Friday, 7 December 2018

Is this how May will exit Brexit?

In the current political climate, only a total idiot would try to predict what’s likely to happen at Westminster next week.

So here is my prediction. (Warning: my crystal ball is badly cracked, covered in dust, and its operating system hasn’t been upgraded since the day before yesterday.)

Here goes:

Next Tuesday, the government’s EU Withdrawal Bill will be defeated in the House of Commons.

On Wednesday morning, after a steady stream of Cabinet ministers have been observed entering and leaving Number 10, Theresa May will make the following statement to reporters in Downing Street:

‘After last night’s vote in the House of Commons, I have consulted widely with colleagues and others to decide on how best to move forward. I have concluded that, in the national interest, I should now step down as leader of the Conservative party in order to allow a new person a chance to take our country into the next chapter of our glorious history. I shall continue to serve as prime minister until a new leader has been elected.

‘As I have said many times during the Brexit process, I have been guided throughout by what I have judged to be the best interests of our country and of our people. As it is now clear that my judgement is not shared by a majority of members of parliament, or by several members of my Cabinet, it is only right that I should make way for someone else to lead our party and our country.

‘It continues to be my view that it is the duty of government to carry out the wishes of the 17.4 million people who voted Leave in the Brexit referendum two and a half years ago. Voters were given a solemn undertaking that their wishes would be respected, and we owe it to them to fulfil that undertaking. That is why I wrote the so-called Article 50 letter in March 2017, beginning the process by which the UK would withdraw from the European Union.

‘However, in view of the difficulties that have since arisen, and of the need to find a withdrawal mechanism that respects both the will of the people and commands the support of parliament, I have today written again to Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, to withdraw that letter as we are entitled to do without seeking the approval of other EU member states, in accordance with this week’s ruling by the European Court of Justice.

‘As a result, the UK will remain a full member of the European Union until and unless a new leader begins the withdrawal process anew. I am confident that my successor will want carefully to consider whether to seek the country’s approval again before making a decision.

‘I have taken this action in order to allow my successor the greatest possible freedom of action. It would not be right for me to hand over the baton with the count-down clock still ticking and with too little time left to develop a new approach to the greatest challenge our nation has faced since the end of the Second World War.

‘The choices that we face remain exactly the same as they were on 23 June 2016: to remain in the EU, to leave with an agreed withdrawal framework and a new negotiated trading relationship, or to leave with no agreement in place. It will now fall to a new leader to decide how best to choose which of those options will serve our nation best.

‘When I took office in 2016, I made this pledge: “As we leave the European Union, we will forge a bold new positive role for ourselves in the world, and we will make Britain a country that works not for a privileged few, but for every one of us.” That has been my single aim every day since then, and I now leave it to others to take that work forward.’

And then? I’m afraid at this point, my crystal ball shatters into tiny pieces. But by this time next week, who knows, perhaps I’ll no longer need it.


Martin Plaut said...

Well, its as good a guess as any I have seen!

Adrian Baskerville said...

It’s difficult to see Mrs May falling on her sword, and any withdrawal of the art 50 notice would need to be genuine and not with the intention of re-opening of negotiations. Nobody knows what will happen, but perhaps Mrs May will carry on with her deal, and succeed in a second vote, because Parliament is unable to agree any alternative proposal, including a further referendum. But I hope you are right, Robin!

Anonymous said...

Nice article, but would she really be able to announce departure from office and be aloud to rescind the agreement? Nice idea but would they 'those seeking control' not simply reduce her ability to act without Cabinet approval to nothing?

Anonymous said...

Lovely idea, but such a revocation of the Article 50 notice would not be in accordance with the Advocate-General’s opinion. He explicitly said that unilateral revocation could only be valid in circumstances where it represented a genuine change of mind on the part of the departing nation. It cannot be used merely to, in effect, “reset” the Article 50 clock.

Gregor McGregor said...

Given that we're in totally uncharted waters, this scenario makes as much sense as any I've seen. I would quibble with 'the greatest' danger (was it threat?) that our nation has ever seen since WW11. Remember the decades of the Cold War and its MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction? I turned up at my grammar school one morning in the early 60's to be told that the old Anderson shelters from WW11 had been refurbed, ready for an attack. That was palpable danger.

Kit Green said...

There are people on the left that want Brexit.

Anonymous said...

Very interesting, and quite a clever way forward - perhaps the only one

I think a 2nd (well, 3rd really) Referendum would be ideal. However, for it to reverse (in people's minds) the 2016 Referendum, it would have to have the same wording

But, there are 3 current options under scrutiny. This has its own problems, namely how to get a decision from the result. See this:

Depending on the voting weighting, any of the 3 options could become the result. So, this in turn depends on who sets the algorithm. And that will be yet another big fight, without getting anywhere. And the doomsday clock is ticking ...

It also authenticates the idiotic use of 2 parallel systems of democracy: representative & direct - if one doesn't work, try another until you get the result you wanted

And another thing. Whichever way this mess goes, shouldn't the government address people's genuine concerns, such as localised unemployment, the CFP, non-EU immigration (which I don't mind but I believe some do), extremism (on both sides), etc ?

Wouldn't it be nice if someone wrote an objective, unbiased list of pros & cons of the 3 Brexit solutions. Nothing wrong with a few facts for a change


Tinkersdamn said...

Admiittedly from an ocean away, your crystal ball seems intact. May appears to have been in the unenviable postion of doing what she had to do under the circumstances, knowing nearly no one left or right wants to hear from their highest officials that democracy itself has fractured, regardless of the degree this may be so.