Brexit protesters demonstrate near the House of Parliament in London. Photo / AP
Three days before Britain was supposed to leave the European Union, the country's exit strategy was in disarray (again) as Parliament exerted control over the Bexit process.
MPs scheduled a series of "indicative votes" for tomorrow, designed to assess which way Parliament wants to go and whether there's a Brexit Plan B or C or D that could command a majority.
Critics called it an unprecedented power grab. But government ministers pointed out the votes are non-binding. And Prime Minister Theresa May noted that the proposals that might be debated - a softer Brexit, a second referendum - have nothing to do with the withdrawal treaty on offer, which is narrowly focused on how Britain leaves the trading bloc and not on the future relationship with Europe. That comes later.
Britain is in a state of paralysis - still. Brexiteers are keen to point out that May promised more than 100 times that Britain would be leaving on March 29. But last week that deadline was punted to least April 12.
A new survey suggested that more than 80 percent of Britons think the government has handled the Brexit negotiations badly. It also showed that 55 per cent would now vote to remain in the European Union.
Rumours are swirling that May could announce her departure date in the hopes of winning over sceptical Brexiteers who would prefer another prime minister to lead the next phrase of Brexit talks.
Or she could call a general election. Or May could plough on - as she is wont to do - and continue trying to win support for her twice-defeated Brexit deal.
But May has clearly lost some control over Brexit machinery.
Yesterday, Parliament voted 329 to 302 to wrest control away from government ministers to hold a series of votes on its own proposals.
May's dwindling authority took a further hit when 30 members of her Conservative Party rebelled to vote against the Government, including three ministers who resigned from their posts.
In his resignation letter, Alistair Burt, a Foreign Office minister, said, "Parliament should seek urgently to resolve the situation by considering alternatives freely, without the instruction of party whips, and Government should adopt any feasible outcome as its own in order to progress matters. I did not believe the Government was prepared to do that, so had to vote to ensure this happens."
May has made it clear she doesn't want "indicative votes" - they "overturn the balance of our democratic institutions," she told Parliament.
If Jacinda Ardern was in No 10, imagine how different Brexit would be | Jonathan Powell https://t.co/SYBjR2u9Qd
— The Guardian (@guardian) March 26, 2019
Matt Hancock, Britain's Health Secretary, told the BBC that the Government wouldn't necessarily be bound by the results of the votes, which are non-binding but nonetheless show the will of the Parliament.
"Clearly, it's incumbent on the Government to listen to what the Commons says," Hancock said. "But we can't pre-commit to following whatever they vote for, because they might vote for something that is completely impractical."
It's not yet clear what the "indicative votes" will cover, or even how exactly they will work. Options could include May's deal, a Norway-style relationship with the EU, a second referendum, a Canada-style free trade agreement, a no-deal Brexit or cancelling Brexit altogether.
Will MPs get a yes/no vote on each proposal? Or will they be allowed to rank preferences? Will they be given a "free vote" or be forced to vote along party lines? All of that was still to be determined.
Some analysts say a softer Brexit, or a Norway-style relationship with the EU, could command a majority in Parliament, but that would be unacceptable to parts of May's Conservative Party.
British Social Attitudes Survey author Prof John Curtice: its results, corroborated by polls “is enough to raise doubts about whether, two and half years after the original ballot, leaving the EU necessarily continues to represent the view of a majority of the British public” pic.twitter.com/YrSs3WngMb
— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) March 26, 2019
It's possible, however, that the threat of a so-called soft Brexit, or even no Brexit at all, could help to swing the hardcore Brexiteers around to May's deal, and that, the Government hopes, could lead a kind of domino effect.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, an influential Brexiteer, seemed to suggest he could back May's deal when he tweeted: "The choice seems to be Mrs May's deal or no Brexit."
May needs the support of the Brexiteers in her own Conservative party; the Democratic Unionist Party, the small Northern Irish party that props up her Government; and probably a handful of rebel Labour MPs. Currently, the odds are not in her favour.
The DUP showed no signs of budging. Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Sammy Wilson, the DUP's Brexit spokesman said May's withdrawal agreement "itself means no Brexit" and that a "better strategy" than passing her deal as it stands would be a one-year extension.
But even though May's Brexit deal may be on life-support, it's not dead yet.