Dominic Raab heads to Brussels for a chat with Barnier – but nothing is agreed regarding the backstop. A feeling of drama grips the bubble, while calm continues in the rest of the UK, and indeed, in Brussels itself. Where does “hell week” leave us then? There are only really four ways I think Brexit goes from here.
- The cabinet swallow the backstop, whatever it ends up being (and it will result in a very soft Brexit, at least for the time being). Then, May gets the deal, including the backstop, through parliament. If this happens, the Tories will then try and depose May (starting with trying to get her to walk off into the sunset voluntarily first) and move Brexit into the background under a new leader. This would probably (mostly) work, or at least shift the Brexit battle to be fought amongst the left primarily. An attempt to cry foul by the Brexity right would mostly be an embarrassing damp squib, which is the main reason I’m sort of cheering for this one to happen.
- The deal is not going to get through parliament and May is left with only one option that avoids her having to fall on her own sword immediately: she agrees to a second referendum as an amendment in order to get enough opposition votes to get it through. Tory civil war could be the result, but perversely, this is the scenario under which Theresa May probably remains PM the longest. She would prefer to go general election than do this, but I can’t see how she has the votes in parliament for another GE.
- No deal actually happens. The deal doesn’t get through parliament and May says she’s walking away. There will be no vote on the deal in parliament because there is no deal to vote on. A lot of people are talking this possibility up since all it requires to happen is inertia – if everyone just stopped doing everything Brexit related this second, this would unfold.
- No deal beckons – and parliament halts it. This is far and away the most drastic option here. I’m not really sure how this would happen, but here’s one possibility: Remainers of all parties form a plan to halt no deal Brexit. A vote of no confidence in the government is called and is voted through on enough Tory votes. Then, all the Remainer MPs get together and their leader, whomever that is, goes to the Queen to say that he or she has a majority in parliament. A sort of “government of national interest” takes over and halts Brexit, at least for the moment, causing a total rupture in British politics. Of course, this would also lead conveniently to a narrative of “the elite would do anything to stop Brexit and so they formed a coup” that would lead to a rise in the far right, which is one of the many reasons why it probably won’t happen. Much more likely under this bracket is that there is free vote and Article 50 is extended, which would have its own fallout.
Does ‘UK joins ETFA’ come under option 1? ‘Cause I still think that’s most likely. Partly because nobody’s talking about it. Quite often with these things the solution seems to come out of the blue (even though it was in fact obvious all along)
The EFTA option seems to be quite a popular one, including amongst a not-insignificant chunk of Leavers. Even if we do something like use membership of EFTA for, say, 5 years as breathing space – with a GE or final vote afterwards to determine the next course (sever all ties, rejoin the EU fully, or stay in EFTA). Yes, it’s a major downgrade of power and control, but who knows: maybe we have an opportunity to elevate the role and influence of EFTA and/or reform the EU?
Unfortunately, the idea has been well and truly wrecked from the very beginning.
I’m more and more convinced that the ERG and Corbyn are determined to ensure we crash out with no deal, for their own ideological reasons – none of which is in the best interest of the country. Worse, far too many MPs seem terrified of actually doing anything to overrule what appears to be a minority hellbent on destroying everything.
Unfortunately, the idea has been well and truly wrecked from the very beginning
Interesting. Why do you say that?
Nick –
Under scenario 4, “A sort of “government of national interest” takes over.” I wonder who the fall guy is the Remainers have in mind to play the Maréchal Pétain of Brexit? The original one was quite popular for a year or two. After that, not so much.
“A sort of “government of national interest” takes over and halts Brexit, at least for the moment, … Much more likely under this bracket is that there is free vote and Article 50 is extended …”
Sorry, but if this is meant to be serious commentary, you need to say that it’s far from clear that a UK government – and still less a vote of the House of Commons – is capable of rescinding the notification given to the EU that we intended to leave.
It looks as though that question will be determined by the European Court of Justice soon. But the question is far from an academic one. The answer would determine whether reversing Brexit would be practical politics.
Taking Article 50 at face value, the UK will automatically leave the EU next year unless the other members unanimously agree to an extension, If that’s so, the need for their agreement – and particularly the need for unanimity – would place the UK in an extremely weak position if it did want to revoke its notification.
A report in the Guardian last month spells it out:
“As things stand, the UK enjoys a privileged relationship with the EU. We have been able to negotiate a rebate worth around £80m a week that has the effect of reducing the contributions we make towards the EU’s running costs. We have secured an opt-out that lets us keep control of our borders. We have no obligation to join the euro. We have enhanced rights to make our own labour laws. And so on.
But, were we forced to seek permission to remain, the EU might look to hug the UK closer to the union. The price of permission might be the giving up of certain those privileges. There have been suggestions to this effect in the past from senior EU politicians. But if we have the legal right to withdraw our notice then that possibility evaporates. We can keep the deal we presently have.”
We could accept and admit that the decision to leave was not taken in accordance with our constitutional requirements.
In that way the Article 50 Notice is simply annulled since it was never valid in the first place.
The EU would have no say in the matter.
We could accept and admit that the decision to leave was not taken in accordance with our constitutional requirements
It was though. The Supreme Court (the final authority of our constitutional requirements) said so in the case of R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union.
M
Indeed so. And Parliament took the advice of the “it was only an advisory referendum” by initiating the Article 50 process and underpinning it with a statute – the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 and following that up with another statute – the European Union (Withdrawal Act) 2018 which repeals and supersedes the European Communities Act 1972. Constitutionally speaking, it couldn’t be clearer really.
Brexit is an economic black hole ask ford
A political impossibility you end up with little england an irrelevance in the world
Since may is now at war with the Conservative nationalist party her way to save the uk is only through a second referendum to stop brexit
She can save herself then and her wretched party from oblivion
Brexit is an economic black hole ask ford
I did, he said: ‘Didn’t you lot get blown up by the Vogons? Anyway, I’m a bit busy, unless you either know where my towel is or have a pan-galactic gargle blaster somewhere on your person.’
Remain 2
Leave 1
Project reality
M
The empire does not strike back
Return of the EU