May blames MPs as EU narrows options

In a statement delivered inside Number 10 Downing Street tonight Theresa May said she would not entertain an extension to Article 50 beyond the 30th June. Despite feverish speculation on May offering her resignation, or mapping out a timetable for her departure, her statement conveyed very little. Given a chance to address the nation, only eight days away from Brexit, she simply stressed that she blames parliament for the deadlock.

Earlier this evening, immediately prior to May’s statement, she met with all opposition party leaders. She attempted to persuade opposition parties to come round to her deal. It failed.

The gloomy meeting was reflective of the general chaos that has descended upon Westminster this week. Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn, on seeing Chukka Umunna – Labour defector, and the leader of the nascent Independent Group – walked out. As he left, Corbyn reportedly said: “He’s not a proper party leader.”

May’s stronger statement actually came this afternoon, when she indicated that she would not continue as Prime Minister if Brexit were postponed beyond 30th June: “As Prime Minister I could not consider a delay beyond June 30.”  May sent a letter this morning requesting an extension to the 30th June.

Following this development, President of the European Council Donald Tusk said that the EU would grant a short extension of Article 50 only on the condition that the House of Commons passed May’s deal next week. However, Tusk did not entirely rule out the possibility of a longer extension – eventually.

A leaked document from the European Commission said an extension to 30th June would be both “legally and politically” difficult. The options the EU would be willing to entertain, in absence of May’s deal passing next week, are a delay until 23rd May or a long extension to the beyond the end of 2019. The former date is to avoid the UK’s participation in the upcoming MEP elections. If the UK requires a lengthy extension then the UK will most likely have to participate in these elections. The document, obtained by Politico, also indicated that the EU would offer only one extension, as offering both would leave them in a limbo state.

However, this process has been complicated by Emmanuel Macron’s intervention. Any extension requested by the UK (23rd March, 30th June, or beyond) needs to be unanimously agreed to by the 27 EU members. French periodical Le Point reported today that Macron has indicated France may veto a request to extend Article 50, contingent on the outcome of debate at European Council.

Tusk, then, has set up Meaningful Vote 3.0 in the Commons next week but has not given her the concessions required to hold it. On Monday Speaker John Bercow announced that he could not allow the Withdrawal Agreement to be put back to a vote in the Commons, barring “substantial” change to its contents. The EU has made clear that her deal is not open for renegotiation, so it is hard to see what substantial changes May could possibly secure.

There are a few mechanisms by which May can get around Bercow’s intervention. She could suspend parliament and introduce a re-sitting, have MPs hold a vote to overrule Bercow’s decision, or secure “substantial” changes to the Political Declaration (the dossier on the UK-EU future relationship).

In PMQs at lunchtime, Tory veteran Ken Clarke called for a series of indicative votes on the different Brexit options facing the UK. He told May that a short extension would be “completely useless” if the government does not know what kind of Brexit it could successfully see gaining the Commons’ support, whether that be a second referendum, a customs union or a Norway style deal. May’s tin-eared response, that “the House has voted on these issues and has rejected them,” was met with uproar from opposition benches. Her deal has been rejected by the House twice now, and she is seeking a third vote next week. Labour’s Yvette Cooper and Ed Miliband too called for indicative votes, with Miliband saying that May was “the roadblock to this House reaching a majority.”

Rejecting another series of indicative votes might land May in hot water. Last week David Lidington, May’s de facto deputy, promised that there would be indicative votes if May’s deal was not approved by 25th March.

But, if she can put her deal to parliament again next week, and somehow coral the numbers to win it, then the UK will most likely be granted a small extension to get its house in order. If her deal fails, the next steps are unclear.

There is, of course, another possibility. Earlier in the week the EU indicated it could hold an emergency summit were May’s deal to fail next week. Despite statements and letters flying around today, the EU has not rescinded this offer. Considering May has indicated she will resign if there is no possibility for a short extension, which is contingent on her deal passing, the following is on the table: May’s deal is voted down, a short extension is not granted, she resigns and due to a new crisis the EU capitulate and say they will grant a longer extension. In this case May is essentially ousted via EU machinations and Article 50 is extended for over a year, leaving space for a leadership contest or even a general election.

If May brings back her Withdrawal Agreement next week she will need to get enough Labour MPs onside to counteract the Tory intractables who won’t support her deal in any circumstances. The threat of a short delay with no other options on the table might be enough to frighten Labour moderates to back the deal – convincing them that anything is better than crashing out on 29th March, or 30th June, with no deal at all.