The PM has brought back her flawed Withdrawal Agreement on Friday 29^th March for a “meaningless vote” rather than meaningful vote 3 this week.

On 27^th March, the PM played one of her last cards at the Tory backbench 1922 Committee to try and get her deal passed. She promised to resign if the extreme Brexiters in her party voted for her deal. So hapless and without authority is she however, that even this drastic tactic appears to have failed. Half the anarcho-brexiters in the ERG still pledged to vote against her deal. The DUP were unmoved despite her desperate pleas to switch votes and announced they would still vote against it and of the senior extreme Brexiters, only the charlatan, self-interested careerists like Boris Johnson switched on the understanding that, with her out of the way, it would give them another chance at being PM.

Meanwhile, the Speaker hardened his ruling about the circumstances in which he will allow the MV3 to be discussed by the House. He had previously insisted that the same motion cannot simply be brought back as the PM attempts to bludgeon and blackmail MPs with the threat of a cliff edge on 12 April into supporting it until she gets her way on the basis of long-established precedent. However, he further said that no “paving motion” or “notwithstanding motion” would be accepted by the table office either.

The Government have tried to get around this ruling by putting forward a motion that separates the Withdrawal Agreement and the political declaration despite the fact that the law is very clear that a “meaningful Vote” under the terms of the EU (Withdrawal) Act must relate to both.

In opening the debate, the Attorney general accepted that this does not meet the terms of the legislation and accepted that it could not be described as a “Meaningful Vote” under that legislation but proceeded to say that this “meaningless vote” if passed, will be taken as a reason to introduce the EU Withdrawal Bill necessary to implement the agreement, as if it had been the meaningful vote! He then hinted very broadly that the legislation would be used to remove the provision in the Withdrawal Act requiring a meaningful vote!

This sleight of hand is probably unlawful. It is certainly disreputable. The appalling PM is now openly touting No deal as the alternative to her deal – the same strategy she has had all along, which has been repeatedly strongly defeated. If she succeeds it will be the blindest of blind brexits as she decouples the future relationship from the agreement just as she disappears in favour of a hardline Tory Brexiter taking over as PM and turning over the political declaration.

I voted against this.

The PM’s appalling deal was defeated again by 58 votes. Despite this, she seemed to say that she will continue trying to pass her deal before the hard deadline now of 12th April. Her behaviour in not accepting defeat and seeking a better way forward is quite simply appalling. She should now seek a long extension to enable the Country completely to rethink this disaster and find a way forward that avoids the appalling prospect of No Deal.

In addition to this drama, the House of Commons itself seized some time (usually controlled by the Government) to begin to discuss a way forward that might command more respect than the PMs deal.

Perhaps predictably, given how divided opinion is, MPs voted against each proposition that was put but this is just the start of a two-day process. It was striking that the indication of a softer Brexit (a customs union – the Clarke motion (J)) and the People’s vote motion (the Beckett/Kyle/Wilson motion (M)) both got more votes than the PMs deal did in MV2 and many more than MV1. More indicative votes will be held today with the hope of breaking the parliamentary stalemate.