MEDIAWATCH: May's chaotic Brexit
The effects of Britain leaving the EU are not determined by the day on which it might happen. It is the terms of a deal that matter. But 29 March has unique symbolism as the date on which Brexit was supposed to happen and the missing of that deadline at 11 pm this Friday night carries political and cultural significance. For ardent leavers, it is a betrayal – the refusal of parliament to honour the referendum instruction. For remainers, it is a relief – proof that MPs will not countenance a chaotic no-deal Brexit.
No one denies that it is a symptom of failure. The article 50 window was not designed to be spacious. Its constraints presented a reason to begin negotiations only with a destination in mind and to aspire for national consensus on what it should be. Theresa May got that wrong and refused to correct the error for two years. She squandered her time, yet still craves the consolation of a gestural vote endorsing half of her deal on the last day of the originally allotted time.
The motion being offered to MPs does not qualify as a meaningful vote in accordance with the laws that formalise Brexit. It covers the withdrawal agreement – the terms of divorce from the EU – as distinct from the political declaration on the longer-term future relationship. Any signal that a Commons majority is available for just the withdrawal agreement would at least unlock additional weeks of the article 50 extension agreement struck in Brussels last week. A deadline of 22 May is available for finalising the existing deal. Otherwise the options are cliff-edge departure on 12 April or pleading for a much longer extension.
Under those conditions, there is a certain logic in Mrs May testing parliament’s aversion to her deal one more time. But there is no sign that she has found sufficient support. Her offer to resign in advance of the next phase of Brexit negotiations has not won over the most hardline Eurosceptics in her party or the DUP. It has, however, created a disincentive for moderate, pro-European MPs to rally behind a deal that any victor in a Tory leadership contest could disavow.
The prime minister is going through the motions of executive power. She is trying to keep some purchase on events as they slip irrecoverably from her grasp. Groups of MPs are assembling alternative Brexit plans in recognition that Mrs May’s version is moribund. The Commons did not settle on a definitive model in a first round of indicative votes on Wednesday, but it was never feasible that two years of bitterness and polarisation would be buried in a single afternoon.
The process has at least generated cross-party dialogues and focused minds on options involving the institutional architecture of the European project – the customs union, the single market and the benefits they offer. It is extraordinary to consider how marginal such options have been to the debate until now. The insistence that Brexit could only be legitimately realised from behind Mrs May’s rigid red lines was perverse in 2016. The endurance of that stricture, in defiance of economic and diplomatic logic, into 2019 will surely be recorded by historians as a tragic mistake.
It should not take the passing of a symbolic deadline to signal that the Brexit process once jealously guarded as the exclusive property of the prime minister and Tory hardliners has ended. But perhaps, if Mrs May is defeated again, the message will finally get through: 29 March is the end of her Brexit journey. The one thing she can usefully do for the country is to support the process by which parliament looks for another way. THE GUARDIAN, mARCH 29
