For Great Britain, the big voice is finally here.
After two and a half years of negotiations, arguments, predictions and attitudes, Parliament will finally decide on Tuesday on a bill dictating the conditions for Britain's departure from the European Union, one of the most sought-after voices that legislators will probably throw in their career.
• Prime Minister Theresa May has spent all his energies trying to convince Parliament – and Britain – that the divorce she is negotiating with Brussels is the best way forward. But she hasn't made the sale. The House of Commons is expected to defeat the agreement with a wide margin, and no one is absolutely sure what's coming next.
• For Mrs May, voting is an exercise in injury control: a serious loss would make it more difficult to extract further concessions from the EU and could give rise to a vote on non-confidence.
• Assuming that the deal does not go, Mrs May must return to Parliament on Monday with a reserve plan. If nothing was approved on March 29, Britain would make a "no-deal" departure from the block, which could pose serious financial risks. (Many lawmakers are concerned about this. Voices not so much.)
A long-awaited bill faces poor prospects
Since June 2016, when 52 percent of British voters approved a referendum to leave the European Union, everything has built up for a vote Tuesday. The bill would determine the trade and immigration relationship between the UK and the block by the end of 2020, while negotiating a permanent agreement.
But even before Mrs Mays agreement with Brussels was published in November, it was clear that Parliament was deeply fragmented on how to move forward. Lawmakers began several days of debate on Prime Minister Theresa May's bill in December, but she postponed the vote for a month, rather than meeting a humiliating defeat when trying to win new promises from Brussels.
But the parliamentary calculus has not changed. Mrs Mays Conservative Party is split over the plan – one of her whips stepped down on Monday so he could vote against it, most recently in a variety of Brexit-related resignations – and the opposition parties overwhelmingly opposed it.
What happens now?
With the bill of Prime Minister Theresa May expected to lose, the question of British politics is: What is going on?
If the agreement is not approved, she will have submitted a reserve plan to Parliament until Monday. The scope of the options is wide, unpleasant and somewhat confusing.
If the deal loses with a narrow margin, she may be able to win some concessions from Brussels and bring these revisions to Parliament for another vote. But if the defeat is a crushing one, this option is unlikely to be available.
As it stands now, Britain will leave the European Union on 29 March. Neither the maize maize government nor the European block wants it to happen without an agreement in place – most experts predict that an unauthorized Brexit would be chaotic and do serious financial damage.
With some time left to negotiate new with the EU, the Prime Minister may be forced to request Parliament to postpone Brexit.
She could also call another referendum, an opportunity favored by lawmakers hoping that British voters have changed. But Mrs May and the Labor Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, have both rejected the idea.
Mr. Corbyn wants to force early elections and seems likely to demand a trust in the government as the prime minister stands on the brink.
For Businesses, A Chance To Get Clarity
The vote will give some of the details that businesses need to plan their operations, but it could at least narrow down the possibilities.
"The longer this Brexit political drama continues, the less and less attractive Britain will be" to investors, Iain Anderson, CEO of the consulting firm Cicero Group, said last week.
Although many companies are already preparing for the worst case – crashing out of the EU without an agreement in place – many have also been vocal in warning against it.
"Don't make mistakes, no actions can't be controlled," says Carolyn Fairbairn, director general of UK industry last week.
The government has tried, in vain, to facilitate public anxiety about how a no-deal scenario would be managed. Last week, it created an artificial traffic jam to test how it would cope with border disturbances, an exercise that was widely prevented.
Manufacturers are still concerned that a non-situation would cause chaos in just-in-time manufacturing, based on goods crossing the British border, sometimes several times, and arriving within minutes of collection. – Amie Tsang
The agreement takes fire from several directions
There are many objections to the Brexit bill, making it clear that no approach to leaving the European Union orders something close to majority support.
The hard-line pro-Brexit Conservatives claim that the deal binds Britain much too close to European trade rules in the foreseeable future. Many even claim that a non-departure from the block would be preferable.
The 1998 agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland guarantees the free movement of goods and people between that part of Britain and the Republic of Ireland, an EU member. But many conservatives and the Democratic Unionist Party, a small group in Northern Ireland united with the British Government, protest against how Mrs Mays agreement would protect this guarantee.
The agreement reached by Prime Minister Theresa May with Brussels includes a "backstop" that would keep Northern Ireland closer to the block than with the rest of Britain if the two parties are unable to reach a long-term agreement by the end by 2020. Critics say it would effectively split Britain into two.  There are legislators in several parties who oppose Brexit in any form and want another referendum. And Mrs May has accused the opposition party of political opportunism by simply resisting something that her government is trying to do. – Richard Pérez-Peña
The parliamentary speaker is trapped in the middle
He is the unlikely star of this season by Brexit, alternately spoiled and adored and often on the cover of tabloids: John Bercow, House of Commons speaker . His work as the highest authority in the chamber is to preside over negotiations and mostly to get members to quit. The role should be strictly nonpartisan.
But Mr Bercow – easily recognizable by his floppy silver hair and flowering voice – is now in a position as a judge making a controversial call in the early innings that could close the betting all over.
Last week, a MEP proposed an amendment calling for Prime Minister Theresa May to return within three days to announce what the government would do next time the original agreement was rejected. She had 21 days earlier to decide.
According to Parliament's arcane rules (which is mainly related to the importance of "immediately"), Mr Bercow should have rejected this amendment. But he didn't. And Parliament adopted it with a small margin.
The decision individually dragged the balance of power to parliament from Mrs May & # 39; s government. The episode made a smaller exit less likely and would let lawmakers weigh in – quickly – with alternatives.
And Mr Bercow may not have finished yet. Commentators said it could end up being the most radical shift in the relationship between government and parliament when the speaker believed King Charles I in 1642. – Benjamin Mueller