Mission Impossible? The three sections of MPs who May needs to convert to win next week

The House of Commons is back and with it the Brexit melodrama. The Government had to endure a parliamentary ambush last night designed to inconvenience (but not completely obstruct) the work of the Treasury in the event of a pure No Deal outcome. The main action starts today, as ministers try to convince Parliament to accept essentially the same version of the Withdrawal Agreement that they had to abandon last month, in the face of certain defeat, but this time with some additional measures designed to deal with specific issues relating to Northern Ireland’s economic relationship with the UK, a new mechanism to allow MPs more control over whether the Irish backstop or an extension of the transition period would be chosen come mid-2020, and, probably, a formula by which the EU hardens its political commitment to securing a final free trade deal before the end of 2021.
The details of these moves are likely to emerge as the debate in the House unfolds, and some may not become available until very close to the actual vote currently scheduled for next Tuesday. Whether or not Theresa May also offers more clues as to her own departure date is still a mystery.
While it is technically possible for the Government to withdraw the Withdrawal Agreement again, it is hard to envisage how the Prime Minister could survive such a climb-down. If the vote were held and lost by a relatively small number (a margin of 20 or less), then it is conceivable that Downing Street could spend the next few days afterwards scrambling around for more concessions that may allow it to bring the measure back again, for what would surely be one final effort at victory, in the last week of January.
If there is still no endorsement of the Withdrawal Agreement by then, the search will be on for a short-term solution that avoids a disorderly pure hard Brexit on 29 March. That in turn would be, even by the standards of this often gruesome political spectacle, pretty ugly.
Is this Mission Impossible? No. It would be better described as Mission Rather Difficult. While it is a massive political headache for the Government, it causes some serious challenges for the official Opposition as well. Jeremy Corbyn is desperate to avoid being painted into a corner where he has to endorse a second referendum. In many ways, the best outcome for him personally would be for the Withdrawal Agreement to pass very narrowly with almost every Labour MP opposing it on the basis of its content, not a principled desire to avoid leaving the European Union. In such a scenario, a still bitterly divided Conservative Party would retain full ownership of the Brexit question for far longer.
There are three distinct sections of MPs who Mrs May must convert to pull off an ultimate victory.
The DUP
The Democratic Unionist Party exercises an influence on the outcome well in excess of its numbers in the House of Commons. As will be outlined below, it is the insistence of the 10 DUP MPs that the current Withdrawal Agreement is a ‘betrayal’ of the Union that affords political cover for a sizeable number of Conservative MPs to oppose it as well. If the DUP could be convinced to switch stance on the basis of the changes that Mrs May will attempt to sell to them over the next few days, then that would change the political dynamic. If it remains totally hostile, Mrs May’s chances are very slender.
Why would the DUP want to reconsider its position? Up until now, the ‘D’ has stood for ‘Dogmatic’. It might well not move but it has a set of domestic incentives to at least think about. The party, and especially its leader Arlene Foster, First Minister until the Northern Ireland Assembly was suspended almost two years ago, has been badly damaged by the Renewable Heat Initiative (RHI) scandal, or ‘cash-for-ash’ in the local argot.
This was a programme overseen by Ms Foster when she served as the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment before her elevation to First Minister in 2016. It was designed to encourage a switch to renewable energy, notably wood pellets, but the subsidies were so large that individuals and institutions discovered that they could make money by adopting the new fuel sources and burning excessively. The public inquiry which is looking into the fiasco has heard evidence of DUP ministers, special advisers and associates ignoring official advice to close the whole RHI plan down, then introducing restrictions to it which were so well signaled in advance that more millions of pounds were lost as businesses and consumers went on one last bonfire of cash and then, most damningly, appearing to attempt to cover up their involvement. This does not look good.
Added to which, the DUP’s opposition to Mrs May’s deal is not popular with its core constituencies, including the agricultural sector and business. Furthermore, there are local council elections on 2 May in which every single council seat in the Province is contested. As matters stand, the DUP is at a risk of losses to both the Ulster Unionist Party and the non-sectarian Alliance Party (both of whom backed Remain in the 2016 referendum). Wiser heads within the DUP at Westminster may conclude that they are better off reaching a settlement with the Prime Minister that they can hail as a big DUP victory rather than continuing their dispute with her. What is unclear is how many wise heads exist.
The ERG
The ERG (European Research Group) of Conservative MPs is, in this context, a shorthand for those Conservative MPs who favoured Leave in 2016 and dislike the Withdrawal Agreement. They are not a single bloc.
There are three broad sub-divisions within them. The most hardline sincerely favour a No Deal exit on 29 March, even if that means moving straight to the WTO rulebook. There are not more than 15 MPs in this camp.
A larger number want to avoid No Deal (or defer it) but do not care for the backstop element of the Agreement before Parliament. If the DUP moves, they could shift as well. Another camp are less motivated by the technicalities of the Agreement than the fear that if the present Prime Minister remains in place, advised by the same senior officials as of today, then the UK will aspire to acquire a Free Trade Agreement with the EU that bound it close to the single market (and possibly the customs union) rather than something more akin to the EU-Canada pact. If the DUP could be turned and Mrs May stated explicitly that she would stand down within months, then this final camp could also be nudged in the ‘Aye’ lobby.
That would then leave the 15 ultra-Brexit MPs with the awkward choice of finding themselves voting with Mr Corbyn or pulling back. There would be a few rebels even in these circumstances. That number could be whittled down.
The ‘Remain’ Conservatives
That leaves the last contingent. These are MPs whose distaste for the Withdrawal Agreement is less about its fine print than that the UK is departing the EU at all. Although the numbers here are small, once again there are sub-sectors. A few, very few - namely Ken Clarke and Anna Soubry - have been adamant throughout in their view that the UK should stay in and that the referendum should never have been held.
Another collection, mostly younger ex-ministers (such as Justine Greening and Jo Johnson), voted for holding the first referendum and are now in favour of a second one. Another strand (the likes of Nicky Morgan) have not backed another ballot but have focused on the UK adopting an ‘end state’ akin to that of Norway. Many in this diverse band will end up backing the Prime Minister.
The potential dissidents would do so if allowed the opportunity to vote on a parliamentary amendment calling for a second referendum (which would be defeated) before falling back into line. Even if a handful did not, they could be offset by a few Labour rebels willing to back the Agreement, either out of opposition to EU membership or because they are so detached from their own party leadership.
So, there is a (complex) route to a win for the Withdrawal Agreement. It largely depends on the DUP.
Tim Hames
Director General, BVCA