As Parliament votes to take back control, Theresa May shows she never had it in the first place

There will now be indicative votes on Wednesday, but absolutely no indication they will be of any use to anyone

The done thing, at rare moments of crisis such as this, is to bring all parties into a national government, and find a way through together. It established, in theory, a national collective responsibility, that allows for the best interests of the nation to transcend party politics.

And the approach we now see is similar, in its way. What we now have, at the start of a week in which no one is absolutely 100 per cent sure we won’t accidentally leave the European Union at the end of it, is not a government by everyone, but its near relation, a government by no one.

Theresa May, with the assistance of Jeremy Corbyn, has set up a government of total incompetence. I don’t use these words carelessly. The Government of Total Incompetence is a thing of carefully honed wonder, modelled, surely, on the system of Total Football played by Ajax Amsterdam in the 1970s.

Just as each player and each position on the pitch was interchangeable, every man switching at will between defence and attack, so now we have plans, positions, whole negotiating strategies that drift in and out of existence, all of them simultaneously government policy, which may or may not be implemented, depending on the capricious vagaries of the hour or minute.

When Theresa May appeared at the despatch box of the House of Commons on Monday afternoon, to give an update on the lack of progress of her withdrawal deal, as she has done every other Monday since November, she gave a speech that can only be understood as a kind of epic poem.

She was “continuing to build support across the house” for her deal, but at the same time casually informing she wouldn’t be bringing it for another vote, because she would lose.

“The house,” she said, had ruled out no deal, but as she spoke, thirty feet away her spokesperson was speaking to journalists, telling them that no deal remained on the table.

She acknowledged indicative votes might be the only way for the house to express an opinion on how to proceed with Brexit, but said she wouldn’t necessarily implement what the house decided.

She was sorry not sorry for her speech on Wednesday night, when she “expressed frustration” which she “knows is shared across the house”.

It was government by Finnegans Wake. Just a series of free form words, amounting to everything and nothing. Perhaps the idea, now, is for the rest of us to dedicate our lives to the academic study of it, scouring it for references, for meaning or instruction that may or may not be there.

At the end of the night, at the end of another six hours of Brexit debate that the nation absolutely could not be in any less need of, she was defeated, yet again. Now, on Wednesday, via an amendment by Oliver Letwin, the house will indeed hold a series of indicative votes on how it wishes to proceed. There they will all be, debating what type of Brexit is best for Britain, two days before the end of the two year negotiating period. And when they are done, there is no certainty whatsoever, indeed there is no likelihood even, either that they will come to a conclusion that is in any way useful, nor whether that hypothetical conclusion will simply be ignored.

Once upon a time, Oliver Letwin was David Cameron’s walking calamity. Now he is his nation’s self appointed saviour. Three junior government ministers resigned to support his amendment.

There are no words, no metaphors that can sufficiently attend to the monumental crapness of events. There has been no shambles like it on these islands, ever.

Meanwhile, as she did or didn’t say that no deal was or wasn’t on or off the table, whatever the table may or may not be, over in Brussels they were doing things rather less in the abstract.

It doesn’t matter, as far as they’re concerned, that no deal has or hasn’t been taken on or off the table. Their position is as clear as it has always been. Their no deal preparations are now complete. If the Withdrawal Agreement isn’t passed by the House of Commons, the UK leaves without a deal on 12 April.

The alternative is to revoke Article 50, which itself is looking increasingly un-straightforward, or apply for a long extension, but they may not even grant that without clear reason to do so. One such clear reason would be a general election, another, a second referendum. There do not appear to be any others.

Theresa May, by the way, again reiterated how bad it would be if a long extension were necessary, and the UK were therefore required part in the elections to the EU parliament. Here in Britain, in 2019, food and medicine shortages are preferable to voting.

And one such date for it to happen? Well, the European elections to the European parliament are on 23 May. That the UK goes to the polls on that day is a long way closer to certainty than anything else.