Theresa may

Every now and then there is a political moment, some event or comment, that reveals just how much society has changed. This week contained one of those moments. On Tuesday it was reported that nine pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong had been found guilty of causing a public nuisance by taking to the streets five years ago to demand a greater democratic say in how their society is governed. And on the same day, the exact same day, the Guardian published an article with the headline ‘Democracy is overrated’. Most voters have ‘no idea’ about what’s going on in the world, the piece argued, and therefore it would be better

Jeremy Corbyn has insisted that Theresa May hasn’t yet moved on her Brexit red lines in talks with the Labour Party. In a broadcast clip this evening, the Labour leader said: ‘Well, the meetings are very long. A great deal of detail is gone into by both parties. We have people who have been on this case for several years so they’re all very accustomed to it all. We’ve gone into it because the government at last acceded to a request I first made last September that we’re prepared to talk and put forward our views, but talks have to mean a movement and so far there’s been no change

As another crunch Brexit week approaches, Theresa May has used a video message to update the public on ‘what’s happening with Brexit’. With the Sunday papers filled with angry Conservative MPs venting about her decision to enter negotiations with Jeremy Corbyn in a bid to break the Brexit deadlock, the Prime Minister uses the address to try and justify her decision. Adopting a more casual tone that normal, May says that Parliament has rejected her deal three times and ‘as things stand’ there is little reason to expect MPs to back it on a fourth vote. This is why she has made the decision to talk to Jeremy Corbyn about

There is a logic in Mrs May’s late move to Labour. It is the same logic by which both parties, at the last general election, put forward very similar policies about Brexit. They need to stay together (while feigning disagreement for party reasons) to frustrate what people voted for. Just as they both said in 2017 that they wanted to leave the customs union, now both are working to stay in it. It is the same logic by which Mr Speaker Bercow has arranged for Sir Oliver Letwin to become prime minister on roughly alternate days. None of the main players really wants Brexit, but none can really say so.

Management books often repeat the dictum: ‘If there’s one thing worse than making mistakes, it’s not learning from them.’ So let’s apply that smug little idea to Brexit. Before I start, a couple of housekeeping points. I voted Remain, but believe we must leave the EU and honour the referendum result. Second, as a former Brexit minister, writing this is a form of therapy for me. Failure no. 1 — from which many other failures flow — was a lack of honesty. Brexit is the biggest challenge we’ve faced since 1939. It’s complex, existential and will take years. It demands a sense of national endeavour, of ‘let us go forward together’.

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

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,

As you know, I have been banging on about the probability that the UK will leave the EU without a deal on 12 April. Having talked to very senior members of the government, and also well-placed sources in the EU, it has become clear to me that MPs have one shot to prevent that – and it will almost certainly be this week that MPs will either rise to the challenge or flunk it. How so? Well, the prime minister and the EU will be looking at the indicative votes that are due to take place on Tuesday and Wednesday – on Tuesday sponsored by the PM, on Wednesday under

After eight hours of talks between EU leaders, Theresa May has been granted an Article 50 extension. If the Prime Minister can pass her deal next week, there will be technical extension until 22 May. If the deal fails to pass, Article 50 will be extended only until 12 April so that the UK can set out its next steps – and potentially apply for a longer extension. This offer appears to give backbenchers time to try and – once again – seize control of the process if May fails to pass her deal. The Prime Minister’s problem is when it comes to meeting the first condition of the 22

Theresa May has united Westminster. Right across the political spectrum, politicians and journalists agree that her televised statement from No. 10 last night was an epic misjudgement, that seeking to pin public blame on MPs for the failure to agree a Brexit outcome has made it even less likely that they will now reach such an agreement. The PM’s awful statement, it is said, has driven away the very MPs she needs to pass her Withdrawal Agreement next week. Consensus like that deserves scrutiny, because it’s often a cloak under which people can hide inconvenient facts. Consider the assertion that May has alienated MPs who will not now vote for

This evening, Jeremy Corbyn walked out of a meeting between opposition party leaders and the Prime Minister about Brexit. The reason for his angry protest had nothing to do with what was being discussed, but his distaste for one of the attendees. Former Labour MP Chuka Umunna was there to represent the Independent Group, and this, according to those present, was too much for the Labour leader to stomach. Labour has since said the the terms of the meeting had changed and that this wasn’t what Corbyn had agreed to when he said he would meet the Prime Minister in her office. But this is an impressive own goal, even

Allies of Theresa May have long talked about how she wants her legacy to be about more than Brexit. But the brutal truth is that there is no such legacy available to her. Rather, her choice is between being the Prime Minister who got a withdrawal agreement through or the one who had to ask for a long, humiliating extension. If May wants to increase the chances of the former being her legacy and not the latter, then she is going to have to promise to go at some point before the next meaningful vote. Earlier today, one office holder in the ERG told me that if May said she

Is this the week Theresa May sets out an exit date for her departure from No. 10? There is hope in government that this will be the week the Prime Minister passes her Brexit deal. However, the price of her doing so could include a promise to resign before the second stage of negotiations begin later this year. No. 10 are working to try and ensure May passes her deal before this week’s EU council meeting where she has to try and seek an Article 50 extension. In a bid to try and do this, ministers have been locked in talks with the DUP all weekend on what could be