THERESA May's Brexit deal has been defeated for a third time by a margin of 58 votes.
In dramatic scenes in the House of Commons, MPs voted by 344 to 286 against the deal as hundreds of protesters staged a noisy demonstration outside on the day when the UK was due to leave the European Union.
So what happens next?
The result of the crunch vote means that the UK has missed an EU deadline to secure an extension of the Brexit process and leave with a deal on May 22.
MPs are set to have another go at reaching a Brexit compromise in another series of so-called indicative votes votes on Monday and Wednesday next week.
NO DEAL
MAY now has until April 12 to go back to Brussels with new proposals and seek a longer extension to the negotiation process, or see the UK leave without a deal that day.
With a clear majority in the Commons against no-deal, and with MPs once more seizing control of the timetable on Monday, May said that the UK would have to find "an alternative way forward".
This was "almost certain" to involve the UK having to stage elections to the European Parliament in May, she said.
But no deal Brexit is still the default outcome if MPs can't agree anything else and there are no further extensions.
As things stand a no-deal Brexit would happen on 12 April in the absence of any other decisions.
No deal was now regarded as the “most plausible outcome”, Barnier warned on Thursday afternoon.
THE COMMONS BACKS A SOFTER BREXIT
PARLIAMENT voted on Wednesday on eight different strategies, with none winning outright. MPs are expected to take the most popular plans — including a customs union with the EU — and see if they can settle on a new approach in the second round.
Under this scenario, it is still feasible that the withdrawal agreement and political declaration are ratified by parliament within weeks, and the UK leaves the EU by the 22 May.
LEAVE THE EU WITH THE PM'S DEAL
DESPITE the repeated rejection of Brexit deals, Theresa May could bring the deal to Parliament for the fourth time.
European Council president Donald Tusk called an emergency summit of EU leaders in Brussels on April 10 to discuss the implications of the vote.
NEGOTIATE AN ENTIRELY NEW BREXIT DEAL
NEGOTIATING a completely new Brexit deal – perhaps in light of the outcome of indicative votes.
It would require a further delay to Brexit and the UK would have to take part in the European Parliament elections in May.
ANOTHER REFERENDUM OR A GENERAL ELECTION
BOTH of these scenarios would require a lengthy extension beyond elections for the European parliament.
Another referendum could have the same status as the 2016 one, which was legally non-binding and advisory. But some MPs want to hold a binding referendum where the result would automatically take effect – like with the 2011 referendum on changing the voting system for UK general elections.
Jeremy Corbyn called on May to accept defeat and allow a general election. “If the Prime Minister cannot accept that, she must go," he said.
And May – who had promised to step down as Prime Minister if her deal was approved – appeared to hint that this was a possibility, telling MPs: "I fear we are reaching the limits of this process in this House."
She said: "This House has rejected no deal. It has rejected no Brexit.
On Wednesday it rejected all the variations of the deal on the table.
"And today it has rejected approving the Withdrawal Agreement alone and continuing a process on the future.
"This Government will continue to press the case for the orderly Brexit that the result of the referendum demands."
She doesn't have the power to call a General Election but she could ask MPs to vote for an early election under the terms of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act. Two-thirds of all MPs would need to support the move.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel