Brexit

Wednesday

Lloyd Evans

Have we seen the last of the Maybot?

An astonishing PMQs. Theresa May no longer looks like a sheeted ghost. She’s quit the sick-bay and acquired a veneer of normality. Chipper, brisk, in command. Cheerful even. Jeremy Corbyn gave a lacklustre performance typified by the artless syntax of his opening phrase: ‘Her chaotic and incompetent government has driven our country into chaos.’ He probed her on the indicative votes but she shrugged him aside. Using a favourite ploy she poured scorn on his forensic skills. ‘He shouldn’t just read out the question he thought of earlier,’ she hectored. ‘Listen to the answer.’ She picked at Labour’s confused positions on the Customs Union and the second referendum. ‘What happened to straight-talking honest

James Forsyth James Forsyth

If May promises to go, will it be enough to win over Tory rebels?

Theresa May goes to see the 1922 Committee of Tory MPs at 5pm this evening. Speculation is rife that she will use the meeting to announce a timetable for her departure, though there’s no official line from Number 10 on this. I understand that Tory switchers are being told that Theresa May will go if the withdrawal agreement bill gets Royal assent, which would have to be by May 22nd. This would, obviously, require meaningful vote 3 to pass – though, as Katy says, John Bercow is not keen on the vote happening at all. If May does set out a timetable, then I suspect a good number of Tory Brexit

Alex Massie Alex Massie

A second referendum is a big risk but it’s the only solution

You would need a heart of stone not to laugh at the predicament in which Jacob Rees-Mogg and his fellow travellers in the European Research Group now find themselves. Happily I am not so encumbered. Having spent months decrying the withdrawal agreement negotiated with the European Union the Moggists now find themselves forced to think about backing it for fear nanny may otherwise bring something worse to the table.  Well, other than anyone capable of observing the facts of Brexit life, who could have predicted this? Who could have recognised that, from the perspective of the Brexiteers themselves, half a loaf is better than no bread at all?  There is

Robert Peston Robert Peston

Theresa May’s Brexit deal is heading for a third defeat

Here is the measure of today’s events in Parliament: probably the least important question is whether the PM names her own departure date when she sees a rowdy meeting of Tory MPs at 5pm under the umbrella of the 1922 Committee. This is not to trivialise whether or not she confirms she would stand down on May 22nd or shortly afterwards, subject to her Brexit deal being ratified later this week. If she conveys in any way when she’s going, and her colleagues have no idea whether or not she will, that’s huge. But every Tory MP knows she is a short-dated Prime Minister. Whatever Theresa May says today, none of her

Ross Clark Ross Clark

The shame of Jacob Rees-Mogg | 27 March 2019

Until this morning Jacob Rees-Mogg had had a remarkable Brexit. From being an obscure backbencher he had risen, without any formal position, to being just about the most powerful figure in the Conservative party after the Prime Minister. He controlled a party within a party, influencing the votes of seventy or so MPs. He became the most lucid of all MPs on Brexit, speaking with a logic and clarity which disarmed his opponents. He introduced a term to the debate – vassalage – which identified perfectly the weakness of Theresa May’s deal, and emphasised how the EU had successfully driven the Prime Minister into a corner. But this morning, all

Isabel Hardman Isabel Hardman

This is MPs’ chance to reinvigorate democracy. Will they take it?

MPs are rather bewildered today. It’s not just that some of them are trying to understand the intricacies of the Labour Party whipping operation, with frontbenchers saying one thing in broadcast interviews, and the whips saying quite another in private conversations. It’s also that parliamentarians are having to decide what it is they actually want from Brexit. This is a significant shift for all of them, whether they were elected two decades ago or in the most recent general election: MPs’ job is to decide whether or not to let legislation written by the government of the day pass unamended. Now, rather than simply rejecting a bill, or making changes

Dominic Cummings

The ERG are Remain’s useful idiots

Watching SW1 these days reminds me of that scene in Citizen Kane when Boss Jim Gettys confronts Orson Welles (Kane): Gettys: ‘You’re making a bigger fool of yourself than I thought you would Mr Kane…With anybody else I’d say what’s going to happen to you would be a lesson to you, only you’re gonna need more than one lesson — and you’re gonna get more than one lesson.’ Kane: ‘… I’m gonna send you to Sing Sing Gettys, Siiinngg Siiiiinnnnngggggg…’ These guys didn’t learn from the 2004 referendum (on a North East regional assembly) before 2016. And even now, very few seem to realise that a ‘second referendum’ would, given minimal competence from ‘Leave’,

Tuesday

Robert Peston

A snap election simply cannot happen – and yet it might | 26 March 2019

Here are the reasons why there must be and cannot be a general election. First, the drivers of a general election: 1) Tomorrow, MPs will start the process of identifying, via so-called indicative votes, a route through the Brexit mess that a majority of them can back. 2) This process is likely to continue next Monday, when a range of Brexit or no-Brexit options should be whittled down to one. 3) There will then be a vote, maybe the following day, compelling the prime minister to negotiate with Brussels whatever MPs have decided. It is too early to say what option MPs will coalesce around. And maybe they are too

Monday

James Forsyth & Katy Balls

Ministers left no clearer about May’s intentions at crunch Cabinet

After today’s Cabinet, ministers are no clearer about what Theresa May’s intentions are. ‘Reading tea leaves would be easier’, remarks one Secretary of State. This problem is demonstrated by the different messages those present took from the meeting. One Cabinet source said that May’s closing words about governing in the national interest ‘felt a bit like a farewell speech’. While another minister says that May ‘gave no impression of being off’. Part of the problem was that because May had to dash off for a phone call with Arlene Foster, the leader of the DUP, the meeting hadn’t drawn to its natural conclusion when it was brought to an end.

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Are we heading for a softer Brexit?

With Oliver Letwin’s amendment passing, MPs will seize control of the order paper on Wednesday afternoon to hold indicative votes. These votes will come before any third vote on May’s deal. The not-so-secret hope of many in government is that they might help the withdrawal agreement get over the line. Theory one is that they’ll show that the majority in the Commons is for a softer Brexit, and so push some reluctant ERGers into the government column. Some ministers also hope that the DUP will not be keen to go for an early election at this moment; and will be more inclined to compromise if they think that the government

Isabel Hardman Isabel Hardman

Tory uproar as Bercow insults backbencher Greg Hands

The Commons has just erupted into a bizarre row over an insult thrown across the Chamber. Normally, in these situations, the Speaker ends up scolding the MP who deployed the insult, but in this case it was John Bercow himself who provoked the uproar in the first place. Demanding that Tory MP Greg Hands come to order, the Speaker told the Chamber that Hands hadn’t been a very good whip when he had held the role, which immediately led to angry roars from the Tory benches, followed by repeated shouts of ‘withdraw!’ Initially, Bercow stuck to his guns as Conservatives complained in points of order that he had only recently

Tom Goodenough Tom Goodenough

Full list: the 30 Tory MPs who backed Letwin’s Brexit amendment

MPs have decisively backed Oliver Letwin’s amendment, handing them control of the parliamentary timetable on Wednesday in order to hold a series of indicative votes on Brexit. The cross-party amendment was voted through by 329 votes to 302. Three Tory ministers – Steve Brine, Richard Harrington and Alistair Burt – resigned in order to back the amendment. A total of thirty Tory MPs rebelled against the Government on tonight’s motion. The decision by MPs to back Letwin’s plan is a further major blow to the authority of the Prime Minister. Earlier, Brexit secretary Steve Barclay said the amendment is ‘unprecedented in its nature’. But Theresa May has insisted that the Government

Isabel Hardman Isabel Hardman

Theresa May gives MPs another Brexit lecture

The most damaging thing that Theresa May did last week was to turn on MPs in her Downing Street statement, blaming them for the Brexit chaos. Given how settled Westminster seems to be on this conclusion, you might expect the Prime Minister to have tried to mend broken bridges in her Commons statement this afternoon. That she didn’t underlines why so much of this mess is her own responsibility. May was not strident, but neither was she making any attempt to mollify MPs. Indeed, her only attempt to engage with MPs’ role in this involved yet another lecture about the number of chances they had been given to put amendments

Ross Clark Ross Clark

Has Leo Varadkar finally come clean on the Irish border?

Without the issue of the Irish backstop, it is reasonably safe to assume the UK would be leaving the EU on Friday with a withdrawal agreement. The government would not be falling apart and businesses and investors would know where they were. But of course, as we have been told constantly by the EU, the backstop is essential. It is absolutely the only way of ensuring, post-Brexit, that the Irish border remains open. What, then, if the whole thing was a hoax – if Britain and Ireland are capable of agreeing between themselves on a customs arrangement which eliminate the need for customs formalities? That is exactly what it appears

Steerpike Steerpike

Why can’t the New York Times stand Brexit?

It seems that the editors of the New York Times will print any nonsense about Britain — the British live on mutton and oatmeal! — so long as it confirms their prejudices about Brexit. ‘With nothing meaningful to say about our future, we’ve retreated into the falsehoods of the past, painting over the absence of certainty at our core with a whitewash of poisonous nostalgia,’ Sam Byers wrote on Saturday. The British, who are in fact more tolerant of immigration than any other European people, are supposedly ‘poisoned’ by ‘colonial arrogance’ and ‘dreamy jingoism’. Britain, whose stock market carries more trades per day than Wall Street, is somehow a ‘backwater’. Brexit has drawn this nation

Brendan O’Neill Brendan O’Neill

Don’t be fooled by the twee placards at the People’s Vote march

I’ve had a lot of flak for describing Saturday’s march for a ‘People’s Vote’ as ‘disturbing’. Angry emailers inform me it was actually a super-polite demo at which children and even pets joined hundreds of thousands of adults in a good-natured traipse through central London calling for Brexit to be rethought. It’s true the marchers were polite. And it’s true there were pets. I saw a dog with a ‘Bollocks to Brexit’ sticker attached to its head. But the politeness bordering on tweeness of Saturday’s mass march cannot disguise its true and, yes, disturbing aim — to overthrow a great act of democracy. I never thought I would see the

Robert Peston Robert Peston

Will MPs get a free vote on alternatives to the PM’s Brexit plan?

A point of significant tension at this morning’s cabinet will be over whether the PM is to allow her ministers and MPs to vote with their consciences on the indicative votes today and tomorrow to find any Brexit – or no-Brexit plan – that a majority of MPs can support AND on the statutory instrument (SI) that will delay the 29 March date in law for exiting the EU. Apparently the whips want a free vote on the SI, so ministers – including some of them – can vote against it and keep their jobs. And more remainy ministers – led by Greg Clark, Amber Rudd and David Gauke –

James Kirkup James Kirkup

In defence of Sarah Vine

The first job of a columnist on a big newspaper is to be noticed. If people aren’t talking about the things you’ve said, what’s the point? By that measure, Sarah Vine is a good columnist. Her name is known. At the Daily Mail she says things that people notice and talk about. She does it on Twitter too. Over the weekend, she had this to say about the anti-Brexit march through London: “There are no leavers there because they would be lynched. These people are so convinced of their righteousness they cannot see anyone who disagrees with them as anything other than a monster. The rhetoric against people who voted to Leave

Sunday

Toby Young

It’s time to send for Michael Gove

On Friday in the Spectator’s Coffee House podcast I suggested Michael Gove should be installed as a caretaker leader until June. I believe this is our best chance — perhaps our only chance — of honouring the result of the referendum. To be clear, I’m a passionate Brexiter and would like as clean a break with Brussels as possible. I want out of the Customs Union and out of the Single Market. If I was an MP, I’d be a member of the ERG. The disastrous course of the Brexit negotiations has made me more anxious to leave, not less. The fact that so many MPs and senior civil servants have

Robert Peston Robert Peston

Cabinet coup or not, the government is on the brink of collapse over Brexit

The correct reports in Sunday Times and Mail on Sunday this morning that some ministers (not all) want Theresa May to go now, and make way for a caretaker – either David Lidington or Michael Gove – tells me NOT she will definitely go within a few days (though she may) but that the government is perilously close to collapse. Because what it shows is the underlying split in the cabinet between those ministers – Gauke, Clark, Rudd, Mundell – who want to stop a no-deal Brexit at any cost, and those who want to prevent either a referendum or a “soft” Brexit “in name only” – Leadsom, Mordaunt, Fox,