LISTEN TO ARTICLE 2:55 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Share Tweet Post Email

Photographer: Leon Neal/Getty Images Photographer: Leon Neal/Getty Images

Facing a historic defeat for her Brexit deal in Parliament, British Prime Minister Theresa May has, almost unbelievably, managed to make things worse.

In a speech before the House of Commons on Monday, May postponed a vote on the deal and vowed to reopen talks with the European Union on the most contentious aspect of the whole undertaking, the Irish border. She offered few specifics, little direction, and only the haziest of timelines. To call this the worst of all worlds is only a slight exaggeration.

It had been clear for weeks that May’s deal — hard fought over months of negotiation — was facing a landslide rejection in the House of Commons. And rightly so: It would stunt Britain’s economy, burden its companies, and infringe its sovereignty, offering essentially no benefits and solving no problems. Everyone hated it.

Even so, proceeding with the vote had a certain logic. It would have allowed Parliament to reject the deal, and cleared the way for work to begin on alternatives. The country and its voters would have been offered at least the possibility of a way forward. What they got instead was yet more paralysis.

The European Union’s negotiators have made it clear that they won’t make significant changes to the deal — let alone substantial revisions on the most divisive issue of all. What May is seeking, and the best she can hope for, is a cosmetic tweak, and that will change few if any minds in Parliament. With Brexit bearing down, May has therefore opted for further delay and further uncertainty, all to no purpose. Meanwhile, the chances of a chaotic no-deal exit — always the biggest risk in this hopeless enterprise — continue to rise.



QuicktakeNo-Deal Brexit

Confronted with such an outright rejection of her plan, what should May have done instead? She should have admitted defeat, acknowledging that an agreement acceptable to both the EU and a parliamentary majority cannot be reached. Realistically, the alternatives reduce to a no-deal Brexit or remaining in the EU. In any event, the choice should be put back before the electorate.

Granted, May has repeatedly and unambiguously rejected the idea of a second referendum. Nonetheless, yesterday she ought to have recanted, and if she couldn’t bring herself to do that, she ought to have stepped aside. As things stand, she’s still prime minister, but no longer leading the country.

As the costs and risks of Brexit have become clearer, support for the project has fallen. In a recent YouGov poll, only 38 percent of voters said they still think leaving was a good idea, an all-time low. Offered the choice of May’s deal or remaining in the EU, 46 percent would stay while 35 percent would take the deal. Imposing the deal under these circumstances would not, as May claims, honor the expressed will of Britain’s voters. It would do the opposite.

Undoubtedly, another vote would be messy, divisive and politically fraught. But that will be true of any foreseeable outcome to Brexit, as should by now be clear. With Parliament deadlocked and the government adrift, only a new referendum can legitimize this choice. Let the people decide.

—Editors: Timothy Lavin, Clive Crook.

To contact the senior editor responsible for Bloomberg View’s editorials: David Shipley at davidshipley@bloomberg.net .