrying reality (containing, as it does, a damning indictment of the DUP and SF in particular) which will probably nudge them towards another sticking plaster solution sooner rather than later. Which is, of course, what Brokenshire and May are depending on.
