Six things we've learned from May's latest Brexit defeat

Some Commons votes have very clear consequences – either legislative or political (like a no-confidence vote). Others are rather harder to interpret. May’s defeat on Thursday was definitely in the second category, but that does not mean it does not matter.

This may turn out to be a significant moment in the Brexit saga. Here is a snap analysis of what it means.

1 May will find it much harder now to argue that she has got a Commons majority behind her Brexit strategy

Two weeks ago May secured a majority for the Brady amendment. Thursday’s vote has not entirely reversed that – Brady would probably still pass, if there were another vote. But it shows that some of the Tories who backed Brady were not willing to do so if that was combined with a suggestion that a no-deal Brexit should be off the table.

2 The debate showed that MPs were only able to unite behind Brady because they could not agree what it meant

This became apparent during the opening of the debate when Tory Brexiters were saying the Malthouse compromise should be official government policy, but Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, refused to concede this.

3 EU leaders, who were reluctant to offer much to the UK in backstop concessions, not knowing what would get through parliament, will now surely feel still less inclined to engage

It is hard to see the point in doing a deal with a leader who cannot get what she agrees through parliament.

4 New government evidence about how damaging a no-deal Brexit might be will have to be published soon

That was the last-minute concession announced by Chris Heaton-Harris. If it says what Anna Soubry thinks it will say, it will strengthen the hand of those MPs arguing that no deal should be ruled out. Although there is a lot of evidence suggesting that the public at large are less concerned about these warnings.

5 May’s defeat raises questions about the competence of the government’s management of parliamentary business

Leavers and remainers were saying Thursday morning that if the government had consulted more widely when drafting its motion the defeat could have been easily averted. It is also arguable that the government, instead of offering Soubry what she wanted, would have been better letting her put her amendment to a vote. It would have been defeated, but at least it would have lost on an issue where it was willing to lose. On the plus side, there would have been no vote on the main motion, meaning no split with the ERG and no prospect of the vote two weeks ago arguably being reversed.

6 The votes suggest that the debate on Wednesday 27 February may end up being a decisive moment for Brexit

Thursday’s debate essentially postponed key decisions: there was no vote on giving parliament the power to rule out a second referendum, and no vote on a second referendum. But Tories planning to back the Yvette Cooper amendment and bill giving the Commons the power to rule out no deal will be emboldened – especially when they read the No 10 statement implying May is attentive to MPs who want to keep no deal as an option. And during the debate it became clear that Labour MPs set on voting for a second referendum will not wait much longer.