Letter from Westminster: What does Oliver Letwin’s constitutional revolution mean?

The constitutional revolution devised by Oliver Letwin, Yvette Cooper, Dominic Grieve, Nick Boles and Hilary Benn has finally broken through the last defences in the Palace of Westminster.

The vote by the House of Commons on Monday night to “take control of Brexit” was the culmination of a long march through the thickets of parliamentary procedure.

Different backbenchers have several times proposed versions of the plan, getting closer each time. Cooper lost by 23 votes two months ago. Benn lost by two votes two weeks ago. On Monday Letwin finally succeeded, by a margin of 27 votes, boosted by three ministers who resigned from the government to vote for it – Steve Brine, Alistair Burt and Richard Harrington.

It has been fascinating to watch. For most of my time reporting from Westminster, I haven’t needed to know much about the finer points of how the House of Commons runs itself. We journalists needed to know the basics. The government controls the Commons timetable, usually negotiated in mysterious ways with the opposition through what are known as “the usual channels”. It usually wins votes, unless there is a free vote or a big rebellion.

Occasionally there were complications, and the Commons is full of helpful experts who would explain what was going on if you knew who to ask. Things often went wrong in the House of Lords, which is a law unto itself, its rules guarded by a more rarefied priesthood of experts, who could be contacted through the parties’ whips’ offices in the upper house.

Since the 2016 referendum, however, things have changed, with the legislature locked in a struggle with the executive. The assumption that only the government can pass laws has been challenged.

One of the few things we used to know, for example, was that private members’ bills – laws drawn up by backbench MPs – could be passed only if the government allowed them to be.

But now Letwin and his colleagues have devised a way to take over the functions of the government temporarily – provided they can win a majority for it. On Wednesday, they are using this power to hold indicative votes on Brexit options. But in coming days they could use it to pass legislation.

At one point, they were threatening to pass a law requiring the prime minister to seek a postponement of Brexit in order to avoid leaving without a deal. In the end, Theresa May agreed to do it without a law being passed.

But the principle has now been established, and our constitution will never be quite the same.

Yours,

John Rentoul

Chief political commentator