On Tuesday, Theresa May made an unusual choice for the backdrop of her historic announcement regarding the terms of Britain’s departure from the European Union. The prime minister chose not Parliament but rather a lectern at Lancaster House, the setting, astonishingly enough, where Margaret Thatcher, the hero of every Tory right-winger, outlined the largely British notion for a single market back in 1988. Thatcher’s role in the European project ranks pretty high in the extensive annals of conservative amnesia, but it was May’s contempt for the elected representatives of the British people that was most significant. It apparently occurred to almost no one that she should be making her speech to Parliament, whose sovereignty and independence the Brexit supporters claimed to champion during the referendum campaign, rather than to the media and European ambassadors.

That was the insult. The injury came when May suggested that, while Parliament would be allowed to vote on the eventual deal, Britain would still likely leave the E.U. regardless. She would not even agree to involve Parliament in the terms of the Brexit negotiations. It is difficult to imagine the equivalent actions in the United States given the difference in our political systems, but there would surely be uproar, and maybe insurrection, if the president trampled over both houses in a similar manner.

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court may, over the next few days, force the government to allow a debate before the triggering of Article 50, which will start the two-year procedure of leaving the E.U. But, even now, government ministers are drafting a one-line bill that is so microscopic that it will allow for no amendments and little debate. I hate to be an alarmist, but this adds up to something of an executive coup on Parliament. And the worst part of the whole story is that M.P.s are conniving in the rapid process of their own obsolescence. Apart from a few honorable exceptions, they sit gravely watching the ship of state head for the rocks with absolutely nothing to say for themselves—no ideas, not one thought about the huge, avoidable disaster of Brexit, and nothing to observe about the sheer, wasteful inconvenience of it all.

If you think I am exaggerating the seriousness of the situation, just look at what May said in her address at Lancaster House. She will take Britain out of the European single market of 500 million with just a vague hope and a lot of rhetoric about trading all over the globe. The U.K. will no longer be obliged to follow the decisions of the European Court, and Europeans will not have the right to come to Britain. Regarding the U.K.’s continuing trade with Europe, she was even more vague, suggesting that while she didn’t want the U.K. to submit to the regulations of the European customs union, she wanted unfettered access to it—in other words, a new customs agreement. I have more chance of winning the EuroMillions lottery two weeks in a row than May has of making this happen.

Not content with the hard Brexit stance, which, naturally, did not go down well with our European allies (these days, it is easy to forget that they are still allies), May went on to warn them that Britain would not tolerate a punitive outcome to the negotiations. If the E.U. decided to make an example of the U.K., the U.K. would respond by creating a low-tax haven to attract businesses away from Europe. The result of this petulant threat was continent-wide ridicule. And May, who has in her repertoire of facial expressions one or two slightly goofy ones, did not help herself by being photographed in a plaid trouser suit that made her look a little clownish.