Who Would Have Thought Theresa May Would Be Right?

In her much-maligned statement last Wednesday, Theresa May accused the House of Commons of going to great lengths to avoid making a decision. The key irony was, of course, that at that time the main block to the HoC actually being able to make a decision was in fact Theresa May. So last week Parliament siezed control of the process, and used it to have indicative votes yesterday. Finally, a chance for the House of Commons to make that much-needed choice!

Naturally, they then proceeded to vote down every possible way forward. May's deal? Nope. A Norway-like deal (in fact, several close variants of this)? Nope. No deal? Nope. A confirmatory referendum? Nope. Rescind Article 50? Nope.

The only possible deal that has ever managed to get a majority in the House of Commons is the "Malthouse Compromise", which amounts to "May's deal, but with the backstop removed". The problem being that the EU rejected that as a possibility long before it was even mooted, and weren't ever going to budge from that position. In other words, the only thing the HoC would accept is a unicorn.

As far as I can see, the only thing that is both (a) possible and (b) hasn't been voted down is to ask the EU for a longer extension. Not to actually achieve anything, mind you, since every possibility has been eliminated. Basically, we'd be asking them for an extension of our Purgatory.

More seriously, I'm inclined to think that the best way forward would probably to put forward "May's deal, but with a confirmatory referendum". That would certainly meet John Bercow's "different motion" test, and I think it would actually get through the House. I'm also pretty certain that the EU would grant a longer extension for the referendum to actually take place. (We'd have to take part in EU elections. I don't really consider that a calamity!)

The referendum itself would be another mess, of course, but at least it's a manageable one. Ideally, I'd prefer to see a shoot-out between May's deal and Remain, but if we absolutely must then I could live with No Deal being added as a third option (despite it being insane), coupled with preferential voting. What shouldn't be on the ballot is any sort of fantasy other option (be it Norway+, Labour's alternative), or what-have-you - any such option would require further negotiation and may not actually be deliverable. The referendum really must be limited to concrete options that we know can be executed promptly.

Naturally, therefore, that is not what's going to happen. My best guess is that May will bring her deal back, again, get defeated, again, there will be more Indicative Votes on Monday where everything is rejected, again, then two weeks of farce, and then No Deal. Not because anyone wants it, but because that's the legal default.