Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I hadn't seen that margin of loss projected before. If it's even close to that she should avoid holding a vote at all, because that margin of defeat would be impossible to recover from. It suggests she was delusional even to try. She would have to resign.

Her only option would be to try and delay the vote while she negotiates the sort of deal I suggest in the diary - without losing a vote by such a margin first - which would undermine her credibility and legitimacy.

It also raises the question of what possible alternative to no deal there could be, and who could negotiate it. Even if they decide to hold a second referendum, what options could be on the ballot paper? Hardly an option voted down by a 300-400 majority of the Commons.

This is looking more and more like no deal, even though almost no one wants it. The UK is losing the capacity to act. If there is a leadership challenge and election it could be months before there is a new Prime Minister is elected and a new government is formed.

For the moment the EU can only watch and wonder as there is a collective melt-down in Westminster. No one will be able to do anything and all sorts of wild and wonderful proposals will fill the media and political vacuum.

At the end of it all, the status quo will start to look a lot more attractive to all concerned, but how can a continuance of that even be achieved? We are in for some truly fantastical times, to quote the bold BOJO, the ghost of Churchill in waiting.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2018 at 08:10:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
She would have to resign.

Sounds inevitable. And yet it seemed inevitable after the election. I think at this point we have to assume that May can't be shamed out of the office.

by generic on Sun Dec 2nd, 2018 at 10:16:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I have a theory - it could be wish fulfilment - that May will have a screaming insane meltdown on the floor of the House, and will have to be led away quietly.

The other possibility is a very public and very dramatic conveniently timed terrorist attack - rather like the spate of attacks we saw just before the election, which inexplicably ended as soon as the election was over, almost as if they'd been intended to herd voters towards the so-called safe option.  

But of course that's just crazy talk, because the British Establishment would never collaborate with the violent despotic regimes it sells arms to, especially not to keep out someone who has promised to end that trade.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2018 at 08:24:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Labour - with cross-party support - have tabled an amendment that makes No Deal impossible.

I'm not expecting 300-400 against. I think most Tories - in the interests of putting party above country, and also because it will dissuade the whips from revealing the dirt they have on them - will vote for the deal, possibly further persuaded by a knighthood or perhaps a peerage, as a reward for outstanding patriotism under pressure.

So the actual majority will be less than 100, and could be at the low end of that.

My guess is the ERG will make its no-confidence move then. It all gets a bit messy at that point, but Labour will be frantically trying to push through a no-confidence and/or a second referendum vote - which may well win, and which the EU are likely to respect.

I don't think the ERG can force No Deal without massive public protests. Things are getting to the point where even the British public may be considering moving beyond mass tutting and satirical Twitter posts.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2018 at 09:31:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
How does Labour's amendment make no-deal impossible? As far as I can tell it makes it impossible for the government to manage the consequences of no-deal which is a different proposition.

It's like preventing a car crash by disabling the airbag.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 6th, 2018 at 10:47:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe it is the revocation of Art 40 if you read it backwards?
by generic on Thu Dec 6th, 2018 at 11:45:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is this the amendment in question:

https://mobile.twitter.com/hilarybennmp/status/1068209119683928067

?

by fjallstrom on Thu Dec 6th, 2018 at 12:41:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Apparently it's been superseded by an amendment by Dominic Grieve.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Dec 6th, 2018 at 03:23:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series