Theresa may

This weekend all eyes are on the DUP. As I say in The Sun this morning, if the government can satisfy them, then Theresa May has a chance of winning the vote on Tuesday because of the domino effect that them coming across will set off. But if the DUP won’t come over, there’s no point holding a third meaningful vote. The DUP spent yesterday in intensive talks with senior government figures. I understand that these talks were broadly positive. One Cabinet Minister close to the process tells me that the chances of the DUP backing the deal are ‘a bit better than 50:50. I’d put it at 60:40.’ What

As if the government did not have enough troubles right now, a major row has erupted between the Whips’ Office and Number 10. The whips think that a Number 10 aide was telling ministers they were safe to abstain on the no to no deal motion, when there was a three-line whip to vote against it. After the amendment ruling out no deal in any circumstances passed, the government decided to whip against its own motion rather than allowing a free vote on it. This irritated a slew of Remain / soft Brexit ministers who wanted to vote against no deal. Sarah Newton resigned as a Minister of State to

The DUP has confirmed that it will be voting against Theresa May’s Brexit deal this evening. A party spokesman said that ‘sufficient progress has not been achieved at this time’ and that ‘it is clear that the risks remain that the UK would be unable to lawfully exit the backstop were it to be activated’. Along with the European Research Group’s recommendation to vote down the deal, this means that the Prime Minister’s strategy of trying to win over the DUP and the Brexiteers in her own party has failed. It means that she is facing a landslide defeat tonight. The Commons benches behind the Prime Minister as she is

There was no triumphalism in Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker’s press conference. Nor was there much detail. May talked about how the joint interpretative instrument meant that the backstop could be challenged and taken to arbitration if the EU was trying to apply ‘the backstop indefinitely’. What May did not mention was how this arbitration mechanism would work. Multiple Cabinet Ministers think, after discussion tonight, that the arbitration does not refer to the ECJ. If that is the case, it will convince a slug of Tory MPs that this arbitration mechanism has teeth. The second aspect is the aspiration to have alternative arrangements in place by the end of December

The government’s efforts to get changes to the backstop have run into a brick wall in Brussels. The EU thinks, with justification, that MPs won’t allow no deal and so feels under no pressure to make significant concessions. As I write in The Sun this morning, one minister fully briefed on the negotiations says ‘we’re at what the hell do we do time’ But without a change to the backstop, Theresa May’s deal is going down to another heavy defeat on Tuesday. That won’t be the end of the matter, though. For the next day, parliament will vote against leaving on March 29th with no deal. Parliament will then almost

Theresa May is in Grimsby today putting in a last ditch effort to convince MPs to back her deal when it returns to the House of Commons on Tuesday. The view in both Downing Street and the Cabinet is that as things stand it will be rejected for a second time. With no concession on the backstop as of yet from Brussels, there is little chance of Brexiteers rallying around the Prime Minister’s deal. May’s speech this lunchtime has only served to hammer this point home. The Prime Minister used the set piece to turn her ire on Brussels for the lack of progress. May warned EU leaders that it

MPs have 10 days to pass Theresa May’s Brexit deal or calamity strikes, I say in The Sun this morning. May’s deal is far from perfect. But what will happen if it doesn’t pass is truly appalling. If May’s deal hasn’t won a Commons vote by March 12th, the Commons will vote on whether to proceed with no deal. The parliamentary arithmetic is such that no deal will almost certainly be defeated. The next day, parliament will then vote on whether to request an extension from the EU. This vote will almost certainly pass. At this point, the United Kingdom would be in the weakest position it has ever been

The only certainty in the Brexit process is that there is no certainty. Brexiteers had long sought solace in the fact that, by law, the United Kingdom will leave the European Union on 29 March with or without a deal. But it’s now clear that this is not necessarily the case  —  or even likely. As we have seen this week, Theresa May is not in control of her party any more than Jeremy Corbyn is in control of his. Corbyn has been forced to move towards the idea of another ‘public vote’ on Brexit, though he has no enthusiasm for one, because he fears that if he doesn’t, MPs

Brexit is back in the Commons next week. As I write in The Sun this morning, two of the big questions are: what will Eurosceptic Tories accept in terms of changes to the backstop and will the Cooper amendment pass. A document circulating among Tory Eurosceptics sets out what MPs should and shouldn’t regard as a meaningful change to the backstop. It warns that assurances from the EU Council would be ‘worthless’ and that changes to the political declaration would be ‘not legally binding’. It says that an interpretative instrument would have, ‘Some legal value’ but ‘would be a face-saver that would be legally pretty meaningless.’ Interestingly, though, it suggests

When Theresa May goes to Brussels next week to bat for changes to the backstop, she’ll do so with a large crack in her bat—I say in The Sun this morning. The symbolic defeat that MPs inflicted on her Brexit plan on Thursday night has significantly weakened her negotiating position. The EU doesn’t want to make significant changes to the backstop. When the Brady amendment passed the House of Commons, saying parliament would accept the deal if the backstop was replaced, the EU responded by saying that they didn’t think this parliament majority was ‘stable’. Thursday night’s vote helps them make that argument. I understand that when the Brexit Secretary

After Theresa May mysteriously evaporated from the Commons following tonight’s government defeat, Downing Street has issued a statement insisting that nothing has changed. The official line is, somewhat tortuously, that the previous set of indicative votes from MPs were the ones that mattered, whereas this one didn’t. A No.10 spokesman said: ‘While we didn’t secure the support of the Commons this evening, the Prime Minister continues too believe, and the debate itself indicated, that far from objecting to securing changes to the backstop that will allow us to leave with a deal, there was a concern from some Conservative colleagues about taking no deal off the table at this stage.

I have this mental image of Brexit Britain on a hospital ward waiting for treatment that never comes. We are hanging on for an operation that is supposed to make us stronger and happier, but we still don’t know what kind of procedure it will be – or even when or whether it will definitely happen. This coming Thursday was supposed to be a big day. It was billed as when MPs would vote on whether Brexit should be postponed, and what kind of Brexit they might eventually support. But it now looks as though the consultant in charge of our treatment, the prime minister, will announce on Tuesday or Wednesday

Number 10 had hoped that if it could hold off the Cooper amendment again next week, then it could eke out a concession from the EU on the backstop. But as I say in The Sun this weekend, this approach has been complicated by Jeremy Corbyn’s soft Brexit plan. This scheme, obviously, appeals to the EU: it would keep Britain in the customs union and following many of the rules of the single market. ‘The Labour party and the EU are operating in tandem to some extent, which is worrying for us’ frets one Cabinet Minister. So, May needs to persuade Brussels that such a deal couldn’t get through because

Home Theresa May, the Prime Minister, went off to Brussels again to talk about ‘alternative arrangements’, for which parliament had voted, to the Irish backstop in her EU withdrawal agreement, which parliament had rejected. First she gave a speech in Northern Ireland, saying: ‘There is no suggestion that we are not going to ensure in the future there is provision for this insurance policy… the backstop.’ Lord Trimble (once an Ulster Unionist, now Conservative), the winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, said he was ‘exploring’ the possibility of a legal challenge to May’s deal on the grounds that it undermines the Belfast Agreement of 1998. The coroner for Northern Ireland

Don’t expect much movement on Brexit this side of Valentine’s Day, I say in The Sun this morning. There are two reasons for this. First, EU leaders are irritated with Theresa May. She signed off on a deal with them, assured them it could get through the Commons and then lost by a record margin. They are now sceptical when the British indicate that this or that change could get the deal through parliament. Despite the Brady amendment passing, the EU are still doubtful about what would get a deal over the line. But there is another reason beyond their irritation why the EU are holding off from engaging with

Theresa May will soon arrive in Brussels with a series of unlikely demands. She must tell the European Union that she wants to re-open a deal that she was hailing as not just the best, but the ‘only deal possible’ a few weeks ago. Parliament has now made her eat her words. It is a testament to her predicament that this counts as a triumph for her. She has narrowly avoided a far worse fate. Had parliament voted another way — rejecting Graham Brady’s amendment and passing Yvette Cooper’s — she would have been sent into the negotiating chamber with nothing to say. She wouldn’t have been able to tell

You could tell that the result of tonight’s vote on the Brady amendment (which calls for alternative arrangements to replace the Northern Irish backstop) came as a surprise to those at the top of government from the look on Chief Whip Julian Smith’s face as he re-entered the Commons. He looked as though he had spent the past few hours trapped in a ghost house of horrors at a funfair. Smith had, like his colleagues in Downing Street, thought that this amendment was going to fail with a narrow margin until minutes before the result was announced. Instead, it passed with a surprising majority of 16. When Theresa May responded