“No deal can’t be taken off the table; it is the table.” You’ll hear
this clever sound bite in Twitter feeds on both sides of the Brexit divide,
but it suffers from the serious defect of being wrong. When we talk about
no deal being the table, we mean that it is the present default position.
No deal is now the ultimate default position. But no deal can be taken off
the table. An alternative ultimate default is that we remain in the EU.

The European court of justice gave the UK an absolute right to revoke the
article 50 notice and remain in the European Union. MPs could adopt
legislation saying that, without an agreed deal by exit day (29 March or
after an extension), our article 50 notice would be automatically revoked.

A bill ruling out no deal was given a clear democratic mandate by tonight’s
vote. This is also in line with Labour party policy. Their 2017
manifesto said, “leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal
for Britain”; and, “We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option.” Unless
Labour supports legislation to take no deal off the table, it will renege
on those promises.

If you are pro-Brexit, it creates a powerful incentive to agree a deal. MPs
have now twice rejected the form of Brexit negotiated by the prime
minister: they have also rejected Labour’s proposed softer Brexit, and
tonight they rejected a third form of Brexit – no deal.

We still don’t know what we want because we have not had a national
conversation about it. The people have not been asked if they want
something sharply different from the European social model -- like the
low-tax, low-public service, deregulated US model.  This is the real debate
when people talk about Brexit.

If MPs revoke, they can later renotify an intention to leave the EU. That
might flow from a national conversation about the economy we want and the
relationship with the EU that implies.

First, the government must be required to make time to pass legislation
taking no deal off the table. Yvette Cooper’s amendment making time for an
extension bill could be a model for that.

• Jolyon Maugham, director of the Good Law Project [*The Guardian* 13.3.19,
edited KH]

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
>
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to