A feature of Boris Johnson’s pyrrhic victory over the WAB (Withdrawal Agreement Bill) was the shifting voting patterns, as the bill was passed with the support of Labour and Independent MPs, then the timetable was rejected as members of both groups withdrew their support. There are so many players and motivations involved in our dysfunctional parliament it is hard to keep track. Thankfully, columnists are on the case.

The Times

The role of the DUP, who voted against the prime minister’s wishes twice is scrutinised amusingly by Daniel Finkelstein. Thi is a party that likes to say ‘no’, he argues. “It can be persuaded to say yes only when someone asks whether it would like to spend some public money.”

There are three main options to the Ireland problem, he points out: create a hard border, keep the whole UK in the EU customs area for the time being, or agree a compromise in which Northern Ireland remains aligned more closely with the EU and put checks in place between it and the rest of the UK.

“Those... are the only options. And the DUP has rejected all of them. It has said no to a hard border, no to the May deal and is now saying no to the Johnson deal.

“It has abstained on no-deal, presumably worried that if it said ‘no’ to no-deal then the double negative might mean that it had accidentally said ‘yes’ to something.”

The DUP said no to the 1973 Sunningdale Agreement, no to the 1985 Anglo-Irish agreement and to the Good Friday agreement, Finkelstein argues. “IT also said no to abortion, no to gay rights, even no to rock music.”

His conclusion? “These are the people to whom the mathematics of the Commons has given such great leverage. But do any of us have to like it? No.”

The Daily Mail

Andrew Pierce considers the resistance to Boris Johnson’s ambition to hold a general election, in the light of the fact that 51MPs have swapped parties or allegiances since the last national poll. The fact that they were elected on platforms they no longer hold to means it is not surprising so many are ‘dodging voters’, he alleges, listing a host of MPs with narrow majorities who might expect to lose their seats.

One group of MPs has no such reluctance, he adds: “They are the Scottish Nationalists.” Riding high in the polls, they stand to gain 14 seats on current standings, Pierce says. He adds that the SNP has another motive for seeking an early election: Alex Salmond’s trial expected in January, on a series of charges including sexual misconduct allegations. “Salmond has strenuously denied all the claims against him but the party fears the effect of any bad publicity.”

What of the Lib Dems? On the face of it they want to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. “Realistically the only way that could happen is if the Lib Dems get a parliaemntary majority - and the only way of possibly achieving that pipe-dream is with a general election.”

Even buoyed by defections pollsters rate their chances of a majority are slim, he says. “That is why... Swinson and her Lib Dems are pushing hard for a second referendum as the best way to halt Brexit.”

The Guardian

For Mr Johnson, calculations about the level of support he can count on are complicated further, according to Jonathan Freedland. Surely those who voted for the WAB are on his side? Not at all: “MPs simply voted for it to receive a second reading, some of them motivated by the desire not to endorse it but to amend it. As Labour’s Gloria De Piero confessed, she voted yes, “not because I support the deal but because I don’t”.

This explains the Prime Minister’s decision to ‘pause’ his bill rather than set a slower timetable, Freedland claims. The “threadbare coalition” backing it will unravel when the detail is examined. “The truth is, Johnson will never have a bigger vote for his deal in this House of Commons than the one he assembled tonight. It will only get smaller. No wonder he had to pause.”

The Daily Telegraph

Another key player is John Bercow, who as speaker of the House of Commons is meant to be impartial. Brexiteers in particular have their doubts and senior MP and arch Brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin insists the next speaker must be different. “The authority and effectiveness of the Speaker depend on people being able to trust him.” Exploring a variety of options for updating the role, he concludes that change is vital. “Restoring confidence in ourselves as an institution and the confidence of the public should be the priority”