British Prime Minister Theresa May’s government is in shambles after Brexit Secretary David Davis and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson resigned due to her weak Brexit plan. Davis’s deputy Steve Baker, a minister within the Brexit department, also resigned.

May has lost seven Cabinet members since November 1, 2017.

Details of May’s Plans

Bloomberg offered highlights from a three-page summary of the deal May’s Cabinet struck last week. Papers to ministers show that Britain “should keep a ‘common rule book’ with the EU for all goods, including agricultural and food products.”

When it comes to customs, May wants a “facilitated customs arrangement” that would use technology “to work out where goods arriving into the UK will ultimately end up,” which means “the correct tariff could be paid – either at the EU or UK rate.” Davis called this plan “unworkable.”

On the subject of regulations, Britain remains committed to keeping “high regulatory standards for the environment, climate change, social and employment and consumer protection, meaning we would not let standards fall below their current levels.”

Bloomberg wrote that May promised her country that the European Court of Justice “won’t have direct jurisdiction in the U.K. after Brexit.” Her proposal has the “ECJ as an interpreter of EU rules as part of a plan to have a joint committee interpret and enforce agreements between the two sides.” This seems kind of fishy to me, but Transport Secretary Chris Grayling insisted that the plan means “the ECJ loses its role as the supreme court for all citizens” in Britain.

This deal could also harm a trade deal with America.

Davis and Johnson Leave in a 24 Hour Span

From The Daily Mail:

In an excoriating verdict on the ‘third way’ trade plan Mrs May forced through Cabinet on Friday night, Mr Davis said she had persistently undermined him and put the UK on track to be humbled by Brussels.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Davis said his ‘conscience’ would not allow him to continue as he did not ‘believe’ in the plan. He insisted he had been ‘clear’ at the Chequers showdown that he did not back the blueprint and the EU would just take advantage.

‘They’ll take what we offer already and then demand some more. That’s what I fear,’ he said.

‘We’re giving too much away, too easily, and that to me is a very dangerous strategy.’

The appointment of Mr Raab, seen as a ‘true believer’ in Brexit, will calm nerves on the Tory benches somewhat. A Leave campaigner in the referendum, he has been promoted from housing minister.

Eyes turned to Johnson after Davis left. Johnson supposedly trashed the plan behind closed doors. The BBC reported that Johnson told his colleagues that the proposal “could be a ‘serious inhibitor to free trade.'” However, he backed the plans “despite claiming that defending the plans was like ‘polishing a turd.'”

The London Times reported that May warned Johnson she would sack him “if he made further public criticism of her proposals after being pressed by cabinet colleagues to reassert her authority.”

A person close to Johnson said that May’s Brexit strategy is not what he and others wanted:

Tory MP Zac Goldsmith defended Boris’s actions:

Goldsmith’s defense comes after some wonder if Johnson could become a challenger to May. The Guardian‘s snap analysis of Johnson’s resignation says that his decision makes him “a diminished figure,” but this could be the time to become prime minister and probably his last chance at it.

It looks like Johnson wanted to resign this evening:

Davis is not the only one who had harsh words for May’s proposal. Sky News reported that Eurosceptic former cabinet minister Owen Patterson said Britain “would be out Europe, but still run by Europe.” MP Lucy Allen wouldn’t describe the plan as Brexit. MP Andrea Jenkyns stated that those who support Brexit “cannot support any deal that restricts our trade with other countries.”

While Brexit crumbles around her, May could probably survive an attack on her leadership:

The prime minister was due to address her backbench MPs in Westminster at 5.30pm, in an atmosphere becoming increasingly febrile. If 48 MPs write letters of no confidence to the chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, Graham Brady, May will face a vote of no confidence.

Many of the prime minister’s supporters believe she would win such a contest, but if she lost, May would face a leadership challenge, with Johnson among the potential candidates.

May’s Speech to House of Commons

After all of this, May has delivered a speech to the House of Commons. She thanked Davis and Johnson for their service. The Guardian reported that she provided a summary of her strategy:

She says the two models proposed by the EU are unacceptable. She says no prime minister could accept a plan that would separate Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.

And she says keeping the whole of the UK in the single market and customs union would mean accepting free movement, having to follow EU law and having to go on paying huge sums to Europe.

She says if the EU continues on its current course, that could lead to a no deal Brexit.

A responsible government must prepare for a range of outcomes, including no deal, she says.

But a no deal would have profound consequences for the UK and the EU.

So the cabinet agreed to propose a new model, she says.

May says the friction-free movement of goods is the only way to avoid a hard border in Ireland, and a border between Ireland and Britain, and the only way to protect supply chains.

She says she is proposing four steps that will enable this.

These are set out in the three-page government document (pdf) published on Friday night.

She says the EU goods regulation that the UK would have to accept are relatively stable. There would be a parliamentary lock on any new laws, she says.

She says parliament would be able to reject any proposals if it wanted, recognising that there would be consequences.

Under the facilitated customs arrangement, “96% of businesses would not face extra bureaucracy.” May also refuted rumors that “the UK would not be able to strike trade deal under plan.”

May also told MPs that “the government must prepare for all outcomes for Brexit, including a no-deal scenario.”

The white paper on Brexit will come out on Thursday.

Should We Be Shocked?

Maybe May was the wrong choice to lead Britain out the EU. In January 2017, the BBC reminded everyone the then-home secretary warned the country “of the implications of a vote to leave the EU.” In other words, she wasn’t really in support of Brexit:

Leaving the single market

April 2016: “So, if we do vote to leave the European Union, we risk bringing the development of the single market to a halt, we risk a loss of investors and businesses to remaining EU member states driven by discriminatory EU policies, and we risk going backwards when it comes to international trade.

“But the big question is whether, in the event of Brexit, we would be able to negotiate a new free trade agreement with the EU and on what terms.”

January 2017: “I respect the position taken by European leaders who have been clear about their position, just as I am clear about mine. So an important part of the new strategic partnership we seek with the EU will be the pursuit of the greatest possible access to the single market, on a fully reciprocal basis, through a comprehensive free trade agreement.”

April 2016: “The reality is that we do not know on what terms we would win access to the single market. We do know that in a negotiation we would need to make concessions in order to access it, and those concessions could well be about accepting EU regulations, over which we would have no say, making financial contributions, just as we do now, accepting free movement rules, just as we do now, or quite possibly all three combined.

“It is not clear why other EU member states would give Britain a better deal than they themselves enjoy.”

January 2017: “If we were excluded from accessing the single market, we would be free to change the basis of Britain’s economic model.

“But for the EU, it would mean new barriers to trade with one of the biggest economies in the world. It would jeopardise investments in Britain by EU companies worth more than half a trillion pounds… and I do not believe that the EU’s leaders will seriously tell German exporters, French farmers, Spanish fishermen, the young unemployed of the eurozone, and millions of others, that they want to make them poorer, just to punish Britain and make a political point.”

[Featured image via YouTube]