There is an informative report on the Politico website HERE about the 'phone conversation between May and Tusk on Wednesday night. One can almost hear the sheer exasperation in the reported words of the EU Council president. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall after Tusk put receiver down. I bet what he said was unprintable in any of the 24 official languages of the EU.
This is what the Politico report says:
"In the phone call, May insisted that her parliament has clarified its complaints about the withdrawal treaty by identifying the backstop provision on the Northern Ireland border as the main source of objections, according to an official briefed on the call.
"Tusk, however, pushed back.
" 'May insisted that now the House of Commons identified the issue that they had with the EU,' the official said. And Tusk replied several times, ‘That's fine, but what do we do about it? The very first condition to find a solution is you present a concrete solution that commands a parliamentary majority.' "
A British official, obviously trying to add a bit of gloss to the fiasco, said there was no immediate readout of the call from their side, but that the prospect of a deal is 'much improved' after Tuesday’s vote, 'provided the EU agrees to rework the backstop'. Hope is always the last thing to die isn't it?
Presenting a 'concrete solution that commands a parliamentary majority' was something she should have done at least a year ago, if not before invoking Article 50 at all.
Politico say the Brady amendment shows that Britain is still deeply divided and that Mrs May would struggle to win a majority for any new deal that they might agree with her.
I can see how the 16 vote majority looks to the EU. This is the potential majority if the entire backstop is removed and replaced with the famous 'alternative arrangements' but they are going to have to be firm arrangement that are acceptable to at least 309 (97.5%) of those who supported Brady's amendment. If just a handful are unhappy with whatever it is that might be agreed she would not get it through parliament. The EU were never going to reopen the talks and a slim majority of MPs in favour of 'something else' yet to be defined isn't going to persuade them otherwise.
An earlier report (HERE) on the same website said:
"The relatively slim 16-vote margin of victory for the main amendment on Tuesday night also confirmed the belief of EU officials that May has not built sufficient political support to carry through with the balance of the Brexit process, including enabling legislation and, ultimately, negotiation of a future trade deal".
This has been her problem from July 2016. She didn't want to build political support and engage with other parties to avoid splitting her party. The schism in the Tories has now escaped out into the country and threatens to engulf Europe.
The official briefed on the call apparently said Tusk urged Theresa May to end the uncertainty given there are now less than two months until the March 29th deadline for Britain's departure. “We can't have another round where we guess what might work in the parliament,” Tusk said, according to the official. I bet his eyes were rolling like a one armed bandit.
I read somewhere that EU officials had already concluded we are nowhere near ready for a no deal Brexit and they expect Mrs May to request a delay, but only until June which they think will not be long enough anyway. They fear she is wildly underestimating the time needed to get everything in place and is pandering to the Brexiteers. I can't find the article now to link to but trust me, I'm sure I read it.
Gary Gibbon, the political correspondent, on Channel 4 News last night also said there was a belief inside the EU that we will definitely have to ask for an extension to the Article 50 period because we simply won't be ready in time. When we do request an extension, they are discussing a plan to offer us a long period - up to a year. This might be a good move because it would give time for another referendum. Clever? Let us hope it is.
When the suggestion was put to Ian Duncan Smith, he said there was no way it would be accepted but faced with a national calamity I don't think the PM would have any option, how could she refuse?
Incidentally, I like the Politico website because it seems close to things in Brussels but by an odd coincidence yesterday I received an email from DEXEU (I signed up a while ago) which sets out the recent expenditure over £25,000 and I note the department paid £25,151.69 in subscriptions to PoliticoPro a slightly better, paid for service than we free subscribers get.
I must admit I thought the government had rather better sources than the internet! But perhaps not.
