Controversy of the week The meaningful vote
The “Brexit plot” is becoming “hideously complex even for those of us paid to follow it”, said Andrew Rawnsley in The Observer. The Cabinet, let me remind you, is still angrily divided over which form of customs union – all of them already rejected by Brussels – to propose to the EU; the issue of “time-limiting the backstop” remains bitterly contentious. Meanwhile, on Wednesday the Commons voted again on an amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill designed to give MPS a “meaningful vote” on the outcome of Brexit negotiations. The amendment had been rejected last week by MPS after Theresa May struck a last-minute deal with Tory Remainer rebels led by Dominic Grieve, but was later revived by the Lords amid claims that May had gone back on her word. As this “surreal soap opera” proceeded, the characters alternated between insulting each other “and torturing us with rival ways to define ‘a meaningful vote’”.
Actually, this issue could hardly be more important, said the FT. It is “preposterous and undemocratic” that the Prime Minister essentially tried to prevent MPS having their say on “one of the greatest decisions facing the nation”. Last week, she averted an embarrassing defeat by promising them a meaningful vote. But in the event, what she offered fell short of what MPS meant by that: that they should have the power to “direct the Government” after negotiations are completed – particularly if the outcome of the negotiations should be a “no deal”. That would have been crazy, said Nick Timothy in The Daily Telegraph. Grieve’s amendment would have let Parliament “wrest control of the negotiations from the Government”. It is the job of ministers – not the UK’S 1,500 parliamentarians – to negotiate treaties. Besides, the amendment would have put May in a weak negotiating position. Brussels, knowing that her positions could simply be overridden by MPS, would have given no ground at all. The result would have been a bad deal, which Remainers could have then used as an excuse to “stop Brexit altogether”. In the event, the Government saw off the rebellion, winning by 319 to 303 votes, said BBC News online. The result came thanks to a compromise: roughly, ministers agreed that the interpretation of the meaningful vote would be decided by the Speaker. Grieve ultimately voted against his own amendment.
One of May’s great skills is her ability “to avoid fighting battles that she cannot win”, said Martin Kettle in The Guardian. In the end, though, she can only kick the can down the road so far. She may have survived this vote, but it will be “only the first of many crunch moments to come” – on the customs union, the Irish border, the single market and so on. In time, May will have to take sides in the Tory party’s “internal war” over Brexit. Her premiership can be seen as a long-running attempt to defer that moment. “Yet she knows that the moment must come. And it will.”