So, the government’s lawyers claim that Brexit can be started without a vote in Parliament, even though the referendum had only advisory status. Why might this be?
You only have to look at the absence of leaders from among those claiming responsibility for the leave vote to see why. Brexit is the ultimate poisoned chalice.
If you don’t trigger it you risk the ire of those who voted for it, more than one in three of us. And would have to betray your own stand. If you do trigger it you’ll piss off those who voted against it, more than one in three of us. And betray your own true stand since most in the House wanted to stay & no-one wants to get the blame for this mess and be in the headlights for two years or more.
So, why not put it to a vote in the House to do the job they were elected to do?
Because 75% or thereabouts of MP’s are ‘Remainers’ and would have to vote either with or against their conscience and with or against their constituents which might not be the same thing. That looks like taking a principled position and those are in short supply just now as these craven men and women jockey for position in the coming months. Besides, no-one wants to be hated by all their mates for putting them in a no-win situation.
Where does that leave us?
Only someone who did not care what people thought of h/her, who wanted power at all costs and could not expect to get it by the usual means, can come forward now and claim the poisoned chalice. An ultimate opportunist. In other words potentially the most dangerous person we could have to take us forward in these difficult circumstances. The best thing you can say for May is that you can’t tell what she’s really thinking: she looks disgusted by everything.
What a comedy of errors. Let’s hope it stays funny. I fear that for the vulnerable it almost certainly will not.