Westminstenders: Are we nearly there yet?

[RedToothBrush]

May went to Strasbourg to improve the WA. She claimed to have won 'legally binding' assurances which mean we can't be trapped in the backstop.

Despite the claim of 'legally binding' it seems that this isn't true. It reduces the risk of being trapped but does not eliminate it.

The whole thing is just political theatre designed to give Brexiteers the opportunity to climb down and support May's deal. Whether that will happen remains to seen.

The right wing press has largely been supportive of May this morning but the ERG were scathing last night which doesn't bode well.

For May to pass the deal she needs the DUP to effectively trigger dominoes of support. If she fails to get that it's highly unlikely it will pass.

In order to pass the deal May needs an extra 116 votes compared to last time. This breaks down to roughly 10 DUP, 65 of the ERG, 4 Independents (Field/Hermon /Hopkins/Austin) and 40 Labour.

The Labour MPs won't go for it unless the numbers look tight and the DUP are on board.

We should get a feel for how things are going as the day goes on. I expect more negative comments on it to be expressed as the day goes on.

We might yet see some amendments and curveball thrown into the mix too. However none of those tabled so far this morning look likely to pass (Labour are yet to table anything)

The Cabinet meets at 9.30am. This will give us an idea of how it's played out there.

At 11.15am Barclay faces the Brexit select committee so some more scrutiny there.

The crucial moment is early afternoon before as May opens the debate on the Meaningful Vote. It is expected there will be an Urgent Question tabled to Cox the Attorney General to assess whether his legal advice that the backstop could be a trap, has changed. This is where thing will come into focus and we will get a good idea of whether the deal will pass or how heavy the defeat will be. How heavy it is, is important.

Word is that Cox said no to the validity of May’s 'legally binding assurances' last night and has been pretty much been sent away to 'think about it with a team of lawyers'. Cox has replied this is "Bollocks". But you do have to wonder if this is what May did in the Home Office with her ridiculous court cases and the A50 case. None of which went well for her in court in the end. However Cox did tell The Mail yesterday he would only change his legal advice if the risk of being trapped was 'eliminated' not merely reduced.

If its going badly a No10 damage limitation exercise will be in full swing by about 4pm.

If The Withdrawal Agreement fails by a small amount May might be able to try again. If it fails by a lot we really are into political chaos. May's position might be untenable if the Cabinet withdraw their support. If May stays that's not necessarily going to stave off even greater crisis.

Theresa May looks likely to go for an extension until 23rd May. The EU have more or less agreed to this. But this might be too short to get an alternative plan on the table. And May would be unlikely to be the person to do this anyway as it requires a huge uturn. The 23rd May date is crucial - if the UK doesn't make contingency plans to take part in European Elections its a cliff edge. A deadline of 23rd May is also too short for another referendum.

The only way we get a 2nd ref is to take the option of a longer extension which requires us to take part in European elections, and this is politically unpalatable to many Tories as it endangers Brexit completely.

This is what ERGers need to weigh up. Are they really committed to no deal. If they are not then the WA is perhaps the only way to stop no deal AND the possibility of no brexit.

However the chances of the legislation for European elections and a long extension getting through the Commons looks extremely unlikely too. But who knows where we will be come the end of April.

Thus if the WA fails then the chances of No Deal sky rocket, even if no deal is blocked by Parliament tomorrow. Unless those same MPs are prepared to vote for EP elections further down the line if need be. This might be the only way to truly block no deal. Has this dawned on Tory moderates? And that's what remain moderates and Labour MPs need to weigh up. I don't think the penny has dropped with many. Yet.

The trouble is that the WA problem is really with hardline ERG Tories not moderates nor Labour anyway.

Voting starts at 7pm.

So he was saying we could have an extension if WA doesn't get through, righto. That's where I was on a loop this morning. So that would be presumably just enough time for the legislation? Is that a good enough reason? (As you say DG I don't see it at all).

Just written to my MP (Labour) . Begged him to support WA as the only way to kill No Deal via statute. I said I voted Remain but that this is the least poisonous way to leave. He'll vote with Corbyn.

One could speculate they are all doing their bit for Anglo-Russian Mafia relations. Allegedly.

Loletta I think it's because a lot of remainer MP's don't think there should be a PV, there isn't much time left so without a long extension not much can shake us out of Brexit, the 'options' for remain side are revoke/PV/extend which waters them down a lot when it comes to numbers to vote it through. They know EU won't offer a long extension, or if they do we won't want to do elections (cost and general faff) plus EU countries will likely veto us extending for a long time.

Nicholas Watt @nicholaswatt
Senior Brexit Tory tells me around 25 Tory MPs will switch to support PM + lots of abstentions. Not nearly enough for PM

Oh Lord. Article 24 of Gatt from Paterson. His propaganda was derided by people who know their onions before. And he comes back with it again.

Adam Payne @adampayne26
ERG MPs are arriving to the 5pm meeting. It’s absolutely packed. Also some cameras in there, which is causing a bit of confusion. “What the bloody hell are they doing there?” one MP said.

So he was saying we could have an extension if WA doesn't get through, righto. That's where I was on a loop this morning. So that would be presumably just enough time for the legislation? Is that a good enough reason?

If the WA passes no need for an extension. If it doesn't, why would an extension help get it through ? All an extension without a clear purpose will do is piss off every non-UK EU member far more than no deal.

Bearing in mind an extension needs all 27 EU members to approve it, that's 27 heads of state that need to explain to 27 nations why the UK gets the kid gloves treatment after calling them all Nazis. Not sure that's going to be the walk in the park some people think it is.

Roland Smith @rolandmcs
Posted without comment.

JRM was saying that we leave by law 29/03 and a motion is not a law, so a motion to not leave without a deal is trumped by the legal status. I think they're banking that the hoc won't be able to force a law to counteract the existing law.

That's what I took from what he's said.

I also think they want no deal. They don't care about actually leaving. If we can't leave and become Singapore on Thames they don't really care if we remain. It's not about being out, it's about being out and being able to cash in.

I thought if WA passed, we did need an extension so that the necessary legislation could also be passed?

Thanks Lonely. Makes a bit more sense now.

That Andrew Lilico is rather deluded, RTB!

still wondering about the Kyle amendment. Does anyone know if this is likely to be resurrected?

Victoria Freeman @make_trouble
Scariest thread I have read in a long time. Easy to dismiss Lilico but I suspect he represents a hefty chunk of Leavers in the HoC

Read ALL the Lilico tweets.

Finished work for the day. Presume the lack of people in the HOC means that they are all huddled in corners wondering what the hell to do.

Anybody want to guess at numbers in tonight's vote? Estimates here seem to reckon May being almost 100 short of getting her deal through. Shall we pass the time while our political system crumbles by taking our own guesses at what the final numbers will be?

Steve Bullock @ guitarmoog
If you were in doubt that this is all not really about leaving the EU, but in fact a handy proxy for a right-wing, populist, deregulating soft-coup, this should alleviate the doubt.

It’s about Brexiters gaining a long-term hold on the political and social system.

I thought the Kyle amendment was being tabled another day as they wanted a 'clean' vote today?

Do we know what amendments are being voted on later?

Lilico's Brexit threads are mad streams of consciousness. There's something peculiar to me about these most rabid of brexiters who aren't even British.

Andrew Lilico @andrewlilco
I suspect that, unless there is a General Election 1st, a new True Leavers Party won't be (politically) ready to declare itself and run by the European Elections. But what on earth wld the Conservative Party platform at those elections be?

Steve Bullock is spot on.

One thing which I've never been clear on: given the sheer bloody divisiveness (sp?) of the referendum and the time since, why does no one seem interested in finding any way of bringing Remainers alongside, however difficult that might be? I mean, what's in it for us? absolutely fuck all. So if you have almost half the country (at least those who voted in the ref) completely disenchanted and even disgusted by what is on offer, where does politics go next?
(sorry, my head hurts now. but the political analysis on these threads is bloody amazing, thank you all)

For light relief, match the politician to the insult.

@susie_dent
"The dictionary has not been kind to those in politics. From centuries past it offers the following:
snollygoster: an unprincipled politician.
throttlebottom: a totally inept one.
catchfart: one that follows the prevailing wind.
virtuecrat: one convinced of their own superiority."