Three cheers for the Commons for the way it is conducting the necessary argument on Europe
Progressive commentators and saloon-bar orators are wrong to condemn MPs for finding the national issue hard to settle.
Progressive commentators and saloon-bar orators are wrong to condemn MPs for finding the national issue hard to settle.
Those for included Bebb, Jo Johnson and Merriman. Those against, Collins, Keegan and Prentice.
It favours “a permanent customs union”, “close alignment with the Single Market” and “dynamic alignment on rights and protections”.
Those who voted in favour included Boles, Collins and Morgan. Those against, Atkins, Buckland and Green.
Those for included Baron, Ghani and O’Brien. Those against, Gillan, Halfon and McLoughlin.
Those who voted in favour included Fysh, Pincher and Boris Johnson. Those against, Brady, Heaton-Harris and Walker.
Those for included Eustace, Fallon and Percy. Those against, Dowden, Quin and Skidmore.
Those who voted in favour included two Foreign Office Ministers, Alan Duncan and Mark Field.
Four plans are being mooted. (We propose a fifth: putting him a time machine and returning him to the Monday Club’s Immigration and Repatriation Committee.)
The Leader of the House is as cloth-eared as Jeremy Corbyn when it comes to dealing with her own backbenchers.
They are at least on-brand in refusing to accept the result of the vote on the proposal which has already taken place – which they lost.
Hers or Letwins? That’s what the choice is narrowing down to. From the point of view of trust in politics, how MPs vote will now make little difference – if any.
This week has seen Parliament grab control, and this has serious implications for the practices of responsible government.
41 per agree that Britain should leave to trade on WTO rules on March 29 compared to 28 per cent who disagree.
In other words, May waits for Letwin. Which adds a new dimension to her chicken game. Her message is: “vote for my deal soon – or get his.”