Brexit is spiralling out of control. May's grip on it has been very shaky for months but now it seems no one is actually controlling things. Speaker Bercow is the latest to have a dramatic impact (HERE), perhaps even more than Arlene Foster of the DUP or Jacob Rees-Mogg at the ERG. The speaker is certainly making a name for himself, although the one they use in Downing Street is probably not printable in a family newspaper.
One thing is now certain, we aren't going to get MV3 this week.
Bercow's shock refusal to allow the government to bring what would be substantially the same motion as the one defeated last week has created yet another huge problem for the government. Theresa May has gradually painted herself into a corner and now Bercow has used a very long handled brush to add a bit more of the red gloss she is so fond of. Her options are slowly being closed down. In a further clarification the speaker has suggested if Mrs May wants to bring it back it needs substantial changes, not just a different opinion. And who is to be the arbiter to decide what 'substantial' means? Mr John Simon Bercow, no less.
It makes all that time spent over the weekend trying to persuade the DUP to support the deal a complete waste. At least it might save a billion or so in political bribes.
The EU have refused any further changes. Parliament has ruled out no deal. She needs an extension to Article 50 that only the EU27 can grant and a short extension would only be granted if it was simply to organise the final legal steps to be completed, a bit of technical tidying up. This would only really apply if the present deal was approved by parliament - and I cannot see this happening before March 29th if ever.
So, it seems to me she has only three options now. One is to request a much longer extension to give parliament time to work out a consensus on what she can comfortably get through the House. This really means getting 350-400 MPs to agree an approach. Anything less and we run the risk of another impasse in a few months. But note the EU27 are getting cold feet about anything other than a short delay (HERE).
The idea of a long extension to the Article 50 process might be attractive to remainers like us, but in the EU they are starting to worry what this could mean for them. Perhaps there was once a dream that Brexit would be reversed after the 2016 vote when we had time to think it through, but public opinion is changing only very slowly and EU leaders now seemed resigned to the UK leaving at some point this year. They just want it over.
Secondly, she could bring MV3 but changed by adding the Kyle/Wilson amendment to put the deal to the people in a new referendum with a choice to accept it or remain. Remember parliament has already ruled out a no-deal exit so this can't be an option (can it?).
Or she could revoke Article 50. This last choice is the only one which gives her complete freedom and it might be her only option in the end although it would be her political death warrant and the Tory party would implode.
The ERG are delighted with Bercow's ruling and seem think it makes leaving on March 29th more likely. Owen Paterson was on Channel 4 saying we can leave on WTO terms on a 'managed no deal' basis and a 'wall of money' in foreign investment would rush into this country. He says we should take up the EU's offer of a free trade deal but failed to mention this offer didn't extend to Northern Ireland which would have to remain in the CU and the SM. Paterson claims it's 'the law of the land' that we leave on March 29th.
Sometimes he appears like Rip Van Winkle, just woken up after a long sleep. He is as mad as a box of frogs if he thinks we are ready to go over the cliff next week.
There is some speculation that Italy's prime minister Matteo Salvini might veto any extension to Article 50, perhaps as a means of putting pressure on the EU over something entirely unrelated to Brexit. He may not need to push too hard, other leaders, Macron included might do the same. They are all heartily sick of it all.
We are starting to look like the man on the ledge, constantly threatening to throw himself off while professional negotiators try to talk him down. It has now been going on so long they have now handed us a loaded gun and left the scene. It is decision time. Do we go or do we stay?
But time is fast running out.
This week is crucial. Paterson's observation that leaving on March 29th being the law of the land is correct. It is enshrined in Section 20(1) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act - which defines ‘exit day’ as 29th March - and came into force on 26 June 2018, under Section 25 of the EU(W)A. There are two distinct things at play here. First the date we leave is set out in EU law under the Article 50 process. May can negotiate a delay to this during this week's summit on Thursday and Friday.
The other, more important point, is the date of 'exit day' set in UK law. Parliament needs to change this date and to do this it needs secondary legislation called a Statutory Instrument (SI). Normally it takes six weeks to get an SI through the House
The Hansard Society Blog (HERE) explains the process in some detail (and as with all things parliamentary, it's complicated) but briefly:
"There are three key stages to the procedure: the minister lays the draft SI before Parliament; it is debated and approved by both Houses; and, if it is approved, the minister may ‘make’ (sign) the SI".
"Normally, from laying to making the SI, the draft affirmative procedure takes around six weeks.
"However, given the steps outlined above, the process could be accelerated. We see no insuperable procedural obstacle to proceedings on the ‘exit day’ SI being completed in the week running up to 29 March, if the draft SI were laid on Friday 22 or Monday 25 March".
The clock that Theresa May was trying to run down is now working against her. She cannot know if or what length of extension the EU will grant until this weekend. So, she cannot lay the SI before parliament until Monday 25th at the earliest. But this would be the last possible moment (and the ERG will go absolutely crazy) - the equivalent of the Hollywood hero defusing the ticking nuclear bomb with seconds to spare. Any unforeseen delay and disaster strikes. We would be in legal no man's land at 11:00 pm next Friday.
The solicitor general, Robert Buckland (HERE), said Bercow's decision was a 'constitutional crisis' and that the government might have to consider the drastic step of ending the parliamentary session early and restarting a new session.
“We’re in a major constitutional crisis here ... This has given us quite a lot to think about in the immediate term. There are ways around this – a prorogation of parliament and a new session – but we are now talking about not just days but hours to 29 March,” Buckland told BBC News.
Brexit is going well, isn't it? For us I mean.
