James Forsyth

There was no triumphalism in Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker’s press conference. Nor was there much detail. May talked about how the joint interpretative instrument meant that the backstop could be challenged and taken to arbitration if the EU was trying to apply ‘the backstop indefinitely’. What May did not mention was how this arbitration mechanism would work. Multiple Cabinet Ministers think, after discussion tonight, that the arbitration does not refer to the ECJ. If that is the case, it will convince a slug of Tory MPs that this arbitration mechanism has teeth. The second aspect is the aspiration to have alternative arrangements in place by the end of December 2020, in other words at the end of the transition.

The government’s efforts to get changes to the backstop have run into a brick wall in Brussels. The EU thinks, with justification, that MPs won’t allow no deal and so feels under no pressure to make significant concessions. As I write in The Sun this morning, one minister fully briefed on the negotiations says ‘we’re at what the hell do we do time’ But without a change to the backstop, Theresa May’s deal is going down to another heavy defeat on Tuesday. That won’t be the end of the matter, though. For the next day, parliament will vote against leaving on March 29th with no deal. Parliament will then almost certainly vote to request an extension to Article 50. At this moment, the UK would be in the EU’s hands.

Government loyalists are grim-faced today. There is no sign of a breakthrough in Brussels and Theresa May’s deal appears to be heading for another defeat on Tuesday. May’s problem is that everyone thinks that they get what they want by voting against her deal. As I say in the magazine this week, lots of ERG types have convinced themselves that they’ll eventually get the Brexit they want, come what may. If the Brexit deal goes down on Tuesday, the Commons is highly likely to compel the Government to request an Article 50 extension. At that point, the UK will be a supplicant: it’ll be up to the EU to decide whether to grant one, how long it will be for and what conditions are attached.

MPs have 10 days to pass Theresa May’s Brexit deal or calamity strikes, I say in The Sun this morning. May’s deal is far from perfect. But what will happen if it doesn’t pass is truly appalling. If May’s deal hasn’t won a Commons vote by March 12th, the Commons will vote on whether to proceed with no deal. The parliamentary arithmetic is such that no deal will almost certainly be defeated. The next day, parliament will then vote on whether to request an extension from the EU. This vote will almost certainly pass. At this point, the United Kingdom would be in the weakest position it has ever been in this negotiation. Whether to grant an extension or not would be up to the EU and would require all 27 member states to agree.

On Tuesday night, as I write in the magazine this week, Theresa May met Leave-voting junior ministers. Her aim was to reassure them that she didn’t want an Article 50 extension and if there was one, it would be short. One of those present then asked her what would happen if Olly Robbins came back saying that a short extension was not negotiable. May was visibly irritated by this comment and shot back, ‘I don’t just do what Olly Robbins tells me to.’ She went on to say that a long extension ‘would be seen as a betrayal by the public’. This exchange is, I think, revealing. First, it shows how frustrated these ministers are. The exchange about Robbins wasn’t the only hostile questioning.

Today’s Cabinet was not a happy affair. I’m told that Liam Fox, Gavin Williamson and Andrea Leadsom all made clear their grave concerns about the Government’s new strategy. There was considerable anger at Amber Rudd, Greg Clark and David Gauke for how they have heaped pressure on May to offer this vote on a delay if the meaningful vote fails on the 12th of March. Liz Truss labelled them ‘kamikaze Cabinet Ministers’ and Andrea Leadsom was, I’m told, audibly furious. Brandon Lewis, Julian Smith, Jeremy Wright, Damian Hinds and James Brokenshire all criticised the way this trio had behaved. Michael Gove asked how May would whip in the vote on whether the UK should go for no deal or seek an extension to Article 50.

Jeremy Corbyn will tell Labour MPs tonight that the party will back a public vote on Brexit. This is the first sign of how The Independent Group has changed the political weather; it is hard to imagine Corbyn accepting this policy without the threat of more defections. Now, we wait to see the details of this policy and whether Labour is going to back a second referendum with Remain on the ballot. But if this is the shift, it is significant. In the 2017 election, Corbyn managed — to my surprise, and with some political skill — to successfully straddle the Leave / Remain divide. This decision will make that more difficult. But there is some talk in Westminster this evening that Labour’s eventual position will be to campaign for its Brexit deal in a referendum.

Brexit is back in the Commons next week. As I write in The Sun this morning, two of the big questions are: what will Eurosceptic Tories accept in terms of changes to the backstop and will the Cooper amendment pass. A document circulating among Tory Eurosceptics sets out what MPs should and shouldn’t regard as a meaningful change to the backstop. It warns that assurances from the EU Council would be ‘worthless’ and that changes to the political declaration would be ‘not legally binding’. It says that an interpretative instrument would have, ‘Some legal value’ but ‘would be a face-saver that would be legally pretty meaningless.

There is a great opportunity in front of the Tories. As I say in the magazine this week, there’s 12 more years in power for the taking for them because of the split in the Labour party. But seizing this opportunity will require the Tories to temper their passions on Brexit. There are two Brexit outcomes that would be electorally disastrous for the Tories: no Brexit and no deal. No Brexit would be catastrophic because the Tories would have failed to deliver on the referendum result. The last two and a bit years would have been for naught and a pro-Brexit party would take huge chunks out of the Tories’ support. No deal wouldn’t be as bad. But it would still send the Tories to defeat at the next election.

Today’s PMQs was a rather surreal occasion. Sitting high up on the opposition benches were the new Independent Group of MPs. But none of them tried to ask a question and both Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May chose to ignore the issue. Instead, we were treated to May repeatedly raising the defection of a Labour councillor in Brighton. I still think that this new group does more damage to Labour than the Tories. I doubt that many Tory voters will be attracted to a party led by the most ardent advocates of a second referendum. But the defection of these three Tory MPs risks creating an impression that the two main parties are as bad as each other.

Sajid Javid’s decision to strip Shamima Begum of her British citizenship leaves me deeply uneasy. I can understand why a Home Secretary charged with keeping the public safe would want to do whatever possible to keep this woman out of the country. But Begum was born in this country, grew up here and was educated here. This, surely, makes her British. As a country, we should want to take charge of investigating her and, if the evidence is there, prosecuting her. After all, she offended against the ties that bind when she headed from this country—a liberal democracy with the rule of law—to go and serve in a so-called caliphate that offended against the values we hold most dear.