Only a day before Britain was originally set to leave the European Union no-one was clear what would happen next. An extension had been secured until 12th April such that the PM might get her Withdrawal Agreement passed. But despite a busy week in both cabinet and parliament nothing is certain.
Withdrawal Agreement rejected
The Withdrawal Agreement, secured by Theresa May with the EU last year, was rejected by parliament twice, once in January and again in early March. This forced Theresa May to hold two more votes which she had promised. The first was to establish whether parliament would take a no-deal Brexit off the table whilst the second vote was to ask whether May should seek an extension from the EU.
No-deal was firmly rejected by parliament, with 321 votes against leaving without a deal to 278. However, whilst the vote was not binding it did lead to parliament agreeing in sending Theresa May scuttling back to Brussels to ask for some more time.
Seemingly begrudgingly the EU gave Theresa May until 12th of April to secure her 'deal', and if secured Britain would leave 'in an orderly' fashion on 22nd May. Should her 'deal' not be passed however, Britain would - by default - crash out on the 12th April.
Of course Britain could go back to the EU and request more time. However, just as the the Speaker of the House dismissed a third vote on her deal without substantial changes, the EU seemed likely to dismiss any further requests for an extension without a plan.
Indicative votes - round 1
On Wednesday last week, with only 15 days until the new possible exit date of 12th April, MPs voted on a number of tabled motions, referred to as 'indicative votes'.
However all eight motions put before parliament were rejected. In a repeat of the earlier move to remove no-deal from the table, a no-deal Brexit was firmly dismissed with 400 rejecting such a proposal whilst only 160 backed it.
A so-called Common Market 2.0 or Norway plus option garnered only 188 votes in support while 283 rejected it. Meanwhile another proposal of EFTA & EEA was also rejected by 377 against with only 65 supporting the motion.
A UK wide customs union option did gather a little more support but again there was almost a 50/50 split with 272 MPs rejecting the motion while 264 supported it.
Corbyn's so-called alternative plane also failed with only 237 voting for it whilst some 307 voted against.
There was also no support in the house to Revoke Article 50 to avoid a no-deal Brexit as only 184 voted in favour while 293 rejected the motion.
Meanwhile a Confirmatory public vote motion - or second referendum - also lost with only 268 backing the idea whilst 295 rejected it.
And the last proposal of Preferential arrangements was rejected out of hand with 422 dismissing it while only 139 back the motion.
Deadlock
And so nearly a week on from when parliament sent May to Brussels to buy more time, parliament seemed to be no further forward and in apparent deadlock.
No proposal has been agreed upon, though there is a clear dismissal of a no-deal Brexit with 400 against 160. This was an even more emphatic dismissal on the previous week's vote. In that vote 321 voted to remove a no-deal from the table while 278 had voted in favour of keeping the prospect in place.
While parliament's opposition of a no-deal Brexit has apparently grown there doesn't appear to be much growth in support for the Withdrawal Agreement.
On the day Britain was originally set to leave the European Union the Withdrawal Agreement was once again rejected [BBC].
The government lost by 344 votes to 286, a margin of 58, and meant the UK has missed an EU deadline to delay Brexit to 22nd May and leave with a deal. Speaking afterwards the prime minister said the UK would have to find "an alternative way forward", which was "almost certain" to involve holding European elections.
The margin of rejection of the deal was certainly down on the March and January votes [391 against to 242 for, and 432 against to 202 for respectively], but is seems clear that getting the extra 50 plus votes in a possible fourth vote is very unlikely [Guardian].
Indicative votes - round 2
After the weekend MPs returned to discuss and vote upon a second, but smaller, list of proposals. But once again there was no consensus and all four indicative votes failed [BBC].
Speaker John Bercow chose four proposals to put before MPs; a customs union, a common market 2.0, a confirmatory public vote and a parliamentary supremacy proposal which would seek to rule out no-deal and revoke Article 50 if no extension could be secured.
But as in the previous week's round of votes there was no consensus. Ken Clarke's customs union plan lost by only three votes, defeated by 276 to 273.
The Common Market 2.0 plan - put forward by Conservatives Nick Boles, Robert Halfon and Dame Caroline Spelman, Labour's Stephen Kinnock and Lucy Powell, and the SNP's Stewart Hosie - was defeated by 282 to 261
A motion put forward by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson calling for a confirmatory vote failed by 292 to 280 votes. Meanwhile Joanna Cherry's proposal was defeated by 292 to 191.
Ticking clock
With the clock ticking down to a no-deal on the 12th April, Theresa May was now faced with few options.
She could attempt to put the Withdrawal Agreement before parliament for a fourth time but that would have to be approved by Wednesday 10th in order that the EU can ratify the agreement and approve the 22nd May extension.
However, it appears that horse has already run and Theresa May has to come up with another plan to present to Europe in order to obtain an extension.
Following a cabinet meeting on Tuesday 2nd April which lasted more than 5 hours Theresa May announced she was to consult with the leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn in order that she might establish cross party support for a proposal she might present to EU leaders [BBC].
In an address to the country the PM said she was "taking action to break the log jam," by "offering to sit down with the Leader of the Opposition to try to agree a plan that we would both stick to, to ensure that we leave the European Union and that we do so with a deal."
Of course, as the EU have so often repeated there will be no renegotiation and there is only one 'deal' on the table. Theresa May appeared to recognise this in saying that, "Any plan would have to agree the current withdrawal agreement."
But as has already been seen through the votes on the WA itself as well as a series of votes on various Brexit related motions, there is almost complete deadlock in parliament.
Whilst there was some positive news emanating from the meeting between the PM and Jeremy Corbyn, there were signs that any resolve would be difficult [BBC].
While Labour and Downing Street described the discussions as "constructive", Jeremy Corbyn himself described them as "useful but inconclusive." [BBC / Guardian].
Fantasy plans
There has been much discussion concerning the possibility that the PM and Corbyn could present a plan of a softer Brexit to the EU. But this could be seen as somewhat incredulously by EU leaders.
There is growing impatience amongst EU politicians with Britain. Indeed there has even been talk that Britain should just leave. And while many are still sad to see Britain disgrace itself, Europe seems almost resigned to Britain crashing out on WTO rules.
Britain won't know until Thursday 11th whether the European Union will offer an extension to Article 50. Should there be no extension offered, Britain will crash out of the EU the following day.
If an extension were granted it could well last many months and force Britain to take part in EU elections.
With all the indecision and lack of consensus shown in parliament it seems unlikely that the PM will have an acceptable plan to present to Brussels. Thus as time draws nearer to Friday 12th of April Theresa May will have a choice of either revoking Article 50 or letting Britain crash out of the EU. Will it be a case of "Torschlusspanik"* and May cancelling Brexit? Or will she let Britain crash out and sail into an uncertain economic future?
There is one sticking point as regards the revocation of Article 50. Last year the European Court of Justice ruled that Britain had the power to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. But the decision to withdraw the notification has to be made in line with the country's "own national constitutional requirements" which could mean that any revocation would have to be put to a parliamentary vote.
Given this scenario Britain could potentially crash out by accident since a parliamentary vote cannot be guaranteed to produce the desired result.
Nearly three years after the referendum there is still only further uncertainty ahead.
tvnewswatch, London, UK
*Torschlusspanik is a combination of three German words, and literally translated means "gate-shut-panic." Apparently the term dates back to the Middle Ages in reference to the panic medieval peasants might have experienced as they rushed to make it back inside the city gates before they closed at nightfall
Withdrawal Agreement rejected
The Withdrawal Agreement, secured by Theresa May with the EU last year, was rejected by parliament twice, once in January and again in early March. This forced Theresa May to hold two more votes which she had promised. The first was to establish whether parliament would take a no-deal Brexit off the table whilst the second vote was to ask whether May should seek an extension from the EU.
No-deal was firmly rejected by parliament, with 321 votes against leaving without a deal to 278. However, whilst the vote was not binding it did lead to parliament agreeing in sending Theresa May scuttling back to Brussels to ask for some more time.
Seemingly begrudgingly the EU gave Theresa May until 12th of April to secure her 'deal', and if secured Britain would leave 'in an orderly' fashion on 22nd May. Should her 'deal' not be passed however, Britain would - by default - crash out on the 12th April.
Of course Britain could go back to the EU and request more time. However, just as the the Speaker of the House dismissed a third vote on her deal without substantial changes, the EU seemed likely to dismiss any further requests for an extension without a plan.
Indicative votes - round 1
On Wednesday last week, with only 15 days until the new possible exit date of 12th April, MPs voted on a number of tabled motions, referred to as 'indicative votes'.
However all eight motions put before parliament were rejected. In a repeat of the earlier move to remove no-deal from the table, a no-deal Brexit was firmly dismissed with 400 rejecting such a proposal whilst only 160 backed it.
A so-called Common Market 2.0 or Norway plus option garnered only 188 votes in support while 283 rejected it. Meanwhile another proposal of EFTA & EEA was also rejected by 377 against with only 65 supporting the motion.
A UK wide customs union option did gather a little more support but again there was almost a 50/50 split with 272 MPs rejecting the motion while 264 supported it.
Corbyn's so-called alternative plane also failed with only 237 voting for it whilst some 307 voted against.
There was also no support in the house to Revoke Article 50 to avoid a no-deal Brexit as only 184 voted in favour while 293 rejected the motion.
Meanwhile a Confirmatory public vote motion - or second referendum - also lost with only 268 backing the idea whilst 295 rejected it.
And the last proposal of Preferential arrangements was rejected out of hand with 422 dismissing it while only 139 back the motion.
Deadlock
And so nearly a week on from when parliament sent May to Brussels to buy more time, parliament seemed to be no further forward and in apparent deadlock.
No proposal has been agreed upon, though there is a clear dismissal of a no-deal Brexit with 400 against 160. This was an even more emphatic dismissal on the previous week's vote. In that vote 321 voted to remove a no-deal from the table while 278 had voted in favour of keeping the prospect in place.
While parliament's opposition of a no-deal Brexit has apparently grown there doesn't appear to be much growth in support for the Withdrawal Agreement.
On the day Britain was originally set to leave the European Union the Withdrawal Agreement was once again rejected [BBC].
The government lost by 344 votes to 286, a margin of 58, and meant the UK has missed an EU deadline to delay Brexit to 22nd May and leave with a deal. Speaking afterwards the prime minister said the UK would have to find "an alternative way forward", which was "almost certain" to involve holding European elections.
The margin of rejection of the deal was certainly down on the March and January votes [391 against to 242 for, and 432 against to 202 for respectively], but is seems clear that getting the extra 50 plus votes in a possible fourth vote is very unlikely [Guardian].
Indicative votes - round 2
After the weekend MPs returned to discuss and vote upon a second, but smaller, list of proposals. But once again there was no consensus and all four indicative votes failed [BBC].
Speaker John Bercow chose four proposals to put before MPs; a customs union, a common market 2.0, a confirmatory public vote and a parliamentary supremacy proposal which would seek to rule out no-deal and revoke Article 50 if no extension could be secured.
But as in the previous week's round of votes there was no consensus. Ken Clarke's customs union plan lost by only three votes, defeated by 276 to 273.
The Common Market 2.0 plan - put forward by Conservatives Nick Boles, Robert Halfon and Dame Caroline Spelman, Labour's Stephen Kinnock and Lucy Powell, and the SNP's Stewart Hosie - was defeated by 282 to 261
A motion put forward by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson calling for a confirmatory vote failed by 292 to 280 votes. Meanwhile Joanna Cherry's proposal was defeated by 292 to 191.
Ticking clock
With the clock ticking down to a no-deal on the 12th April, Theresa May was now faced with few options.
She could attempt to put the Withdrawal Agreement before parliament for a fourth time but that would have to be approved by Wednesday 10th in order that the EU can ratify the agreement and approve the 22nd May extension.
However, it appears that horse has already run and Theresa May has to come up with another plan to present to Europe in order to obtain an extension.
Following a cabinet meeting on Tuesday 2nd April which lasted more than 5 hours Theresa May announced she was to consult with the leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn in order that she might establish cross party support for a proposal she might present to EU leaders [BBC].
In an address to the country the PM said she was "taking action to break the log jam," by "offering to sit down with the Leader of the Opposition to try to agree a plan that we would both stick to, to ensure that we leave the European Union and that we do so with a deal."
Of course, as the EU have so often repeated there will be no renegotiation and there is only one 'deal' on the table. Theresa May appeared to recognise this in saying that, "Any plan would have to agree the current withdrawal agreement."
But as has already been seen through the votes on the WA itself as well as a series of votes on various Brexit related motions, there is almost complete deadlock in parliament.
Whilst there was some positive news emanating from the meeting between the PM and Jeremy Corbyn, there were signs that any resolve would be difficult [BBC].
While Labour and Downing Street described the discussions as "constructive", Jeremy Corbyn himself described them as "useful but inconclusive." [BBC / Guardian].
Fantasy plans
There has been much discussion concerning the possibility that the PM and Corbyn could present a plan of a softer Brexit to the EU. But this could be seen as somewhat incredulously by EU leaders.
There is growing impatience amongst EU politicians with Britain. Indeed there has even been talk that Britain should just leave. And while many are still sad to see Britain disgrace itself, Europe seems almost resigned to Britain crashing out on WTO rules.
Britain won't know until Thursday 11th whether the European Union will offer an extension to Article 50. Should there be no extension offered, Britain will crash out of the EU the following day.
If an extension were granted it could well last many months and force Britain to take part in EU elections.
With all the indecision and lack of consensus shown in parliament it seems unlikely that the PM will have an acceptable plan to present to Brussels. Thus as time draws nearer to Friday 12th of April Theresa May will have a choice of either revoking Article 50 or letting Britain crash out of the EU. Will it be a case of "Torschlusspanik"* and May cancelling Brexit? Or will she let Britain crash out and sail into an uncertain economic future?
There is one sticking point as regards the revocation of Article 50. Last year the European Court of Justice ruled that Britain had the power to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. But the decision to withdraw the notification has to be made in line with the country's "own national constitutional requirements" which could mean that any revocation would have to be put to a parliamentary vote.
Given this scenario Britain could potentially crash out by accident since a parliamentary vote cannot be guaranteed to produce the desired result.
Nearly three years after the referendum there is still only further uncertainty ahead.
tvnewswatch, London, UK
*Torschlusspanik is a combination of three German words, and literally translated means "gate-shut-panic." Apparently the term dates back to the Middle Ages in reference to the panic medieval peasants might have experienced as they rushed to make it back inside the city gates before they closed at nightfall
No comments:
Post a Comment