For the second evening in a row I sat glued to the BBC Parliament channel.
You know what unfolded. It appeared that parliament succeeded in expressing its will. It does not want No Deal. For small mercies let us be thankful.
And now what? From my twitter feed it is apparent that people are still profoundly confused.
First, No Deal is still in the table, because it remains the law. Nothing has changed. No law has been amended meaning that on 29 March we can still leave without a deal against the current will of parliament. And what is apparent is that the government will permit that, at least as things stand at present. They want to keep No Deal as a threat and however many times they are defeated it seems May's coterie believe that they have the right to choose what is, and is not, permitted as an option.
Second, an extension to Article 50 is possible, but according to the motion to be debated today, only if May's Deal is accepted, when an extension to 30 June would be requested. This makes clear that unless parliament objects May's Deal will be voted on again next week. This must be unprecedented in parliamentary history. And, as a matter of fact, we have no idea what extension the EU might consider. It may only offer something much longer, for example, with the U.K. being left with the option of leaving on a date it chooses if it can ever make a choice.
Third, according to May parliament could also decide to revoke Article 50. Or it could decide on a second referendum. She rules these out. I think neither likely, however desirable. I cannot see parliamentary majorities for either, as yet.
She also, fourthly, appears to have entirely ignored the possibility that she might resign and let another government be formed.
Or, fifthly , that a general election might be held.
And there is in all this the unknown factor, which is Bercow. He refused to be drawn in how he might react to this chaos once today's votes are out of the way when questioned during successive points of order in the House last night. But I think this is where the power lies now.
It is said Bercow has faults. I am sure he has. But this is his moment. And he is one of the few who is rising to it. Begrudgingly, I admit Yvette Cooper is another who is. The leaders of the SNP, Plaid and the Greens join them.
What Bercow might do we cannot tell. But I suspect he is running out of enthusiasm for a prime minister without an effective government, or even cabinet, who is acting contemptuously of Parliament.
He will allow today to proceed. He will take what is said as indicative of will, as he will take the last two days as similarly indicative. And I believe he will then allow a series of votes, whether the government likes it or not, on issues not then decided. Each will specifically stand clear of each other.
These might include should the Deal be renegotiated?
And should it now commit the UK to a Customs union?
And should the Irish Customs border, if one is required, be in the Irish Sea, meaning Northern Ireland can remain in a Customs Union even if the UK is not?
Maybe it will be asked if the UK should be in the single market?
And it is likely that a long extension will be explored.
As will the appetite for a second referendum be tested. Maybe what should be on the paper might be questioned, although I doubt there will be time.
And then Bercow will permit legislation to be tabled to effect the propositions most likely to win support.
He will at the same time, and only then, allow another vote in May's Deal.
And he might if nothing is passed then allow a vote on revocation.
Or an appeal for extra time on condition of the House being dissolved and an election called.
He could do all these things. He may ‘take back control' by doing so but when there is no effective government - and there is not - then that is what he might need to do.
By doing so he could just steer us through this mess. But it all comes down to Bercow.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“Or an appeal for extra time on condition of the House being dissolved and an election called”. Ah, yes, the true People’s vote and a splendid opportunity to refresh the brainpower in the UK parliament.
Parliament voted to not allow a no-deal exit.
To the EU, a no-deal exit is the default position with no withdrawal agreement.
So parliament took back control; over something it has no control over.
Meanwhile, two of the most pro-no-deal, pro-brexit, people in the campaign are in an EU member state lobbying to get an extension to the article 50 period refused….
The government want to leave, deal or not. The largest opposition party want to leave, preferably with a sort of deal, but who knows?
My money is still on a disordered vindictive blame-everyone-else exit.
Truly: We are led by donkeys.
Donkeys is too kind – they are generally gentle pleasant creatures
I struggle to think of any creature from the animal kingdom that reflects the selfishness, cowardice, thuggery, venality, ignorance ….. that we see displayed.
No – this is human beings at their worst. Leave animals out of it
We really do need an experienced Speaker at this time, and this situation puts into clear perspective the attacks made on Bercow last year with respect to his point of departure. The Brexiters just want the chaos to continue in order to facilitate their aims.
He could go down in history as a great Speaker after all of this. He is a major voice of reason, unlike the PM, who hardly had a voice last night!
Karl Greenall says:
“[Bercow] could go down in history as a great Speaker after all of this. …”
I don’t follow the cut and thrust of the Commons very closely, but I have been greatly impressed with his ‘performance’ as Speaker more than once. He shows his respect for parliament at times by his scathing and contemptuous slapping-down of some of the sillier members’ asinine pomposity; and he does it with such tremendous panache.
There are times when he seems to be one of very few adults in the room. No wonder some of the Members would like to see him ousted.
Mr Bercow is my MP. He was once a brash and somewhat rightish Tory, but he has moved more leftward. I never voted for him, Conservatism being anathema to me, but Have always found him a dynamic, helpful, sympathetic and very effective representative for the Buckingham constituency. He has been to my mind a brilliantly effective Speaker. That he held this position meant that none of the three(Lab, Con, and LDs) – nay, two and a half – parties would put up candidates in General Elections; to avoid being solely spectators in those elections, I and my wife have voted Green. Mr Bercow will not be standing in the next GE: the question then is, should I return my allegiance to Labour? Had there been proportional representation, there would be no question: I’d remain committed to a party that combines aspirations for a more just society with environmental concerns and a whole hearted commitment ot the EU; but with a first past the post system, it would have to be Labour.
“Ita All Comes Down to Bercow”
At last, Richard. We now have a true definition of democracy – British-style.
My commendations to you on pointing this out.
Bercow is indeed the last man standing as far as I am concerned which is why I wrote to him recently to offer my support.
He is the key.
But the potential for blow back from Leadsom (the ‘Leader’ of the Commons – yeah right) is huge.
Leadsom will attack Bercow (as will the ERG) on the basis that he is acting ultra vires or even with bias – failing to note of course that Parliament (and the country) is now in totally unchartered territory and where it is obvious to anyone with enough brain cells to see that there are no precedents and precedents will have to be set.
Let us hope that if Bercow sets a new precedent it is for the good of the country. No Deal is not acceptable (I have given up hope of BREXIT being rescinded such is the collective cowardliness and ignorance in That Place) and a good and orderly withdrawal taking into consideration the concerns of 48% Remain is now the only game in town in my view.
Yes – another referendum would be nice but have we really learnt anything from the conduct of the first? I put it to the regulars here that we have not. And that remains a huge risk.
So, a good and orderly, unrushed exit is what we need, a planned uncoupling, minimising the damage to both sides whilst maintaining relations with the EU.
If the Speaker or the Commons cannot deliver that, then we Remainers in particular must contemplate marching upon Parliament to seize the Mace.
Honestly that is what I think should happen. In street parlance, Parliament ‘has lost it’.
Mind you – in advocating inundating Parliament in such a manner, maybe I have too?
Such is this infernal BREXIT bollocks!
With you most of the way on that EAS.
“So, a good and orderly, unrushed exit is what we need, a planned uncoupling, minimising the damage to both sides whilst maintaining relations with the EU.”
The only sensible way to achieve that is to rescind Article 50 and start again properly. The chances of that happening seem to me to be about zero. And the chances of being taken seriously in the EU after a fractious two years of argey bargey pretending to be negotiations, has damaged the prospect of even that least worst option being fruitful.
There is a very old saying that when you’re in a hole you should stop digging. Theresa May has got a JCB in there with her. 🙂
I approved this without a 🙂
And then I decided not to be so grudging
Yes I agree Andy – rescind Article 50.
Fully agree – both with Bercows role which will be studied in years to come, and the need to rescind Art 50 and start again. Arguably that also needs a fresh government following a general election, tho that opens as big a can of worms as a referendum, but we need to grit our teeth and deal with it.
Just to remind your readers that the population of the Crown Dependencies (about 200,000) and presumably Gibraltar besides the BOTs are trying to follow in silence the events at Westminster. It surprises me that even if MPs are not too interested in the well being of the people that they might be expressing more support to protect the City of London interest in these odd places. The governments of the Islands have been discussing UDI as an option so there may yet be many more boundaries to design for with the EU.
Here is Senator Ian Gorst the Jersey External Affairs Minister reassuring the Jersey public;
https://youtu.be/wZBCiGORWtA
Interesting
Thank goodness for Bercow’s courage and steadfastness, but this whole farrago highlights the poisonous nature of what I call “The Abolition of the No Confidence Vote Act” that goes under the official name of “The Fixed Term Parliament Act”.
Jim Callaghan lost a VONC by one vote, and properly resigned and called a General Election. Indeed, I think the lost VONC removed his right as PM to make that decision, and compelled him to do so.
The more appropriate historical parallel is the resignation of Neville Chamberlain in 1940, who resigned because he didn’t get a large enough vote in his favour in a VONC.
If he’d followed Theresa May’s practice – who has been massively defeated twice on votes on her deal, and defeated to a lesser extent on others – he would simply have ploughed on, and stayed put, until the cancer that killed him in 1941 or 1942 forced his resignation.
It is the baleful influence of that poisonous element of the FTPA that has allowed this situation to develop – a classic sleight of hand, with the PRETENCE if empowering Parliament, by apparently reducing Prime Ministerial power masking the REALITY of REDUCING Parliamentary power, by making it harder to remove an Executive Government.
May was able to use the FTPA to easily call an early General Election, so where was the alleged restraint? She has also used it ruthlessly to stay in power, and to manipulate Parliamentary procedure. Without it, she would be long gone, and some resolution to this farce and tragic impasse – General Election, a People’s Vote, but first of all the withdrawal of Article 50 – would have occurred weeks, if not months ago.
From where I sit – in Scotland and a supporter of Independence – this is Westminster bubble politics at its very worst. It’s like a parallel universe where the “laws of physics” are “not as we know” them. Tory and Labour MP’s are so self-absorbed in their fantasy of British/English nationalism that they are totally unable to conceive of another world out there where ordinary citizens are bewildered and fed up with their pantomime goings on, or that there are other parts of their “precious Union” where many people see the issue of leaving the EU very differently. Apart from the SNP, Greens & Plaid the hard core British nationalist MP’s, (including some Scots and others) there is absolutely no interest in other parts of the UK. This is reflected in virtually all the UK press and media, (apart from The National in Scotland), such as when the BBC cuts away to the studio as soon as Ian Blackford rises to speak to give us Farage.
And the worst of it is that these British Nationalists don’t realise that’s exactly what they are.
I agree
The Blackford point proves it
They did it on Sky last night
Should have watched Bayern v Liverpool instead
Skye
Bercow could stop May’s deal coming up again but the government could also stop any other legislation from coming up and run the clock down.
Neither of them will do that.
Tonight they want to extend the March 29th deadline. This is akin to the Monty Python ‘ dead parrot ‘ sketch ( look it up if you haven’t seen it , or don’t remember it ) . The referendum put a hole in the status quo , but rather than address it , they have been trying to avoid it for two and a half years . And now our elected members ( all of them ) would rather find a ‘ solution ‘ that somehow makes the impossible, possible : leave, but not leave and all parties happy because it is more important to for the politicians to get what they want rather than the people, whichever way you voted .
I agree. Bercow is already a hero just by keeping some semblance of order in the proceedings in the chamber and refusing to be bullied either by May & co. (whoever those are at any given moment) or by the ERG maniacs, whose peevish assaults on his choice of amendments yesterday marked a new parliamentary low.
However, since the failure of Benn & Cooper’s amendment yesterday, I fear that much of your hypothetical pattern of permitted votes may now be dust, given that the lunatic (May) is still in charge of the asylum’s agenda. Bercow’s real clincher is his undoubted constitutional power to bar May’s third vote should the proposition be substantially unchanged – and it’s extremely difficult to see how that would not be the case. In the insane chaos that is in danger of becoming ‘normalised’ (hideous word) at Westminster, I find it particularly disturbing to read apparently serious speculation last night that May might seek to respond by securing a vote to “disapply” the Speaker’s ruling. Should such an outrage happen – then, truly, the ‘U’K’s parliamentary system is over.