There's no alternative to Theresa May's deal – we're going to find that out the hard way

Last night, the government experienced the worst defeat since the 1920s, as 432 MPs voted against the EU’s withdrawal agreement. Be in no doubt, this throws the Brexit process in to absolute chaos and makes the bleak prospect of leaving the European Union without a deal a stark and very real one.

An optimist might say that Mrs May’s defeat allows us to press the reset button and try to secure a better Brexit. This will happen either because the thumping defeat will convince EU leaders of the need to open negotiations afresh, or because Parliament will somehow seize control of the negotiation process and succeed where, apparently, this government has so spectacularly failed. So, let’s look at those prospects for a moment.

We can be confident that the EU will not substantively renegotiate anything, even forgetting for a moment that there now is simply not enough time as Britain departs the EU on 29 March. The most obvious reason for the gloomy prospects for renegotiation is the unwillingness of EU leaders to offer anything different. IT’s likely that they genuinely feel that this is the best that a third country, outside of the club, can hope for, not to mention that they were presumably assured by Theresa May herself that this was a deal that met Britain’s needs once we leave – until the eleventh hour it was due to go for a vote in December that she insisted she could win, apparently contrary to all logic (yes I got déjà vu yesterday too).

Next, there is a deeper issue of political culture clash that has been underexplored. I watched several hours of yesterday’s debate, and it was Northern Ireland and the backstop that seemed to be causing a lot of concern, especially for Tories who were planning to vote down the deal. The EU did provide Mrs May with assurances that it did not want to see the backstop applied long-term, heralding the prospect of talks on a trade deal. It must be remembered that the nature of coalition politics in many European democracies means that political consensus-building, compromises and assurances are the norm. In Britain’s adversarial, two-party, rivalry-driven political system, they are not. I believe this is a significant reason why we have always viewed the EU with suspicion and concern. If that culture clash hasn’t been managed for the last 2.5 years since the Brexit vote, what chance now?

And finally, it is unlikely that there is a genuine and sincere desire to help Britain out beyond what is necessary. Here we come to the great deception of the Leave campaign during the referendum. Those seeking our departure promised us that, based on the nature of our trading position in Europe, they would be falling over themselves to give us anything we want, and that only an economically illiterate idiot would consider doing anything but. Yet the EU is an economic and political project. No, I don’t believe it’s trying to do away with the nation state and sneer at national pride and identity, but it is a project that is political to its core. It’s not designed for anyone to leave, and it doesn’t hold together if any of its constituent parts can break away but still get all the perks.

So, what about Parliament? One suggestion, presuming the government survives tonight’s no confidence motion (very likely), is that Parliament can test out a range of scenarios in a series of indicative votes, to try and determine what will command majority support. No deal? Extend Article 50? Second referendum?

The problem is, it’s already clear that no scenario commands that level of support across the House of Commons. That’s before we even talk about Theresa May hectoring Parliament minutes before last night’s vote not to let the British people down and to examine their consciences, then acknowledging that they had valid concerns and must be heard minutes after a monumental defeat. Or what about Jeremy Corbyn, lambasting the government’s failure to reach out across the house in one breath, whilst introducing a no confidence motion and insisting upon a general election in the next. All the while, the Scottish National Party is against the entire Brexit process because they can’t get over the fact that Scotland chose to remain part of the United Kingdom, and the Lib Dems are having a jolly old time supporting whatever takes their fancy because they don’t really matter anymore. Direct democracy and Parliamentary, representative democracy are locked in a bitter battle, proving incapable of reconciliation. Parliament has to deliver something that, in the main, it doesn’t want.

Were I in that house last night, I would have voted for the deal. True, it’s not as good as staying in the EU in my opinion, but the referendum result has to be respected. Theresa May can be justly criticised on many grounds, not least for her stubbornness and refusal to face the reality staring her in the face. But it’s hard to argue with the fact that she has worked tirelessly and fought for what she believes in, and has, in a hostile climate, managed to come up with something credible and workable. In the end, I conclude that above all, she has judged correctly that there exists no viable alternative to this deal. Now, following last night’s defeat, we’re likely to find that out the hard way.