When drafting a bill to gain parliamentary permission for the activation of article 50, the government could have chosen to indulge the spirit of the judgment handed down by the supreme court earlier this week. Unsurprisingly, ministers have chosen instead curt adherence to the letter of the law.

The judges told the government it could not notify the European council of the UK’s intention to withdraw from the EU unless parliament gave permission, so permission is being sought in the most peremptory fashion: a few brief sentences, leaving scant aperture for amendment, and a fast-track legislative timetable to get the whole thing out of the way without disrupting Theresa May’s plans to do the deed by the end of March.

The bill contains no hint of ceremony, no symbolic or practical deference to parliamentary sovereignty or scrutiny, although the court ruling arguably invited something of that nature. The proposed act reads instead as a stingy concession yielded reluctantly, under duress, with a very simple political calculation in mind – that MPs will not dare to delay or derail its passage for fear of being seen as stubborn defiers of the national will, as expressed in last year’s referendum.

That calculation is surely well founded. There is not a majority in the Commons to thwart the progress of this bill. The Lords might contain more appetite for obstruction but it is unclear what opportunities they will have to divert the process of such a tightly worded statement of intent.

There will be much parliamentary gnashing of teeth over the time limits imposed for debate, but much of that will be a proxy for the frustration MPs feel that their own judgment on the big Brexit questions has been superseded by a popular vote and Theresa May’s personalised interpretation of what that vote means. In the coming fortnight there will be a parade of tormented ex-remainer MPs, mostly on the Labour benches, unburdening themselves of their dilemmas – the need to respect the will of the people, while fretting that the prime minister is handling things all wrong or refusing to respect the people’s true, constitutionally empowered assembly, namely the House of Commons.

Some may even dare to give voice to their view that the will of the people, as imprecisely conveyed by the 52% leave vote, is mistaken. Liberal Democrats will assert proprietorial political rights over the anxieties of those among the 48% who wish the whole process could be rerun. Scottish Nationalists will complain that the prime minister is wilfully neglecting the nuances of opinion in Scotland. But ultimately the bill will pass, and article 50 will be triggered.

The rest of the EU has made it clear that there can be no serious discussion of the terms of exit before that happens. Meanwhile, there is no evidence of some great national change of heart. May is operating on the presumption that the balance of opinion instead tilts the other way – that a comfortable majority have accepted Brexit, whatever that may mean, and are either baffled or unimpressed by the apparent delay.

This is the essence of today’s scrap of paper. It might as well have been called “a bill to confer on Theresa May the power to just get on with it”. That is the message for the country and, regardless of MP squeamishness, it is a politically potent one.