The prime minister survived the vote of no confidence last night but 117 (37%) of her own MPs voted against her and to get even this abysmal result she had to concede that she will stand down before the next election in 2022. The fact that she felt it was necessary to make this offer is seen as revealing how weak she is. The next leader will want to be in place well before the election so Mrs May will be under pressure to go early in 2021.
While 200 of her MPs have confidence in her leadership, over a third do not. This is seriously damaging to her authority but she is now safe for 12 months at least. From that perspective the Brexiteers in the ERG lost quite badly.
But quite a few of the 200 MPs who supported her last night are opposed to the deal which means, I assume, that had the vote in the House for the Withdrawal Agreement gone ahead on Tuesday as planned, she would have received about 200 votes, including a handful of Labour rebels, for her main policy. Up to 450 may have voted against. This is a huge margin and it gives an idea of what a mountain she has to climb.
None of the internal party machinations will help with getting the deal through parliament. It is hard to see what assurances the prime minister will be able to bring back from the EU today that will change the mind of 100+ Conservative MPs. The EU have said the deal negotiated painstakingly over the past eighteen months is the only possible deal, they have moved as much as they can. There is nothing more they can offer to sweeten it.
May's win last night will bring some relief in Brussels but no more concessions. She travels today to beg for something, anything, but it will not bring any change at all to the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement. The EU leaders and diplomats are skilled at sounding conciliatory but when push comes to shove they will not move.
The best she can hope for, say The Guardian (HERE) is:
"According to a leaked document seen by the Guardian, the European leaders are expected to issue a short statement of six paragraphs insisting that “the backstop does not represent a desirable outcome” for the EU.
"They plan to reiterate that the arrangement would only be temporary and Brussels would negotiate and “conclude expeditiously a subsequent agreement that would replace the backstop”, in new language emphasising the need for intensive talks after the contentious arrangement is put into force".
This will not be anywhere near enough for the DUP and many of the 117 who opposed Mrs May. The deal will still fail to get ratified - if parliament ever get to vote on it.
So, what happens next?
According to another report in The Guardian HERE,
the EU have repeatedly said they would not agree to an extension of the
Article 50 period if all that was to achieve is a managed no deal exit:
"Brussels has repeatedly warned it would not countenance an extension of
the two-year negotiating period to simply allow a “managed no-deal”,
which would likely be the preferred way forward by some candidates for
May’s job".
Assuming
the deal is voted down by the British parliament, would the EU ever agree to an extension?
Perhaps, but the decision to grant one will be in their hands and they would presumably demand some pre-conditions. And they might
include an agreement to hold a second referendum.
There is no time to start all over again with a Norway option even if EFTA and the EU want that. We are left with either no
deal or no Brexit. These are very extreme political positions and I think the PM would
not go for either without asking the people again in a second vote.
The New Statesman (HERE) thinks the result has increased the risk of no deal but I don't think the writer fully understands what a catastrophe this would be. It is never going to happen. I think it increases the chances of no Brexit.
The New Statesman (HERE) thinks the result has increased the risk of no deal but I don't think the writer fully understands what a catastrophe this would be. It is never going to happen. I think it increases the chances of no Brexit.
Watching it unfold last night, the BBC had the usual roving reports from around the country speaking to people who had no idea what was going on. What we are supposed to learn from listening to ordinary men and women in the street who haven't been following Brexit at all, I do not know.
I lost count of the number times I heard people say she must stay to ''deliver Brexit' which always irritates me because, after two and a half years, we still do not know what 'Brexit' means. It's as if the nation voted in 2016 for a surprise - but for many it will be a nasty one.
I lost count of the number times I heard people say she must stay to ''deliver Brexit' which always irritates me because, after two and a half years, we still do not know what 'Brexit' means. It's as if the nation voted in 2016 for a surprise - but for many it will be a nasty one.
