• With the deadline of 29 March approaching and the lack of consensus in the UK on a deal, Parliament will vote about 17 hours. Thursday on whether to withdraw the planned date for leaving the country from the European Union. They wrapped it up on Wednesday, adopting a measure opposing any attempt to leave without agreement
• Ms. May remains in power but is seriously compromised. Many conservatives supported an anti-non-bargain proposal against her wishes and several members of her cabinet declined to vote against him, leading to speculation that she had lost control of her party and trial.
Britain is trying to buy time
After months of riots and stories, threats and political inhibitions, Parliament is paralyzed, which means that today's lawmakers will probably try to stop the clock before the deadline of March 29th. Parliament returns on Thursday for a third day of Brexit's vote, and it is widely accepted that MEPs will support a delay search measure.
But if the vote for delay postpones the deadline, it also creates new problems. 19659002] Firstly, any delay will require approval from the other 27 Member States of the European Union. The big question is what kind of delay will be given and what it will achieve
Many experts say the European Union is likely to grant an extension, though how long it will last is less secure. Some Brexit supporters fear that extending the deadline in the future may mean that departure will never happen. But a short delay will cause its own problems.
Elections to the European Parliament are scheduled to begin on May 23, so if the deadline is postponed after that date, Britain will have to elect European deputies even when it tries to finalize its withdrawal from the bloc. Unpleasant.
In addition, Ms. Mae's government needed more than two years to negotiate its agreement with Brussels. If a majority were to appear for a new exit deal, such a proposal would have to be negotiated with Brussels and no one thinks that a new deal can be reached by the end of May if we assume Brussels will even play a ball.
It remains a question: British MPs said they opposed exit without a deal, and the prospect that they might cause catastrophic damage to the economy, chaos in ports, and food and medicine shortages. But if they do not actually vote for a deal, this is still planned to happen. By itself, the extension will only change the payment date.
MEPs will be controlled
Four amendments will be voted after the debate on Thursday, including one who can effectively take control of the Brexit process by the prime minister. Teresa May, allowing Parliament to consider alternatives to its plan, and another call for time to hold a second referendum.
The one who was supposed to watch was proposed by Hillary Ben, an opposition MP and a former minister, with the support of some senior conservatives. He will urge MEPs to put aside next Wednesday to conduct a series of quick-fire voices on various plans, including those that maintain closer ties with the bloc to determine which one has the best chance of luring a parliamentary majority.
The so-called indicative votes will be held the day before Mrs. May attends the European Union leaders summit and – if MPs ask her – to postpone the request for Brexit.
There is another amendment calling for Brexit to extend the process so that Parliament can find a majority for a different approach, but it is less likely to be adopted because it was formally proposed by the opposition Labor Party.
Also in the mix is a change from Sara Wallace. an independent MP who calls for an extension of the second referendum, although no majority is expected.
Another amendment by Labor lawmaker Chris Bryant claims that Ms. May should not be allowed to re-negotiate with the House of Commons.
The aim is to break Ms. May's plans to return with her unpopular plan to Parliament for the third time next week before Parliament has a potential opportunity to consider alternatives.
The choice of amendments is the task of the speaker, John Berkow, who angered Brexit's hard-lines, refusing to schedule a vote that would exclude the possibility of a second referendum. 19659022] European leaders hint of readiness for a long delay
Brexit's delay can only happen with the consent of the European Union and in the last days the opinion of its leaders seems to have hardened. Many people did not see enough room for further negotiations; it seemed that only general elections or a second referendum on Brexit would justify Britain's dedication to more than a few months.
This seems to have changed on Thursday, when European Council President Donald Tusk said European leaders should be "Open for a long-term expansion" of Britain's membership.
Comments will add to Mrs. May's threat to politicians who are pro-brak: If they do not support her agreement in a third vote next week, they are facing a great slowdown on Brexit. move to a deal that maintains close ties to the block or even another referendum.
Simon Cowney, Ireland's Foreign Minister, has proposed that even a 21-month extension be an opportunity to leave the UK by the end of 2020
May struggles to remain head of state
Prime Minister Teresa Mae insisted that the possibility of Brexit without a deal should remain an option, arguing that removing it from its talks rsenal would deny her leverage in her dealings with the European Union.
However, when Parliament convened on Wednesday, she supported the proposal to invite MEPs to state that they were opposed to leaving the European Union on 29 March unless a deal was concluded
Parliament went one step further and votes against leaving the block without a deal under any circumstances, at any time – a sharp reproach of Mrs. May.
It was not for the first time that the members of Mrs. Mey had opposed her, and there was little reason to suspect it would be the last. On Tuesday MEPs categorically rejected 391 votes in favor, 242, the deal that Ms. May negotiated with officials from the European Union, including last minute changes, to persuade rebellious lawmakers who are concerned , that the UK may be subject to some of the block's economic rules indefinitely.
This speaks of Ms. Ma's tricky struggle that she was small. This is less categorical than the first vote on the deal in January, which lost 230 votes, a striking margin in the 650-seat parliament.
British governments rarely lose significant parliamentary votes, but Ms. May has survived several Brexit interruptions – and a stream of cabinet resignations – which usually mean the end of the prime minister's term.
But the whisper of a strategy turns out to be true
Already in February, a television journalist sitting at the hotel bar in Brussels heard the chief British negotiator for Brexit, Olli Robbins, who talked to colleagues. The journalist took what he described as an "extraordinary" confession that was flying in public promises by Prime Minister Teresa May.
The plan, Robbins said, was the government in March to present Brexit's uncompromising supporters with an unpleasant choice: vote for Mrs. May's redesigned deal or take a long delay in the process
The British political class immediately broke out. The foreign minister denied having such a plan. Mrs. Mei insisted that Britain left the European Union on March 29 and that any delay was unthinkable.
Well, fast forward to this day, and Mrs. Mee does exactly as Mr Robbins predicts. Because of all the chaos and humiliation of the past two days, BRREKS deputies feel renewed to accept the deal they have twice rejected.
Trump talks about trade potential
The prospects for a trade agreement between the UK and the United Kingdom Countries after Brexit has been re-routed for two years.
Before President Trump took office, he said the pact could be achieved "very quickly". But in an interview published during his visit to England in July, he announced Prime Minister Teresa May proposals too favorable to the European Union and in November he warned that her plan meant that Britain "may not be able to trade with us".
On Thursday, Mr Trump sounded more optimistic on Twitter.
But he can oppose the wave in parliament.
Mr. Trump is allied with some of Brexit's most zealous supporters without a deal, like like Nigel Farage. And Brexit's supporters signed a trade deal with the United States as one of the awards for a complete stay with the European Union. Legislative decisions over the last few days have made this type of hard Brexit – and this kind of far-reaching commercial deal – far less likely.
Among the curvy balls thrown into Parliament on Wednesday was the claim that the spokesman, John Berkow, is technically entitled to stop the government from returning the withdrawal agreement rejected twice by the large majority, for a third vote.
The legal basis for this proposal is deep in the leadership of the Parliament, the work of a diligent 19th-century clerk named Ersan May. On page 397, the Rules of Procedure state that proposals or amendments that are "essentially the same as a matter solved during a session can not be raised again during the same session."  constitutional annoyance that followed, it turned out that the newest member of the House of Commons cast cold water on this idea in October.
"This rule is not intended to hinder the will of Parliament," said Clerk Sir David Nazler. In other words, Mr Bercow, a consistent defender of the rights of the advocates – would hardly hinder the third ballot if Members of Parliament really wanted an opportunity to vote on it.
"It would be ridiculous for him to apply a rule, literally constructing a rule if he disappoints what Parliament wants," said Jack Simson Caird, a former House of Commons scientist who is a senior research fellow at the Rule of Law Center in Bingham.
The issue was the subject of much discussion on Thursday morning, and most commentators came to the conclusion that Mr Bercow – who opposed Brexit to the referendum and demonstrated his willingness to thwart Ms May's agenda – barely will you give her this hand grenade.
said that we are in strange constitutional times, and Parliament is looking for a way to play, as counting to Brexit goes to the final stage. "This is completely unprecedented," said Mr Caird. "The system really can not cope with what is required of it."