,
18 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Very difficult to follow the twists and turns in Westminster - after defeats on Tuesday and Wednesday both for the deal, and for no deal, attention today turns towards the question of extension. THREAD 1/
TM's plan is clear. To hold MV3 next week, and if it passes, to request a short 'technical' extension from the EU. If the WA passes, it is very likely that this extension will be granted. 2/
If MV3 fails, she is prepared to ask for a longer extension, for reasons to be articulated by Parliament. This could be eg to allow for a GE (opening up the path for a different WA) or a people's vote. The extension will have to agreed by a reluctant TM, and the EU-27. 3/
If this extension request is rejected (which is quite possible; either because the UK can't point to a path forward, or because one or more EU Govt opposes the plan), the default, despite yesterday, remains no deal. 4/
In such a scenario, we could see MV4 - and if the deal falls again, a vote to revoke A50 in order to avoid no deal. 5/
As you see, the deal and deal - despite their defeats - remain very much in play/on the table. So too are an extension, and, as if from nowhere, revocation. 6/
MPs today will try to provide some clarity about why an extension might be sought; and (very much linked) how long an extension needs to be. Can they propose a plan to break the Brexit impasse? 7/
I see few reasons for optimism. We are looking for a plan to emerge in a matter of days... when there has been no sign of any consensus in Parliament since 2016. It is likely (though who knows?) that various proposals (eg for a PV, Norway plus) will be voted down. 8/
If that's right, we will be where we have been for quite a while - though with the credibility of the Govt and Parliament further damaged. It is, as TM often says: the WA, no deal, or no Brexit. 9/
The problems with the WA and with no deal are manifest. They have - again - been rejected. No Brexit looms ever larger as a possible outcome. 10/
It is an outcome which would, of course, enthuse remainers. Crucially though, it is also an outcome which - on reflection - should also be palatable to many leavers. 11/
They did not want or imagine that Brexit would end with the WA, or with no deal. There are, they argue, better ways to achieve Brexit, and for the UK to thrive outside the EU. 12/
It is just (as Labour and the ERG often say...) that the Government, in negotiation with the EU, failed to do Brexit properly. If we revoke, we remain an EU member state, with all rights and obligations intact. 13/
We have the right as an EU member state to decide, with a fresh democratic mandate, to trigger A50 again, if and when majority support to do so (eg after a GE) becomes apparent. 14/
It is - for better or worse - not the end of Brexit. The UK *has* to do some thinking about the nature of its relationship with the EU and the wider world. Those who still want Brexit can and will make their case. 15/
Their aim will be to find a leave which works, and delivers benefits to the UK. Their aim should not be to settle for what they see as a deeply flawed Brexit, on the spurious ground that it somehow delivers 'the will of the people'. 16/
Revoke and reconsider is outlined more fully here (from December). It offers the UK the opportunity to avoid an unstable, and damaging Brexit outcome - which is all the WA and no deal can provide. 17/ blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/12…
I find it very difficult to see how it can be argued that leaving via the WA, or leaving with no deal, provide either a more stable, substantively better, or more democratic, outcome. 18/18
