The UK parliament finally got to deliver its verdict on the draft Withdrawal Agreement last night (15 January) and its opposition was overwhelming, inflicting defeat on the government’s plan by 230 votes – the biggest margin in modern times.
In ordinary circumstances, this would have been enough to force the resignation of the Prime Minister and bring down the government. But these circumstances are far from ordinary.
A motion of no confidence in the government has been tabled and a vote will take place today. The government is expected to narrowly win the vote with the support of the DUP and, if that happens, the Prime Minister must then present new proposals to parliament on Monday 21 January which, in turn, must be voted on by the end of the month. So, on the morning after the vote before, what might that alternative plan look like? And what other outcomes are possible?
Immediately following the announcement of the result, Theresa May promised that she would enter talks with senior parliamentarians to formulate a way forward which commands the consent of the majority of MPs. However, the divisions within parliament on what that approach should be have been laid bare by last night’s vote and the extent to which the Prime Minister reaches out to Opposition parties in a bid to find common ground on a Plan B could be crucial.
- Another vote – Theresa May could decide to ask parliament to vote again on her deal but, given the scale of the initial defeat, a second attempt to push it through is expected to prove futile and waste further precious time.
- Renegotiation – The prospect of securing a ‘bespoke’ deal which the Prime Minister has always favoured appears to have been dented by the scale of the defeat on the Withdrawal Agreement. Will this mean that the existing Norway and Canada models are now back on the table? Theresa May seems unwilling to consider remaining with in a customs union and allowing freedom of movement so that appears to rule out the Norway ‘soft Brexit’ model, whilst the ‘Canada’ free trade deal model may not have sufficient support among MPs who favour remaining in the EU. It’s difficult to see how either model can secure the support of the majority of MPs. The response of the EU to a possible renegotiation will also be crucial. Will it be prepared to re-open talks and, if so, will it require further compromises from the UK?
- Extension of Article 50 – the government does not want to delay or revoke Article 50. There is growing clamour for Article 50 to be extended given that there are just ten weeks remaining until 29 March with no immediate prospect of a Withdrawal Agreement in sight. However, the EU is unlikely to countenance such a move unless a significant event, such as a general election or second referendum, is planned which could change the dynamics of Brexit.
- Second referendum – the government does not intend to propose legislation for a second referendum but it may be forced down this route if no agreement can be found as 29 March approaches.
- General election – again, the government does not want to take this option, but it may be a way of changing of the arithmetical deadlock in parliament and it could either be forced on the government through a no confidence vote or the Prime Minister could eventually choose to call an election herself to avoid no deal.
- No deal – in addressing parliament after last night’s vote, Theresa May gave the assurance that the government did not intend to allow the clock to run down to a no deal conclusion. However, a reluctance to seek an extension of Article 50 still means that no deal could happen as it is the default legal position if agreement cannot be reached.
‘Taking back control’ was an often-repeated mantra of the Leave campaign in the 2016 referendum. It appears that this is precisely what parliament intends to do with the Brexit process and it began by heavily rejecting the government’s plan last night. What it now decides to do with that power may well shape the destiny of Brexit.
