May failed. There was no surprise there. And, since she took command, she has no one to pass the buck to: this failure is hers to own.
That she failed is hardly a surprise. I was not alone in spelling out all the issues she faced, in Ireland both North and south; with the hard-right of the Tories, and with the Commission. It was obvious that the available positions were irreconcilable. What was staggering was that she had to take a phone call during the lunch that was supposed to seal the deal before that reality dawned on her. Most negotiators do their preparation a little better than that.
So what now? When historians look back they will, I suspect, treat yesterday as a significant moment. A UK prime minister could not deliver her stated foreign policy desire. Her government lies in tatters. With three issues to agree upon to deliver the policy she claims to be mandated to fulfil it is not clear she got close on any issue.
Even if a sum of money in settlement with the EU was agreed it is not clear that she would have got this past the Daily Mail.
There was no apparent agreement on the role of the ECJ post 2019, and yet it will clearly have one. This issue still appears insurmountable with the hard-right.
And for the first time in 800 years Ireland has the upper hand in international diplomacy with the UK, and is not relenting now.
Put like that, this is not just an impasse. This is instead outright failure. And this is not failure because of ‘events' but failure because there had been an outright refusal on May's part to recognise three key issues.
The first is that there is no mandate for hard Brexit. It was never on a ballot paper. People did not vote for it.
Second, there is no such thing as ‘the settled will of the people'. In democracy, in life, in negotiations, and most certainly in politics things change. And that was not altered by a referendum result.
Third, if you haven't got a Commons majority and want to lead the country on a momentous issue then you have to build big alliances. A tawdry deal with the DUP does not count, and it's failed May, badly.
So, what happens now? Given the fast moving nature of this issue prediction is a little hard but some things can, I think, be taken as given. The Irish, DUP, Tory hard-right and the Commission are not going to change their positions. They're all clear as can be that they're sticking where they are. I think we can presume that they all mean it.
So, in that case, all compromises have to be within these constraints. And given that it has to be recognised that there are three possible outcomes.
One is hard Brexit. That would be a win for a tiny minority in parliament and the country. It would be the consequnce of putting the priorities of ‘the bastard' wing of the Tory party higher than the majority will of the people of this country. It may happen. But it would tear the country apart. I think the Union with Scotland would be the least price paid. Economic chaos would be the other. It is entirely possible that this might happen: Tories obediently trotting behind their leader aided and abetted by the DUP and a few Labour members in leave of their senses could deliver the greatest English foreign policy failure in nearly 1,000 years (for English it is).
The second is not leaving the EU. I actually can't see that happening now. I do not think Labour has the courage to state the obvious and say that this was, all along, a terrible idea. Barry Gardiner clearly demonstrated the crassness of Labour's position on this when saying it would take a two thirds majority in a referendum to now overturn the 2016 result.
Third, then, there is compromise to be had. We could leave the EU as the referendum demanded and stay in the customs union and Single Market. We could do a Norwegian deal. We could still try to negotiate. But after yesterday will the Commission do that? Why should they when it is apparent that Theresa May has no better command of the issues, or support to deliver a deal than David Davis? I am not sure they will.
My suspicion is that there is only one way forward. We either have a general election, for which no one is prepared, or there has to be a Grand Coalition. I am not sure how else the demands of the Tory hard-right and the DUP, that are intended to destroy wellbeing, can be shaken off and progress can be made.
The chance of such a Coalition is, however, remote. May could not lead it. And I doubt Tories would serve Corbyn. Angus Robertson is not in the House. So, what of Vince Cable, or better, Caroline Lucas? Is it just possible that the strangest of alliances could be created to deliver stable government now? But remember it too is no panacea. It could also be a centrist neoliberal alliance around Chuka Ummuna intended to keep the City in power in the UK.
Yesterday revealed the mess we're in. It's deep, real, and not at present readily soluble. Blame can be attributed later. The requirement now is for solutions. So maybe an election is the only viable one. But that costs vast amounts of time that is not available in the Article 50terms. And yet, precisely by eroding time available an election might require the compromises that are also necessary.
However it is looked at, Theresa May is now very obviously in office but not power. There is only one certainty: she has to go as a pre-condition of change. And an election may be the only way to deliver that change.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
[…] http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/12/05/if-yesterday-proved-anything-it-is-that-may-has-to-go-… […]
EFTA anyone?
She’s too blinkered about holding on to the reigns of power to willingly go and the Tories won’t have a vote of no confidence because (a) any potential new leader doesn’t want to be in the firing line and (b) they’re so terrified of Corbyn the bogeyman ( and by they I mean the media and corporate lobbyists the Tories are in thrall to ) to give him a chance. Not least with the current survation survey giving Labour and 8 point lead.
It seems crazy to watch this slow motion economic implosion – I feel a little hopeful that Scotland may come out of this better off in the long term if the union breaks up. I do have some trepidation as an Irish national settled up here since 2010 with a Polish partner and a child born here. The stories of the home office tearing families apart with impunity are very worrying.
But how can a GE be forced ? They will just bluster and bluff while filling their pockets as much as they can.
The most alarming thing is that per Manchau in the FT this is all a charade anyhow.
He compares the Canadian agreement and how long it has taken to go through the 27.
The point is that, after paying the 50 Billion odd there is not much that can be agreed as Ireland showed yesterday.
Merkel was prepared to throw the Canadian agreement out to save the coalition.
It is clear to me, that outside the Customs union and trade deal, there is no point.
Have to either stand alone or stay put. Looks like the Chinese will be the only ones who can save the UK.
Trump is too self obsessed to do otherwise.
The General Election ‘told’ Theresa May that what was needed, and desired by the public was a coalition ‘National Government’ to deal with this issue of Brexit and hammer out some sort of consensus position.
She chose to ignore that and now we see the result.
Another election on FPT(F)P is not likely to put us in a better position. Neither of the big parties has a coherent policy position do they?
It inspires no confidence that we have politicians appearing on these Sunday chat shows maintaining that fundamental disagreements can be swept away and resolved as ‘minor technical issues’
Sadly, I think your ‘Cassandric’ assessment is justified, Richard. If we really did want to change our relationship with the European Union this was a very stupid way to go about it. The babies are going down the plughole and we stand to be left with just the dirty bathwater.
That isn’t clever.
In the midst of chaos, and quick assessments being made by everybody, I like best this statement from you Richard, that had real substance and lives beyond the moment:
“…. there is no such thing as ‘the settled will of the people’. In democracy, in life, in negotiations, and most certainly in politics things change. And that was not altered by a referendum result.”
Now that is really interesting, and it is constitutionally profound.
Thank you
It’s odd how one person’s quick line resonates with others. And it’s one of then pleasures of writing
A national government is a technocratic solution not a democratic one, and I absolutely oppose the idea .
The only democratic course open is to call a General Election, and for anyone with any sense to vote Labour, for reasons that go beyond the Brexit issue.
To be honest, I think May would be relieved to lose; I have no idea why she carries on, she’s so obviously out of her depth.
I’m happy watching the Tory government in general, and May in particular, looking so incompetent, destructive, and beleaguered, but there comes a time when enough is enough, and the monster needs to be put out of its misery before more damage is brought about by its death throes.
I do not wish to write anything that would prop up this Conservative Government for one second longer than necessary (I say this not because my opinion is important, but to make clear where I stand). Nevertheless it seesm to me that the Labour Party could have brought down this government, and hasn’t. My problem is – I do not know where the Labour Party stands on the critical Brexit issues; that just seems to me a fact.
What Westminster could do that actually serves the British people now, is probably a minority Government operating day and daily on a ‘confidence and supply’ arrangement, with the clear intention of establishing an agreed soultion to the big Brexit questions; single market, customs union, Brexit itself.
Labour’s lack of clarity worries me, greatly
It certainly looks to me as though the Endgame has ended.
But how many times have we been here before? Even I can’t tell that from looking.
The right thing to do is stop BREXIT. It has dragged on long enough to tell us that we really just were not prepared structurally to leave. We were not set up to leave. It’s as simple as that.
Or admit another truth: that the act of leaving requires a longer period of readjustment and it is just going to have to take longer – if at all. Ten years or more. So what?
I see this sort of unrealistic expectation crap from politicians all of the time in the public sector. They want results far too quickly to confer with their voting timetables rather than having to do anything with the messy reality that constitutes trying to get things done.
I fear that your reasonable assessment, Richard, suffers from being just that – being reasonable – and there seems little of that commodity around within the ranks of the present Tory government or party. As Andy points out, the fundamental problem with the ‘election solution’ is that Corbyn’s Labour party are every bit as clueless in relation to Brexit’, which they have done little about but to assist, like a ham-fisted boy scout attending an unwanted delivery. Even if May somehow is allowed – by the 27, the EU parliament, the Daily Fail, the ‘Breximaniacs’, the Irish and/or the DUP etc. – to get to Stage 2, the leaked ‘penalty clause’ is a crystal clear spy-hole into the bleak, rule and price taking future of what will be left of the SOE that South Britain will swiftly become. For Scotland the only rational way forward, and one which now has every likelihood of coming to pass, is independence and EU membership. For the rest… a bungled slow-motion, economic and political act of communal suicide now seems unstoppable.
Heavens: I never aspired to being a reasonable man
I must chastise myself!
Nigel,
I agree with your conclusion that the only rational outcome for Scotland would be Independence and EU membership. I fear, however, that the SNP have become too cautious about the timing of any new independence initiative following the 2014 disappointment. This is understandable, but all momentum will be lost if they hang about until they think it’s safe to call another referendum.
The Scottish Government should heed the example of Estonia: when the Russians pulled out in 1992, they took everything of value and left a bankrupt country with no currency (other than the worthless rouble), no system of law (it was all Soviet law), no constitution or democratic system of governance. The Estonians effectively had to invent a state fit for the 21st century from scratch and within 12 years they had gained membership of the EU (with all the convergence requirements that entails) and NATO, set up their own currency to enable them to adopt the Euro (once they had demonstrated their economic competence – they’ve run a balanced budget for years and only borrow for investment projects), they’ve written a Constitution and developed a system of democratic governance (utilising proportional representation). They devised a code of law specifically aligned to EU requirements and the identified IT as a priority for training and development and now have one of the most advanced integrated national information systems on Earth.
If Estonia can do it with a population of 1.4 million and limited natural resources, Scotland can surely do it too, and much quicker, since we have a mature economy and our laws are already aligned with EU requirements. With Brexit looking to deliver an economic disaster for the UK, it seems that Scotland will have to act in the next 12 to 18 months or be dragged down in a crisis which deepens with every passing day.
The Channel Islands and IOM already have a relationship with the UK and EU without being part of either and deals with the rest of the world.
Perhaps that should be used as a model now that Plan A has collapsed?
Oh come on Mike: no one has a clue what the CI relationship is, which makes it a meaningless precedent, based on a supposed treaty of which no one has ever seen a copy
I found this:
https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2017/1201/924399-brexit-deadline-uk/
In it is this
————————————–
One big suspicion in Dublin (and Brussels) circles is that London is deliberately trying to isolate the Irish issue from the other two.
This is being done, suggest some officials, by putting forward an irresistible offer on the financial settlement and citizens’ rights, thus putting unbearable pressure on Leo Varadkar to go along with a less than robust deal on the border.
EU sources say that won’t succeed.
————————————————–
I suspect that yesterdays little charade was a set-up designed to force the EU into Trade Talks without resolving the Irish Border Issue. Failing that a refusal to go to talks would give May grounds to go for the Flounce-out-no-deal option,
The EU was well prepared, and stymied both parts of their “cunning plan”.
Varadkar also chucked the Border Problem back at May in no uncertain terms. Clearly he was not having any of it.
Heaven knows where she (and perforce we) go from here.
” it is not clear that she would have got this past the Daily Mail”
I am not sure that the Daily Mail’s approval is still required these days. That was one of the beautiful revelations to come out of the last GE. And should push come to shove (which it has now) I am not sure why the hard right’s approval is required either. They don’t represent a majority among their own party. What are they going to do if they don’t get their way? Split? Start a separate party? I doubt it.
Upsetting Johnson’s faction may have its consequences for the PM and they’d normally be avoided but the given the failure you’ve described above that would seem to be the lesser of 2 evils.
That leaves the DUP as the most serious problem I suppose. Its a problem that could be traded away – but at what price? The DUP could also be reminded that a general election right now would end their odd little position of advantage.
So short of an election the 2 options would be the single-purpose, temporary alliance that you have described or a serious game of brinkmanship – not with EU – but with the hard right
and DUP allies. If only the Tories had a leader that was up to that task.
I actually think that this will strengthen May. If the DUP agrees to a special deal for NI, which in effect means it stays in the customs union and single market, the other devolved nations will want the same. Even the Mayor of London is demandig this. As someone on BBC News said today, the only way to resolve this is for the UK as a whole to negotiate to stay in the customs union and single market, perhaps without free movement by paying more money. The hard-brexiteers will have to put up with it. I can’t see them forcing a GE unless they are content to be out of power for a generation. I think that May will see this now as her opportunity to firm-up her leadership. It’s not as if it’s going to get any easier going though, with Brexit and all the other troubles she’s facing. I’m glad now that Labour didn’t win this year because they would have been facing the same Brexit challenges. Let the tories destroy themselves with this. It will be to Labour’s advantage to take over after the deal is done. Better that the GE is called in 2019.
Maybe….
Just May be
[…] http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/12/05/if-yesterday-proved-anything-it-is-that-may-has-to-go-… […]
Ironic you share the same position as Farage…
?
Teflon Don, You will REALLY have to justify that rather strange remark.
You can’t leave that hanging like piece of shit on edge the toilet seat.
Unless that’s what it is ; In which case let’s have it with the next flush.
Come clean, Teflon Don, this will stick if you don’t, Teflon is not for life only until there’s a more expensive version on the shelves.
Are you to become the Don formerly known as Teflon Don?