The only certainty in the Brexit process is that there is no certainty. Brexiteers had long sought solace in the fact that, by law, the United Kingdom will leave the European Union on 29 March with or without a deal. But it’s now clear that this is not necessarily the case — or even likely. As we have seen this week, Theresa May is not in control of her party any more than Jeremy Corbyn is in control of his.
Corbyn has been forced to move towards the idea of another ‘public vote’ on Brexit, though he has no enthusiasm for one, because he fears that if he doesn’t, MPs would leave his party and join the new Independent Group. Fear of ministerial resignations drove May to say that MPs will have the right to oblige the government to request a Brexit extension if her deal is defeated, further weakening her negotiating position. The parliamentary maths is such that the Commons is almost certain to vote to request an extension to the Article 50 process rather than simply leaving on 29 March.
May is now suggesting that any extension would be only a short one, until the end of June. Brexit, the argument goes, must be complete before the new European Parliament starts its term on 2 July. But this, too, is fanciful. If the numbers don’t exist in the UK parliament for a no-deal Brexit at the end of March, they won’t suddenly appear by June. The Prime Minister is essentially admitting that the Commons won’t let the UK leave without an agreement. Brexit can happen only if a deal passes.
Any extension will be a humiliation for the Prime Minister, who has repeatedly said that Britain is leaving the EU at the end of March, come what may. But on the upside, it improves her chances of winning the next big vote on her deal, due on 12 March; and that is now the only way of Britain leaving the EU even vaguely on schedule.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in