This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/world/europe/brexit-theresa-may-no-confidence-vote.html

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
After Defeat on Brexit Plan, Theresa May Faces No-Confidence Vote Theresa May Survives Confidence Vote in British Parliament
(about 4 hours later)
LONDON — After suffering the worst parliamentary defeat in modern times over her plans for leaving the European Union, Britain’s prime minister, Theresa May, endured another day of turmoil on Wednesday, when she is to face a vote of no confidence in her battered government. LONDON — Prime Minister Theresa May narrowly survived a vote of no-confidence in Parliament on Wednesday, but the result did little to quell the turmoil gripping the British government over her plan for leaving the European Union, coming a day after she suffered a historic defeat on the blueprint.
On Tuesday Mrs. May lost by a crushing margin, 432 to 202, when Parliament voted on her plan for European Union withdrawal, or Brexit, as the clock ticks toward March 29 when Britain is scheduled to leave. The House of Commons voted 325 to 306 to reject an opposition motion of no confidence. If successful, it almost certainly would have ousted her from power and probably would have forced a general election, adding still more layers of uncertainty in a country fast approaching the March 29 date for leaving the bloc — yet unable to agree on how to do so.
Lawmakers spent much of Wednesday debating whether Mrs. May’s government should continue in power before voting at around 7 p.m. on a motion that could, in theory, lead to a general election. On Tuesday, Parliament dealt Mrs. May a crushing defeat, voting 432 to 202 to reject her painstakingly negotiated agreement with Brussels for leaving the European Union, or Brexit — by far the biggest losing margin for a government on a major issue in modern times.
That is an unlikely outcome, analysts say, because many of those who voted against Mrs. May’s withdrawal plan, including hard-line pro-Brexit rebels in her Conservative Party, and a group of 10 lawmakers from Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, have said they will support the government on Wednesday. Yet, a day later, more than 100 lawmakers from Mrs. May’s own Conservative Party who had opposed her Brexit bill voted to support her government, as did legislators from the Democratic Unionist Party in Northern Ireland who also hate Mrs. May’s plan.
They argue that they want to replace Mrs. May’s deal, not her, and they prefer her badly weakened leadership to the prospect of what Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, called for: an election that could bring Labour to power. The head-snapping sequence of events leaves Mrs. May — the leader of an intractably divided party, with a split cabinet, no parliamentary majority and no clear path forward on Brexit — more politically wounded than ever, yet somehow still standing.
“Last night the government was defeated by 230 votes, the largest defeat in the history of our democracy,” Mr. Corbyn said in beginning the no-confidence debate. “If a government cannot get its legislation through Parliament, it must go to the country for a new mandate, and that must apply when it is on the key issue of the day.” Ordinarily, a prime minister would be expected to resign after suffering a big defeat on a signature bill, but Brexit has rewritten the rules of British politics. And once again, Mrs. May, who has defied many predictions of her political demise, lived to fight another day.
Mrs. May insisted that an election would only do harm. Her ability to soak up political punishment and survive is an acute frustration to Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the opposition Labour Party, who began the no-confidence motion by reminding lawmakers that Tuesday’s vote was “the largest defeat in the history of our democracy,” adding that Mrs. May was leading a “zombie government.”
“It would deepen division when we need unity, it would bring chaos when we need certainty, and it would bring delay when we need to move forward,” she said. Ian Blackford, the leader of the Scottish National Party’s lawmakers at Westminster, accused the prime minister of presiding over a “political collapse,” adding that, in its pursuit of Brexit, the country was “on a path to self-destruction.”
Time and again, the prime minister vowed Wednesday to consult with Parliament and somehow craft a deal to leave the European Union that could win passage. Yet when pressed, she declined repeatedly to offer any specifics about what aspects of the agreement she might be willing — or even able — to change, saying only that Parliament must deliver on the 2016 Brexit referendum. But with the no-confidence motion having failed, attention will turn rapidly to whether Mrs. May has a credible Plan B for Brexit. Time and again, the prime minister vowed Wednesday to somehow forge a deal that could win passage, yet when pressed she declined repeatedly to offer any specifics about what might change.
“This is pure robotic fantasy,” said an exasperated Stewart M. McDonald, a lawmaker from the Scottish National Party. Nonetheless, there is growing speculation that she could seek a postponement of the March 29 deadline for Brexit, and suggestions that she will ultimately have to compromise with Labour lawmakers who want to keep a permanent customs union with the European bloc.
Whatever the result of the vote Wednesday evening, another day of drama and political crisis in London underscores the extent to which Mrs. May’s strategy for leaving the European Union is now in disarray, leaving Britain in a perilous position, just 10 weeks before the country is scheduled to depart the bloc. In a call with business leaders on Tuesday evening, the chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, tried to reassure them that Britain could avoid a disorderly departure without any agreement, and raised the possibility of an extension to the negotiating period under Article 50 of the European Union’s treaty.
Ordinarily, a prime minister would be expected to resign after suffering a big defeat on a signature bill, but Brexit has rewritten the rules of British politics. So analysts say that Mrs. May can expect to survive the no-confidence vote. On Wednesday Mrs. May was careful not to rule out the prospect of extending the negotiating period, but noted that the bloc would agree on such a course only if “it was clear there was a plan that was moving toward an agreed deal.”
After Tuesday’s defeat, Mrs. May’s opponents are focusing on an array of contradictory objectives, demonstrating that more than two and a half years after Britons voted to leave the European Union, their politicians have failed to reach any consensus on how to do so. And while Mrs. May insisted that any Brexit plan must allow Britain to have its own trade policy, something that is impossible inside a customs union, the justice secretary, David Gauke, described that policy as “our starting point” and told Sky News, “I don’t think it’s a question of being boxed in.”
One faction in Parliament advocates a more complete and abrupt break from Europe than the one the prime minister has negotiated with Brussels; another supports Mrs. May’s plan; another wants a softer Brexit than she has proposed; and yet another still hopes for no Brexit at all. On Monday, Mrs. May is required to return to Parliament with proposals on how she intends to proceed, and that will give lawmakers the opportunity to add alternative suggestions — ranging from a customs union or a second referendum to a no-deal departure. Those could be voted on next week, giving some indication of whether there is any sign of a growing consensus among lawmakers.
Last month, the prime minister survived a confidence vote within her own Conservative Party after promising that she would step aside after the Brexit agonies had ended. Assuming that she also survives Wednesday’s confidence vote of the entire House of Commons, she has promised consultations and to reach out to political opponents — though not Mr. Corbyn — before she has to tell lawmakers how she plans to proceed. The risk for Mrs. May is that, if she fails to move fast enough, she could lose control of Brexit to a newly emboldened Parliament.
For now, Mrs. May seems still to hope that she can do this without a fundamental change that would soften her plan and keep closer ties to the European Union, something that would almost certainly provoke resignations from pro-Brexit members of her own cabinet. There are problems looming for Mr. Corbyn too because, now that he has failed in his attempt to secure a general election, he will be under pressure to endorse plans for a second Brexit referendum. A lifelong critic of the European Union, Mr. Corbyn has so far resisted such calls, but on Wednesday 71 Labour lawmakers gave their support to the campaign for a so-called “people’s vote.”
She is unlikely to win support from significant numbers of opposition lawmakers, however, unless she embraces the notion of keeping a permanent customs union with the bloc, a change that would prevent Britain from having an independent trade policy and keep it tied to some European rules. Mrs. May’s one card is that her opponents are focusing on an array of contradictory objectives, demonstrating that more than two and a half years after Britons voted to leave the European Union, their politicians have failed to reach any consensus on how to do so.
And if Mrs. May attempts to plow ahead without any significant adjustments to her plan, an increasingly assertive Parliament is likely to try to wrest control of the process from her government. Many Conservative Party critics want to scrap a key part of Mrs. May’s agreement, the “backstop” proposals to ensure goods flow freely across the Irish border after Brexit. This would keep the whole of the United Kingdom tied to many European rules until agreement can be reached on a detailed trade deal that would remove the need for frontier checks. But the European Union has steadfastly rejected that approach.
Though there is no consensus among lawmakers on a way forward, a very large majority of them want to exclude the possibility of leaving the bloc without a deal, because they fear that could create chaos at British ports, cause shortages of some food and medicines, and plunge Britain into a recession. Some would be happy with a more abrupt break from Europe than the one the prime minister has negotiated with Brussels. By contrast, pro-European opponents want a softer Brexit than she has proposed, keeping close ties to the bloc, while others still hope for no Brexit at all.
If Wednesday’s motion of no confidence fails, as is widely expected, Mr. Corbyn will face increased pressure from within his own ranks to support the idea of holding another referendum that could reverse Brexit. Though there is no agreement among lawmakers on a way forward, a large majority of them want to exclude the possibility of leaving the bloc without a deal. They fear that could create chaos at British ports, cause shortages of some food and medicines and plunge Britain into a recession. That points to moves to request a delay to Brexit.
So, despite the disarray, the defeat on Tuesday probably marks the beginning of the endgame in the Brexit process. European Union officials have reacted with exasperation to the confusion in London, and so far are unwilling to reopen the legally binding part of the deal that Mrs. May negotiated. After her overwhelming defeat on Tuesday they see little point in offering concessions until there is a plan that could get through the British Parliament.
European Union officials have reacted with exasperation to the confusion in London, and so far say they are unwilling to reopen the legally binding part of the deal that Mrs. May negotiated. This includes plans for one of the most contested sections of the agreement, the “backstop” proposals to ensure goods flow freely across the Irish border after Brexit, and that would keep the whole of the United Kingdom tied to many European rules until agreement on a detailed trade deal that would remove the need for frontier checks. That was acknowledged by a former head of the British foreign office, Peter Ricketts, who wrote on Twitter that Mrs. May had “cashed all her chips” with European negotiators, adding that there “won’t be any more help coming now.”
Many analysts and European officials believe that Britain will be forced to ask to postpone the March 29 deadline for withdrawal. President Emmanuel Macron of France predicted on Wednesday that the British would “ask for an extension to negotiate something else.”
President Emmanuel Macron of France predicted on Wednesday that the British will “ask for an extension to negotiate something else.” But first, he said, he believed Mrs. May would try to win new concessions from the European Union, hoping to “come back to vote again,” only to have Brussels refuse to sweeten the deal. European officials have said they could work with Mrs. May on something new, if she is willing to scrub out some of her “red lines” and agree to keeping closer ties to the bloc.
His minister for European affairs, Nathalie Loiseau, told France Inter radio: “It’s not up to us, the French, the Europeans, to tell the Britons what they must do. What we can tell them is ‘Hurry up!’ because March 29 is tomorrow.” The first vice president of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans, quoted the British writer C.S. Lewis to suggest that there might yet be a fresh start for Brexit.
On Wednesday, Brexit supporters argued that the scale of Mrs. May’s defeat showed that she needed to renegotiate the Irish backstop provisions, which they fear could leave the country tied indefinitely to European Union rules. “You can’t go back and change the beginning,” he wrote on Twitter. “But you can start where you are and change the ending.”
“There is just no way that this backstop is going to go through Parliament,” the pro-Brexit Conservative lawmaker Steve Baker told the BBC.
But another senior Conservative lawmaker, Oliver Letwin, told the broadcaster that the government needed to be “much more flexible,” and that Mrs. May needed to scrap the red lines she had laid down as the fundamental principles of her negotiation. “This is not a terrain in which you can have things you can never do,” he said.
A broader rethinking now seems likely if Mrs. May is to have any chance of success, analysts say, and that will probably involve testing the degree of support in Parliament for different options.
“Although May is wary, she may eventually be forced to bow to pressure from ministers and backbenchers to allow members of Parliament to stage ‘indicative votes’ on Brexit options,” Mujtaba Rahman, managing director for Europe at the consulting firm Eurasia Group, wrote in an analysis.
These options may include everything from keeping close ties to the European Union, as Norway has, to having a permanent customs union, to holding a second referendum.