JUST IN: British Lawmakers Reject Prime Minister’s Brexit Plan, Heightening Uncertainty

British lawmakers have resoundingly rejected Prime Minister
Theresa May’s terms for the U.K.’s withdrawal from the European
Union, heightening the country’s sense of uncertainty and paralysis
less than two months before the exit is supposed to take
effect.

Parliament rejected May’s Brexit plan by a 432-202-vote Tuesday
evening, one of the biggest parliamentary defeats in British
history. It was a humiliating landslide in which scores of
lawmakers from May’s own Conservative Party turned against their
leader, along with the opposition Labour Party. Hostility to May’s
Brexit plan came from all sides of the political spectrum – from
those who felt May’s plan kept Britain too tethered to the EU and
those who wanted as close a post-divorce relationship as
possible.

With the official exit date of March 29 looming, May must now
try to negotiate a revised withdrawal agreement with the EU. But
securing changes in the next few weeks that will satisfy the rebels
in her ranks, the Labour Party and 27 EU nations will be a tough
challenge. That leaves the U.K. at risk of tumbling out of the
European Union with no deal at all, which critics warn will cause
economic chaos and financial disaster.

The entertainment industry – which was overwhelmingly in support
of Britain remaining in the EU – has chafed under the uncertainty
and begun taking steps to protect itself. Major television
companies, including Discovery and Sony, have handed in their
U.K.-issued channel licenses, fearing that they won’t be recognized
in the rest of Europe after March 29. Film and VFX companies worry
that skilled technicians from the Continent will no longer be able
to come work in Britain.

Tuesday’s vote in Parliament, after more than 50 hours of
debate, was supposed to pave the way for a smooth exit for Britain
from the EU. May has been negotiating with the EU for two years on
the terms of that withdrawal, shortly after she became prime
minister in the wake of the Brexit referendum.

But the agreement the two sides finally hammered out was
rejected by Parliament on a number of counts. Some critics said it
would jeopardize the unmanned border between Northern Ireland
(which would leave the EU with the rest of the U.K.) and the
Republic of Ireland (an independent member of the bloc); that could
undermine Northern Ireland’s delicate peace plan. Other opponents
faulted May’s deal for giving Britain insufficient access to the
EU’s single market.

May attempted to rally lawmakers to her side by insisting that
she had wrested the most concessions she could from the EU and that
an improved agreement was not possible. “No such alternative deal
exists,” she told a raucous House of Commons on Tuesday evening.
She admonished lawmakers to keep in mind that “this is the most
significant vote that any of us will be part of in our political
careers.”

Her opponents were unmoved. “This deal is bad for our economy, a
bad deal for our democracy and a bad deal for this country,” Labour
Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said, calling on members of Parliament
to “reject this deal because of the harm it would do.”

Corbyn demanded that Britain hold another general election to
boot out May and her ruling Conservatives and to give Corbyn and
his party a chance to negotiate a better Brexit deal. But trying to
hold an election before March 29, or persuading the EU to extend
that deadline, is a tall order.

Another alternative gaining some momentum is to hold a new
referendum, allowing the British public to vote on May’s plan.
Supporters of that idea contend that the “in or out” plebiscite in
June 2016 was too vague, with the actual withdrawal terms unknown;
voters should now be able to approve or reject the actual Brexit
plan.

But that proposal would also have logistical hurdles to
surmount. May is fiercely against the idea.

“A second referendum would lead to further division,” she said
in Parliament on Tuesday, shortly before her plan was shot down by
a huge margin. “It would say to the people we were elected to serve
that we were unwilling to do what they had instructed.”