How did Theresa May remain PM after her Brexit-deal was rejected?












30















As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal (source):




She [May] said there was a "big job" ahead to unite the party and the country following the referendum, to "negotiate the best possible deal as we leave the EU" and to "make Britain work for everyone".



She added: "I am the only candidate capable of delivering these three things as prime minister[...]"




She worked for two years on a deal that the Parliament eventually rejected, so she failed her main(?) task. Yet next day the very same Parliament gave her confidence that she should continue governing (and achieve a Brexit-deal). How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?










share|improve this question









New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 12





    "So she failed her main(?) task." You're right to put the question mark in. Her main task is being the Prime Minister, Brexit gets a lot of headlines but it's by no means her main responsibility.

    – JeffUK
    13 hours ago











  • @JeffUK In the source I quoted she seemed to outline her job. I guess she did unite her party (at least for the no confidence vote), but I as far as I understand, she did not unite the country, the UK seems to be quite divided. "make Britain work for everyone" sounds really vague, I don't know how she stands with it. Her deal was rejected. So at most she achieved half of what she set out to do.

    – user2414208
    13 hours ago






  • 2





    My impression is that the PM sees this is a stumbling block, so her work is not yet complete. So, she carries on.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago











  • Nobody wants the job. Including Corbyn. Nobody can deliver Brexit.

    – Richard
    3 hours ago
















30















As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal (source):




She [May] said there was a "big job" ahead to unite the party and the country following the referendum, to "negotiate the best possible deal as we leave the EU" and to "make Britain work for everyone".



She added: "I am the only candidate capable of delivering these three things as prime minister[...]"




She worked for two years on a deal that the Parliament eventually rejected, so she failed her main(?) task. Yet next day the very same Parliament gave her confidence that she should continue governing (and achieve a Brexit-deal). How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?










share|improve this question









New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 12





    "So she failed her main(?) task." You're right to put the question mark in. Her main task is being the Prime Minister, Brexit gets a lot of headlines but it's by no means her main responsibility.

    – JeffUK
    13 hours ago











  • @JeffUK In the source I quoted she seemed to outline her job. I guess she did unite her party (at least for the no confidence vote), but I as far as I understand, she did not unite the country, the UK seems to be quite divided. "make Britain work for everyone" sounds really vague, I don't know how she stands with it. Her deal was rejected. So at most she achieved half of what she set out to do.

    – user2414208
    13 hours ago






  • 2





    My impression is that the PM sees this is a stumbling block, so her work is not yet complete. So, she carries on.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago











  • Nobody wants the job. Including Corbyn. Nobody can deliver Brexit.

    – Richard
    3 hours ago














30












30








30


1






As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal (source):




She [May] said there was a "big job" ahead to unite the party and the country following the referendum, to "negotiate the best possible deal as we leave the EU" and to "make Britain work for everyone".



She added: "I am the only candidate capable of delivering these three things as prime minister[...]"




She worked for two years on a deal that the Parliament eventually rejected, so she failed her main(?) task. Yet next day the very same Parliament gave her confidence that she should continue governing (and achieve a Brexit-deal). How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?










share|improve this question









New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal (source):




She [May] said there was a "big job" ahead to unite the party and the country following the referendum, to "negotiate the best possible deal as we leave the EU" and to "make Britain work for everyone".



She added: "I am the only candidate capable of delivering these three things as prime minister[...]"




She worked for two years on a deal that the Parliament eventually rejected, so she failed her main(?) task. Yet next day the very same Parliament gave her confidence that she should continue governing (and achieve a Brexit-deal). How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?







united-kingdom brexit parliament theresa-may






share|improve this question









New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 13 hours ago









Machavity

15.6k44578




15.6k44578






New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 15 hours ago









user2414208user2414208

15123




15123




New contributor




user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






user2414208 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 12





    "So she failed her main(?) task." You're right to put the question mark in. Her main task is being the Prime Minister, Brexit gets a lot of headlines but it's by no means her main responsibility.

    – JeffUK
    13 hours ago











  • @JeffUK In the source I quoted she seemed to outline her job. I guess she did unite her party (at least for the no confidence vote), but I as far as I understand, she did not unite the country, the UK seems to be quite divided. "make Britain work for everyone" sounds really vague, I don't know how she stands with it. Her deal was rejected. So at most she achieved half of what she set out to do.

    – user2414208
    13 hours ago






  • 2





    My impression is that the PM sees this is a stumbling block, so her work is not yet complete. So, she carries on.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago











  • Nobody wants the job. Including Corbyn. Nobody can deliver Brexit.

    – Richard
    3 hours ago














  • 12





    "So she failed her main(?) task." You're right to put the question mark in. Her main task is being the Prime Minister, Brexit gets a lot of headlines but it's by no means her main responsibility.

    – JeffUK
    13 hours ago











  • @JeffUK In the source I quoted she seemed to outline her job. I guess she did unite her party (at least for the no confidence vote), but I as far as I understand, she did not unite the country, the UK seems to be quite divided. "make Britain work for everyone" sounds really vague, I don't know how she stands with it. Her deal was rejected. So at most she achieved half of what she set out to do.

    – user2414208
    13 hours ago






  • 2





    My impression is that the PM sees this is a stumbling block, so her work is not yet complete. So, she carries on.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago











  • Nobody wants the job. Including Corbyn. Nobody can deliver Brexit.

    – Richard
    3 hours ago








12




12





"So she failed her main(?) task." You're right to put the question mark in. Her main task is being the Prime Minister, Brexit gets a lot of headlines but it's by no means her main responsibility.

– JeffUK
13 hours ago





"So she failed her main(?) task." You're right to put the question mark in. Her main task is being the Prime Minister, Brexit gets a lot of headlines but it's by no means her main responsibility.

– JeffUK
13 hours ago













@JeffUK In the source I quoted she seemed to outline her job. I guess she did unite her party (at least for the no confidence vote), but I as far as I understand, she did not unite the country, the UK seems to be quite divided. "make Britain work for everyone" sounds really vague, I don't know how she stands with it. Her deal was rejected. So at most she achieved half of what she set out to do.

– user2414208
13 hours ago





@JeffUK In the source I quoted she seemed to outline her job. I guess she did unite her party (at least for the no confidence vote), but I as far as I understand, she did not unite the country, the UK seems to be quite divided. "make Britain work for everyone" sounds really vague, I don't know how she stands with it. Her deal was rejected. So at most she achieved half of what she set out to do.

– user2414208
13 hours ago




2




2





My impression is that the PM sees this is a stumbling block, so her work is not yet complete. So, she carries on.

– Steve Melnikoff
13 hours ago





My impression is that the PM sees this is a stumbling block, so her work is not yet complete. So, she carries on.

– Steve Melnikoff
13 hours ago













Nobody wants the job. Including Corbyn. Nobody can deliver Brexit.

– Richard
3 hours ago





Nobody wants the job. Including Corbyn. Nobody can deliver Brexit.

– Richard
3 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















30














That is because there is a likelihood that the opposition party will gain power should the government be defeated in the confidence vote.



According to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the government has 14 days to try to form a new government or an early election will have to be called. The new government formed will also be subjected to a confidence vote.




The Act specifies that early elections can be held only:



[ ... ]



if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.






The Conservative Party is currently in power on a "confidence and supply" arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party.



It would be difficult for the Conservative Party to find another party to form a "confidence and supply" arrangement. After the 2017 general elections, the Liberal Democrats expressed skepticism on forming a government with the Conservative Party, the Scottish National Party is opposed to the Conservative Party while the Sinn Féin has an abstentionist policy. These are the three parties with enough seats to prop up the government.




After the damage inflicted on the Liberal Democrats by their coalition deal with the Conservatives in 2010-15, the centrist party ruled out any reprise. There was also no chance of a Conservative deal with the Scottish National Party (SNP), which won 35 seats but which is resolutely opposed to the Tories on both constitutional and economic questions. It appears that no one has even contemplated a grand coalition between Labour and the Conservatives, an arrangement that works in Germany but which is alien to the UK other than in wartime.



Source: The Conservation: Can a minority Conservative government survive? Let’s look at the maths






It's also worth noting that it is rare for a party's own MPs to vote against their government in a confidence motion.



Most governments are defeated after the "confidence and supply" party (in the current case, the DUP) votes against it. However, the DUP is opposed to a Corbyn government so they continue to prop up the incumbent Conservative Party government.



Not surprisingly, MPs voted entirely along party lines on the confidence motion:



Image



If no new government could be formed, an early election must be held in which the Labour Party is currently in good shape to win.



As such, either way, the opposition Labour Party will likely gain power should the incumbent Conservative Party be defeated in the confidence vote.






share|improve this answer





















  • 6





    Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    14 hours ago






  • 5





    worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

    – Orangesandlemons
    14 hours ago






  • 2





    @user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 1





    @Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

    – gerrit
    12 hours ago








  • 9





    @gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

    – Caleth
    12 hours ago



















12














Because, I think, no one wants to be on Prime-Minister place during Brexit. Just imagine the number of problems coming - with borders, economy, bank sector especially. For now, responsibility for all Brexit-coming problems will lie on the May's government. On the next elections, May's government will be associated with all Brexit stuff, not the new-elected.



MPs don't like May's Brexit-deal. But they also don't want to take responsibility on consequences, by substituting May's government themselves.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

    – Jared Smith
    13 hours ago






  • 4





    "no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 16





    @SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

    – Orangesandlemons
    13 hours ago






  • 3





    @gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

    – Orangesandlemons
    12 hours ago






  • 2





    @Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

    – Martin Bonner
    11 hours ago



















2















How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?




Exactly this. They trust her to come up with a different deal (not all of them expect the same changes though, some may even hope for a no-deal Brexit). And why not? It's their decision. Many criticize only a single part (the backstop). There is still some time.



At some point this might become somewhat ridiculous. If no new idea with a majority in Parliament and consent of the EU emerges, they will either have to accept her deal or reject her and do something else like a General Election, another referendum or a no-deal Brexit.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

    – Jontia
    9 hours ago











  • @Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago



















2















As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal




No, she was elected leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to lead the Conservatives (and consequently the country). Making a Brexit deal is surely the most important part of those jobs at the moment so it is still somewhat surprising that she is still in them. However, your premise suggests a direct connection between the Brexit deal and her election, which simply does not exist.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});






user2414208 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38104%2fhow-did-theresa-may-remain-pm-after-her-brexit-deal-was-rejected%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









30














That is because there is a likelihood that the opposition party will gain power should the government be defeated in the confidence vote.



According to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the government has 14 days to try to form a new government or an early election will have to be called. The new government formed will also be subjected to a confidence vote.




The Act specifies that early elections can be held only:



[ ... ]



if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.






The Conservative Party is currently in power on a "confidence and supply" arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party.



It would be difficult for the Conservative Party to find another party to form a "confidence and supply" arrangement. After the 2017 general elections, the Liberal Democrats expressed skepticism on forming a government with the Conservative Party, the Scottish National Party is opposed to the Conservative Party while the Sinn Féin has an abstentionist policy. These are the three parties with enough seats to prop up the government.




After the damage inflicted on the Liberal Democrats by their coalition deal with the Conservatives in 2010-15, the centrist party ruled out any reprise. There was also no chance of a Conservative deal with the Scottish National Party (SNP), which won 35 seats but which is resolutely opposed to the Tories on both constitutional and economic questions. It appears that no one has even contemplated a grand coalition between Labour and the Conservatives, an arrangement that works in Germany but which is alien to the UK other than in wartime.



Source: The Conservation: Can a minority Conservative government survive? Let’s look at the maths






It's also worth noting that it is rare for a party's own MPs to vote against their government in a confidence motion.



Most governments are defeated after the "confidence and supply" party (in the current case, the DUP) votes against it. However, the DUP is opposed to a Corbyn government so they continue to prop up the incumbent Conservative Party government.



Not surprisingly, MPs voted entirely along party lines on the confidence motion:



Image



If no new government could be formed, an early election must be held in which the Labour Party is currently in good shape to win.



As such, either way, the opposition Labour Party will likely gain power should the incumbent Conservative Party be defeated in the confidence vote.






share|improve this answer





















  • 6





    Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    14 hours ago






  • 5





    worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

    – Orangesandlemons
    14 hours ago






  • 2





    @user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 1





    @Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

    – gerrit
    12 hours ago








  • 9





    @gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

    – Caleth
    12 hours ago
















30














That is because there is a likelihood that the opposition party will gain power should the government be defeated in the confidence vote.



According to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the government has 14 days to try to form a new government or an early election will have to be called. The new government formed will also be subjected to a confidence vote.




The Act specifies that early elections can be held only:



[ ... ]



if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.






The Conservative Party is currently in power on a "confidence and supply" arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party.



It would be difficult for the Conservative Party to find another party to form a "confidence and supply" arrangement. After the 2017 general elections, the Liberal Democrats expressed skepticism on forming a government with the Conservative Party, the Scottish National Party is opposed to the Conservative Party while the Sinn Féin has an abstentionist policy. These are the three parties with enough seats to prop up the government.




After the damage inflicted on the Liberal Democrats by their coalition deal with the Conservatives in 2010-15, the centrist party ruled out any reprise. There was also no chance of a Conservative deal with the Scottish National Party (SNP), which won 35 seats but which is resolutely opposed to the Tories on both constitutional and economic questions. It appears that no one has even contemplated a grand coalition between Labour and the Conservatives, an arrangement that works in Germany but which is alien to the UK other than in wartime.



Source: The Conservation: Can a minority Conservative government survive? Let’s look at the maths






It's also worth noting that it is rare for a party's own MPs to vote against their government in a confidence motion.



Most governments are defeated after the "confidence and supply" party (in the current case, the DUP) votes against it. However, the DUP is opposed to a Corbyn government so they continue to prop up the incumbent Conservative Party government.



Not surprisingly, MPs voted entirely along party lines on the confidence motion:



Image



If no new government could be formed, an early election must be held in which the Labour Party is currently in good shape to win.



As such, either way, the opposition Labour Party will likely gain power should the incumbent Conservative Party be defeated in the confidence vote.






share|improve this answer





















  • 6





    Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    14 hours ago






  • 5





    worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

    – Orangesandlemons
    14 hours ago






  • 2





    @user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 1





    @Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

    – gerrit
    12 hours ago








  • 9





    @gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

    – Caleth
    12 hours ago














30












30








30







That is because there is a likelihood that the opposition party will gain power should the government be defeated in the confidence vote.



According to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the government has 14 days to try to form a new government or an early election will have to be called. The new government formed will also be subjected to a confidence vote.




The Act specifies that early elections can be held only:



[ ... ]



if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.






The Conservative Party is currently in power on a "confidence and supply" arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party.



It would be difficult for the Conservative Party to find another party to form a "confidence and supply" arrangement. After the 2017 general elections, the Liberal Democrats expressed skepticism on forming a government with the Conservative Party, the Scottish National Party is opposed to the Conservative Party while the Sinn Féin has an abstentionist policy. These are the three parties with enough seats to prop up the government.




After the damage inflicted on the Liberal Democrats by their coalition deal with the Conservatives in 2010-15, the centrist party ruled out any reprise. There was also no chance of a Conservative deal with the Scottish National Party (SNP), which won 35 seats but which is resolutely opposed to the Tories on both constitutional and economic questions. It appears that no one has even contemplated a grand coalition between Labour and the Conservatives, an arrangement that works in Germany but which is alien to the UK other than in wartime.



Source: The Conservation: Can a minority Conservative government survive? Let’s look at the maths






It's also worth noting that it is rare for a party's own MPs to vote against their government in a confidence motion.



Most governments are defeated after the "confidence and supply" party (in the current case, the DUP) votes against it. However, the DUP is opposed to a Corbyn government so they continue to prop up the incumbent Conservative Party government.



Not surprisingly, MPs voted entirely along party lines on the confidence motion:



Image



If no new government could be formed, an early election must be held in which the Labour Party is currently in good shape to win.



As such, either way, the opposition Labour Party will likely gain power should the incumbent Conservative Party be defeated in the confidence vote.






share|improve this answer















That is because there is a likelihood that the opposition party will gain power should the government be defeated in the confidence vote.



According to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the government has 14 days to try to form a new government or an early election will have to be called. The new government formed will also be subjected to a confidence vote.




The Act specifies that early elections can be held only:



[ ... ]



if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.






The Conservative Party is currently in power on a "confidence and supply" arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party.



It would be difficult for the Conservative Party to find another party to form a "confidence and supply" arrangement. After the 2017 general elections, the Liberal Democrats expressed skepticism on forming a government with the Conservative Party, the Scottish National Party is opposed to the Conservative Party while the Sinn Féin has an abstentionist policy. These are the three parties with enough seats to prop up the government.




After the damage inflicted on the Liberal Democrats by their coalition deal with the Conservatives in 2010-15, the centrist party ruled out any reprise. There was also no chance of a Conservative deal with the Scottish National Party (SNP), which won 35 seats but which is resolutely opposed to the Tories on both constitutional and economic questions. It appears that no one has even contemplated a grand coalition between Labour and the Conservatives, an arrangement that works in Germany but which is alien to the UK other than in wartime.



Source: The Conservation: Can a minority Conservative government survive? Let’s look at the maths






It's also worth noting that it is rare for a party's own MPs to vote against their government in a confidence motion.



Most governments are defeated after the "confidence and supply" party (in the current case, the DUP) votes against it. However, the DUP is opposed to a Corbyn government so they continue to prop up the incumbent Conservative Party government.



Not surprisingly, MPs voted entirely along party lines on the confidence motion:



Image



If no new government could be formed, an early election must be held in which the Labour Party is currently in good shape to win.



As such, either way, the opposition Labour Party will likely gain power should the incumbent Conservative Party be defeated in the confidence vote.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 14 hours ago

























answered 14 hours ago









PandaPanda

29.3k7103159




29.3k7103159








  • 6





    Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    14 hours ago






  • 5





    worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

    – Orangesandlemons
    14 hours ago






  • 2





    @user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 1





    @Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

    – gerrit
    12 hours ago








  • 9





    @gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

    – Caleth
    12 hours ago














  • 6





    Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    14 hours ago






  • 5





    worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

    – Orangesandlemons
    14 hours ago






  • 2





    @user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 1





    @Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

    – gerrit
    12 hours ago








  • 9





    @gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

    – Caleth
    12 hours ago








6




6





Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

– Steve Melnikoff
14 hours ago





Great answer. Besides the fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister, a factor that is rarely brought up is what might happen to a Conservative MP who votes against their own party (or abstains). It can be speculated that they would be expelled from the party, which besides any personal and professional turmoil that would cause, would make it hard for them to be re-elected at the next election, as they would have to stand as an independent, or possibly for another party.

– Steve Melnikoff
14 hours ago




5




5





worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

– Orangesandlemons
14 hours ago





worth pointing out that if Corbyn had thought he'd win the motion he probably wouldn't have tabled it...

– Orangesandlemons
14 hours ago




2




2





@user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

– Steve Melnikoff
13 hours ago





@user2414208: if a majority of the voters in an MP's constituency want the current government to remain in power (or failing that, don't want a Labour government), then voting to achieve that - and giving voters this reason - is a sensible course of action. Obviously it keeps the MP in power too (insofar as individual MPs have much power), but this can be painted as being about the bigger picture.

– Steve Melnikoff
13 hours ago




1




1





@Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

– gerrit
12 hours ago







@Orangesandlemons That makes no sense whatsoever. Clearly, it is strongly in Corbyns and Labours interest to carry out its conference pledge and do whatever it can to get an early general election.

– gerrit
12 hours ago






9




9





@gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

– Caleth
12 hours ago





@gerrit Corbyn would be a fool to want to become PM right now. He would much prefer to be PM in April, and be able to blame absolutely anything on "the Tory Brexit"

– Caleth
12 hours ago











12














Because, I think, no one wants to be on Prime-Minister place during Brexit. Just imagine the number of problems coming - with borders, economy, bank sector especially. For now, responsibility for all Brexit-coming problems will lie on the May's government. On the next elections, May's government will be associated with all Brexit stuff, not the new-elected.



MPs don't like May's Brexit-deal. But they also don't want to take responsibility on consequences, by substituting May's government themselves.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

    – Jared Smith
    13 hours ago






  • 4





    "no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 16





    @SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

    – Orangesandlemons
    13 hours ago






  • 3





    @gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

    – Orangesandlemons
    12 hours ago






  • 2





    @Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

    – Martin Bonner
    11 hours ago
















12














Because, I think, no one wants to be on Prime-Minister place during Brexit. Just imagine the number of problems coming - with borders, economy, bank sector especially. For now, responsibility for all Brexit-coming problems will lie on the May's government. On the next elections, May's government will be associated with all Brexit stuff, not the new-elected.



MPs don't like May's Brexit-deal. But they also don't want to take responsibility on consequences, by substituting May's government themselves.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

    – Jared Smith
    13 hours ago






  • 4





    "no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 16





    @SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

    – Orangesandlemons
    13 hours ago






  • 3





    @gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

    – Orangesandlemons
    12 hours ago






  • 2





    @Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

    – Martin Bonner
    11 hours ago














12












12








12







Because, I think, no one wants to be on Prime-Minister place during Brexit. Just imagine the number of problems coming - with borders, economy, bank sector especially. For now, responsibility for all Brexit-coming problems will lie on the May's government. On the next elections, May's government will be associated with all Brexit stuff, not the new-elected.



MPs don't like May's Brexit-deal. But they also don't want to take responsibility on consequences, by substituting May's government themselves.






share|improve this answer















Because, I think, no one wants to be on Prime-Minister place during Brexit. Just imagine the number of problems coming - with borders, economy, bank sector especially. For now, responsibility for all Brexit-coming problems will lie on the May's government. On the next elections, May's government will be associated with all Brexit stuff, not the new-elected.



MPs don't like May's Brexit-deal. But they also don't want to take responsibility on consequences, by substituting May's government themselves.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 9 hours ago









yannis

6,91854368




6,91854368










answered 14 hours ago









user2501323user2501323

1,210425




1,210425








  • 1





    No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

    – Jared Smith
    13 hours ago






  • 4





    "no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 16





    @SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

    – Orangesandlemons
    13 hours ago






  • 3





    @gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

    – Orangesandlemons
    12 hours ago






  • 2





    @Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

    – Martin Bonner
    11 hours ago














  • 1





    No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

    – Jared Smith
    13 hours ago






  • 4





    "no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

    – Steve Melnikoff
    13 hours ago






  • 16





    @SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

    – Orangesandlemons
    13 hours ago






  • 3





    @gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

    – Orangesandlemons
    12 hours ago






  • 2





    @Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

    – Martin Bonner
    11 hours ago








1




1





No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

– Jared Smith
13 hours ago





No one in politics ever wants to be the one to bell the cat.

– Jared Smith
13 hours ago




4




4





"no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

– Steve Melnikoff
13 hours ago





"no one want to be on Prime-Minister": that's not true; Corbyn has said repeatedly that he wants the job.

– Steve Melnikoff
13 hours ago




16




16





@SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

– Orangesandlemons
13 hours ago





@SteveMelnikoff yeah, he says that. What he really wants is to be PM after everything has gone haywire, so he can say 'not on my watch'. Which, to be fair, is fairly sensible.

– Orangesandlemons
13 hours ago




3




3





@gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

– Orangesandlemons
12 hours ago





@gerrit Sorry, I'm sadly unable to quote JC's internal motivations, but his careful avoidance of calling for a NCM earlier and various ways he's dodged calling it suggest that he's in no hurry to force a GE right now. Which makes sense - if May brexits then all the negatives can be blamed on her.

– Orangesandlemons
12 hours ago




2




2





@Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

– Martin Bonner
11 hours ago





@Orangesandlemons There would have been no point in calling for a NCM earlier. In fact, there was no point in calling for one now (see result), and he might not have bothered if May hadn't said that SNP, LibDems, and Greens could table one instead.

– Martin Bonner
11 hours ago











2















How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?




Exactly this. They trust her to come up with a different deal (not all of them expect the same changes though, some may even hope for a no-deal Brexit). And why not? It's their decision. Many criticize only a single part (the backstop). There is still some time.



At some point this might become somewhat ridiculous. If no new idea with a majority in Parliament and consent of the EU emerges, they will either have to accept her deal or reject her and do something else like a General Election, another referendum or a no-deal Brexit.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

    – Jontia
    9 hours ago











  • @Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago
















2















How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?




Exactly this. They trust her to come up with a different deal (not all of them expect the same changes though, some may even hope for a no-deal Brexit). And why not? It's their decision. Many criticize only a single part (the backstop). There is still some time.



At some point this might become somewhat ridiculous. If no new idea with a majority in Parliament and consent of the EU emerges, they will either have to accept her deal or reject her and do something else like a General Election, another referendum or a no-deal Brexit.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

    – Jontia
    9 hours ago











  • @Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago














2












2








2








How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?




Exactly this. They trust her to come up with a different deal (not all of them expect the same changes though, some may even hope for a no-deal Brexit). And why not? It's their decision. Many criticize only a single part (the backstop). There is still some time.



At some point this might become somewhat ridiculous. If no new idea with a majority in Parliament and consent of the EU emerges, they will either have to accept her deal or reject her and do something else like a General Election, another referendum or a no-deal Brexit.






share|improve this answer














How do MPs explain that on Tuesday they reject her deal, but on Wednesday they trust her to continue to get an acceptable deal (which she failed to do in two years, according to the vote the previous day)?




Exactly this. They trust her to come up with a different deal (not all of them expect the same changes though, some may even hope for a no-deal Brexit). And why not? It's their decision. Many criticize only a single part (the backstop). There is still some time.



At some point this might become somewhat ridiculous. If no new idea with a majority in Parliament and consent of the EU emerges, they will either have to accept her deal or reject her and do something else like a General Election, another referendum or a no-deal Brexit.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 10 hours ago









TrilarionTrilarion

1,887627




1,887627








  • 2





    It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

    – Jontia
    9 hours ago











  • @Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago














  • 2





    It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

    – Jontia
    9 hours ago











  • @Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago








2




2





It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

– Jontia
9 hours ago





It's already ridiculous, it took 2.5 years to get here. The meaningful vote was pushed back a month during which time absolutely nothing changed. The idea that May cancome up with something new at this point seems laughable. She has already ruled out every other option.

– Jontia
9 hours ago













@Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

– Trilarion
5 hours ago





@Jontia Then maybe MPs will eventually see her wisdom and finally agree with her.. or do something else. There is still time to oust her if needed. Problem is that there is no majority in Parliament for anything currently. But there might be a majority for something soon. So far, MPs keep all their options open. Brexit could even still be canceled, at least theoretically.

– Trilarion
5 hours ago











2















As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal




No, she was elected leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to lead the Conservatives (and consequently the country). Making a Brexit deal is surely the most important part of those jobs at the moment so it is still somewhat surprising that she is still in them. However, your premise suggests a direct connection between the Brexit deal and her election, which simply does not exist.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago
















2















As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal




No, she was elected leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to lead the Conservatives (and consequently the country). Making a Brexit deal is surely the most important part of those jobs at the moment so it is still somewhat surprising that she is still in them. However, your premise suggests a direct connection between the Brexit deal and her election, which simply does not exist.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago














2












2








2








As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal




No, she was elected leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to lead the Conservatives (and consequently the country). Making a Brexit deal is surely the most important part of those jobs at the moment so it is still somewhat surprising that she is still in them. However, your premise suggests a direct connection between the Brexit deal and her election, which simply does not exist.






share|improve this answer














As far as I understand, Theresa May was elected to the leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to make a Brexit deal




No, she was elected leader of the Conservatives (and consequently Prime Minister of the UK) to lead the Conservatives (and consequently the country). Making a Brexit deal is surely the most important part of those jobs at the moment so it is still somewhat surprising that she is still in them. However, your premise suggests a direct connection between the Brexit deal and her election, which simply does not exist.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 8 hours ago









David RicherbyDavid Richerby

1,641819




1,641819








  • 1





    Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago














  • 1





    Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

    – Trilarion
    5 hours ago








1




1





Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

– Trilarion
5 hours ago





Funny side note: those who expressed no confidence in her as Tory leader in December, expressed confidence in her as head of government in January.

– Trilarion
5 hours ago










user2414208 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















user2414208 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













user2414208 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












user2414208 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38104%2fhow-did-theresa-may-remain-pm-after-her-brexit-deal-was-rejected%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Histoire des bourses de valeurs

Why is there Russian traffic in my log files?

Rename multiple files to decrement number in file name?