The amendment promised by the government intended to honour the PM's commitment to the pro EU rebels was published yesterday and immediately declared unacceptable by Dominic Grieve (HERE). The PM has looked weak since she lost her majority in the 2017 election, now she looks shifty and dishonest as well. It's hard to see how she will survive to the autumn. She bought off the rebels on Tuesday with a promise she would give MPs a meaningful vote, and has now broken the promise.
The amendment is, on the surface, an arcane one and perhaps, you might think, unlikely ever to be used. It concerns the role of parliament in the event of the talks collapsing without a deal. The rebels want parliament to have more power in the event of a no deal outcome. Since the government is fighting extraordinarily hard to prevent the amendment becoming law, it should be clear to all that David Davis wants to threaten to walk away at some point. By passing the amendment parliament would effectively prevent him doing so as The Guardian suggest (HERE).
If he ever thought the EU would make concessions under those circumstances anyway he is dafter than I thought. It is like someone threatening to shoot themselves in the foot unless you give them what they want. I think Barnier would say, "be my guest."
Isn't this the problem with trying to appease both sides by fudging or kicking the can further and further along the road? Mrs May's position now looks totally untenable and even faintly ridiculous, as if she was simply trying to hang on to her Downing Street residence rather than lead the country.
I noted that yesterday Anna Soubry, when it was suggested the government was being a bit slippery, was using the same sort of terminology that Jacob Rees-Mogg has used in the past - the prime minister is an honourable woman and therefore I believe the assurances she gave. Now we see she is not an honourable woman.
Laura Kuenssberg at the BBC is describing the whole episode as a Tory party "psychodrama" (HERE), which sums it up nicely.
By trying to reconcile the irreconcilable she has lost the confidence of both sides. Who can now trust her? The amendment, assuming the government do not change it again, will go back to the Lords and be debated again. If the Lords send it back as originally drafted by Grieve, I assume the government could lose the vote on third reading and Mrs May might be toppled. The government is constantly coming up against this parliamentary arithmetic. There is no majority for either a hard Brexit or no deal at all. Hard line Brexiteers must finally accept it and either go along with a soft Brexit or call for a second decisive referendum.
The government, parties and people are split by a disastrous referendum characterised by cheating and lies, narrowly won by the Leave campaign and based on 30 years of misinformation and anti EU bile pumped out by the right wing press. What an absolute mess Brexit is turning out to be.
The only bright spot for me is that I believe the divisions will only start to heal when we see a sizeable and definite majority for or against Brexit. The arguments continue only because of the closeness of the result. And given the utter horlicks the government is presiding over and the enormous problems ahead which will eventually lead to chaos, I do not ever see a majority for Brexit. It is only a matter of time.
