THERESA May is facing another parliamentary bust-up over her flagship Brexit legislation after a compromise designed to keep critics in her own party on board was denounced as “unacceptable” by Tory Remainers.
The move was branded “sneaky” by one backbencher while another senior pro-EU Tory said the wording of a government amendment was changed at the last minute to deny MPs the chance of blocking a no deal Brexit.
A senior minister was forced to deny having lied about the plan, which was signed off by May.
Peers are to vote on Monday on a proposal to give MPs the power to dictate the government’s response if it fails to reach a deal with Brussels.
May avoided almost certain defeat in the Commons on Tuesday by assuring rebels that their concerns about having a “meaningful vote” on the final Brexit deal would be addressed.
However, the amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill tabled yesterday leaves Parliament facing a “deal or no deal” choice.
If MPs reject the agreement reached by May with Brussels – or if no deal has been obtained by January 21 – Parliament will be offered the opportunity only to vote on a “neutral motion” stating that it has considered a minister’s statement on the issue.
Crucially, the motion will be unamendable, meaning that MPs cannot insert a requirement for May to go back to the negotiating table, extend the Brexit transition or revoke the UK’s withdrawal under Article 50.
Leading pro-EU Conservative Dominic Grieve indicated that the final text of the amendment tabled by ministers yesterday had been changed from the wording which he believed had been agreed earlier in the day. He said: “I think it is unacceptable because it seems to me to be contrary to what the whole intention was behind this whole amendment.”
Backbench Tory MP Sarah Wollaston tweeted: “So just to be clear we are now going to have to amend the ‘unamendable’ after the agreed amendable amendment acquired a sneaky sting in the tail.”
Solicitor General Robert Buckland acknowledged that previous versions of the amendment had existed until May decided on the final proposal yesterday afternoon.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel