The epic shambles goes on. I didn't think the PM's deal would fly and fully expected a serious accident. In fact it blew up on the ground after being hit by missiles from both sides. The scale of last night's 230 vote humiliating defeat was apparently a record in parliamentary history. The BBC (HERE) were suggesting the last big government defeat was against Ramsay MacDonald in the 1920s but that was only by 160 and must now be looked on as almost as good as a victory by comparison.
However, No 10 were last night claiming (HERE) her deal had just suffered a few scratches and with a bit of T-Cut and a couple of hours it would be back ready for another test flight very soon. But don't be fooled, the deal as written is dead.
Business groups are up in arms with Adam Marshall (HERE), director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, saying, "There are no more words to describe the frustration, impatience, and growing anger amongst business after two and a half years on a high-stakes political rollercoaster ride that shows no sign of stopping,"
He implored MPs to come to an agreement, and was joined in this plea by business groups including the Federation of Small Businesses, the Institute of Directors and the Confederation of British Industry.
Donald Tusk, President of the European Council helpfully tweeted:
If a deal is impossible, and no one wants no deal, then who will finally have the courage to say what the only positive solution is?— Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) January 15, 2019
Imagine spending eighteen months negotiating an agreement only to find that it is comprehensively rejected by the body that has to ratify it. This would be farcical if it was done by a novice but by a government it is an abject international humiliation. Especially so when the government in question and the negotiations are led by a woman who wrote a pamphlet in 2007 (HERE) explaining in detail on page 17 under a sub title 'Putting things right', how it should have been done.
She is now going to do something that she herself suggested and actually consult. All those years ago she wanted ministers to consult a Scrutiny Reserve Committee BEFORE negotiating with the EU but in the most important negotiation of her life she ignored, not just the advice of experts, but her own advice as well:
"The Scrutiny Reserve should be put on a statutory basis, so that ministers are required to come before the European Scrutiny Committee before negotiations at the European Council. It would therefore be impossible to override it. Ministers should have to set out their negotiating positions to the Committee, and gain its approval".Nick Boles, Conservative MP for Grantham, hit the nail on the head with this tweet:
She has approached the Brexit negotiation as if she commanded a majority of 150 in the Commons. She has conducted the argument as if this was a party political matter rather than a question of profound national importance of legitimate concern to all MPs— Nick Boles MP (@NickBoles) 15 January 2019
After this belated consultation to try and find some consensus, she intends to go back to Brussels in an even more humiliating errand and explain that she has wasted everybody's time and can we start all over again?
I watched the final day of the Withdrawal Agreement debate yesterday. The Attorney General gave a valiant and even an eloquent defence of the Agreement but I don't not think he swayed anybody at all. There was however something he said which Dominic Grieve later picked up on (HERE):
I watched the final day of the Withdrawal Agreement debate yesterday. The Attorney General gave a valiant and even an eloquent defence of the Agreement but I don't not think he swayed anybody at all. There was however something he said which Dominic Grieve later picked up on (HERE):
The Attorney General
"I respectfully suggest to my right hon. Friend that that is because the expectations of the withdrawal agreement have been far too unrealistic. [Interruption.] This is a serious issue, and I ask for the indulgence of the House in making what I hope is a serious point, although I have to give way to the hon. Member for Leeds West (Rachel Reeves). If the House does not accept the point, that is fine, but let me at least make it".
And then much later in the debate:
Dominic Grieve
"At appropriate moments, we also had those delicious moments of confession and avoidance from the Attorney General. He gently pointed out that he thought the suggestion that we could have a negotiated deal without a transition had been overblown. Who overblew it? The truth is that for two and a half years, and during the period of the referendum, we have been living in a fool’s paradise in relation to expectations. When during the referendum was there mention of the backstop and its constitutional implications that worry so much Members representing Northern Ireland constituencies? Where was the 20-month transition, now potentially extended for two years, and where was the complete lack of concrete terms for a future relationship?"
Today the PM faces a vote of no confidence and she will probably win it, although we can hope. But she has only herself to blame. The red lines, the 'no-deal is better than a bad deal' rhetoric, the lack of consultation and so on. The Brexiteers 'overblew' it but the PM helped them every step of the way.
I think the PM has received almost total condemnation for the way she has handled Brexit - except from Dr Richard North who still seems to believe (a) we will leave on 29th March and (b) with no deal. These are two of the impossible things before breakfast that Brexiteers believe. He says this morning:
"But, in a perverse way, it can only end well for Mrs May. If she gets her deal, it is a famous victory. If she fails, she will go down in history as having tried her very best against insuperable odds, only to be blocked by an irrational parliament determined to force us into penury".
All I can say is Wow!
I think the PM has received almost total condemnation for the way she has handled Brexit - except from Dr Richard North who still seems to believe (a) we will leave on 29th March and (b) with no deal. These are two of the impossible things before breakfast that Brexiteers believe. He says this morning:
"But, in a perverse way, it can only end well for Mrs May. If she gets her deal, it is a famous victory. If she fails, she will go down in history as having tried her very best against insuperable odds, only to be blocked by an irrational parliament determined to force us into penury".
All I can say is Wow!
