What happens to Brexit, May and more after the vote?

First of all, I apologise for my brief sabbatical. There was a circle of repetitive Brexit-related news found across all mainstream mediums and having addressed them, I felt it unnecessary to further comment on issues and ideas.

However, the elephant in the room is that Mrs May has lost her 'meaningful vote' by 230 votes, the largest government defeat in history and the message from the Commons to May could not be clearer. Parliament fundamentally rejects the deal presented and no matter the amendments proposed, the deal is flawed and will never be supported by the Commons. Now, this vote is not legally binding but it would be politically suicidal to pursue with such a deal as fellow parliamentarians would argue the executive is acting independent of Parliament and, no doubt, a successful vote of no confidence would follow.

There was talk earlier on Tuesday that May would, if there was a minor loss of her deal, to allows the proposal of amendments and return to the EU and ultimately say, we are so close, just agree on this and we'll be done here. Unfortunately, this was not the case. May lost and lost in a big way. A 230 majority could not state clearer the intention of Parliament and that her deal is dead; to be frank, it was the ultimate humiliation for Mrs May, undoubtedly one of her worst moments in Parliament. But her losing this vote is all good and well but what can actually happen next - as if current uncertainty was bad, we now bring back numerous options such as a second referendum back onto the table.

Vote of No Confidence

Finally, Jeremy Corbyn submitted a vote of no confidence in the government today rather than just the PM herself. I do not, however, believe this will achieve anything; Mrs May has the support of her fellow Conservatives who do not wish to see a General Election, which would be incurred if Mrs May lost the vote. The vote, no doubt will be far closer than the vote last night, and see large numbers of MPs vote against Mrs May's government but I simply do not see the opposition winning this vote. May has her fellow Conservatives and most likely her DUP colleagues as well who continue to support the rhetoric that they will show confidence in Mrs May in such a vote. Fundamentally, I think no one outside of the opposition wants to see a General Election and that will ultimately be the main concern in today's vote of no confidence.

What else is on the table? - a second referendum?

Well, we have heard talk of a second referendum being discussed pretty consistently for the last six months or so but I fail to see the benefits. This idea of a second referendum, I believe, needs to be approached with logic and rational. The notion that a second referendum undermines the principles of democracy are perfectly valid in this scenario. Why have a vote when you've already had a vote on the same topic just two years prior? Fundamentally, it undermines the value of a vote as you get a do-over. This is a highly simplified version of the argument but ultimately, one could say oh you know I voted for Labour in this general election but I don't think I made the right decision, I guarantee that I'll vote for the SNP next time over and essentially basing your political views on previous events rather than current affairs. Finally, it's important to note the demographic of the vote, the older generation were far more likely to vote Leave than Remain whereas the younger generation were far more likely to vote Remain rather than Leave. With the older generation passing away and the younger generation seeing new members joining the electorate daily, if you assume the proportion of voting remains constant, the Leave majority declines by 1,350 daily. January 19th is known as Crossover Day and is the day in which Remain moves into the lead in terms of popular majority. A second referendum will not be fair on the electorate as random factors will have affected the overall polling of the electorate.

Furthermore, what tangible result would you get from a second referendum? If you have a second referendum, the ideal result is that the electorate votes Remain, that way you can rescind Article 50, remain in the EU and go back to living your pre-Brexit lives, but you are preparing for the ideal scenario in which the electorate votes remain. If you think about it, what happens if the electorate votes to Leave again, you will have essentially wasted valuable time to prepare for the withdrawal executing a referendum which confirmed the initial referendum? I mean, really? You cannot go into a referendum with such conditions because it is clear which way the electorate will sway, in fact, it will be largely similar to 2016 again.

Voters can vote to support what we have now, a failing government and botched Brexit negotiations or simply to Remain (Take Back Control). The result is clear but the legitimacy sadly not. A second referendum does not achieve an ounce of good and brings the legitimacy and fundamentals of democracy into direct question.

What else is left on the table? - No Deal Brexit?

I could hypothesise about this till the cows come home but frankly this is a mess. I could easily, and I mean easily, lambaste the government's handling of no deal Brexit preparations - from the handing of contracts to Seaborne Freight to their traffic management trial in Kent - it's been a total shambles. First of all, it should give you no confidence that government is suitably prepared for such a scenario and that it should be avoided at all costs. There is a clause in the Finance Bill that denounces the idea of No Deal Brexit and expresses Parliament's view that No Deal Brexit is off the table but is that all. Mrs May remains consistent with her rhetoric both that it was her deal or no deal and that no deal is better than a bad deal but through the data provided by the Treasury indicate huge economic troubles ahead if a no deal Brexit is pursued. I could continue to explain why a No Deal is bad but I feel that is already widely publicised.

Is a no deal Brexit really still on the table? The Commons would suggest no. The Commons united today for the first time in a very long time against Mrs May's deal and I have no doubt that Parliament would unite again against a no deal Brexit due to the vast support for Yvette Cooper's amendment just last week - signalling Parliament's view against a no deal Brexit scenario. Do I really believe we will have a no deal Brexit from March 29th onwards - I am highly sceptical.

What else is left on the table? - Could we revoke Article 50?

Theoretically yes, although the political turmoil that would cause is inconceivable and benefits nobody. However, the more interesting option is to revoke Article 50 - something determined as being possible by the ECJ late last year - and re-invoke Article 50 to restart the two year process. The practicalities of such a proposal are unclear to me but it would prove a prudent method of securing the economic stability in the short term as a number of changes could take place:
 - We could see a new Tory government created to renegotiate our Withdrawal
 - We could see a new European Parliament with different opinions on Brexit, either beneficial or not

But is it really what we want to see? Another two more years of Brexit negotiations? I recently came across an anagram which I now regularly use. I am B.o.B, Bored of Brexit, and I know numerous individuals who just want Brexit to be resolved so we can refocus media attention and focus onto judicial reform, improvement of the rail network, NHS and education. None of these options really scream plausibility or stand out as being the obvious choice forwards - they all their pros and cons. No one can know what will happen but we will just have to sit here and observe and analyse current affairs as they unfurl. T-71 days to go.

I would also like anyone to challenge my views here. My views aren't necessarily the most logical or rational but they are mine and if anyone has differing views on the possible options, please comment below.  - Until next time.