DAVID Mundell could be sacked after abstaining on the UK Government’s motion to rule out a no-deal Brexit.
The Scottish Secretary was one of four Cabinet ministers believed to have disobeyed the Government and not voted in the Commons, along with Amber Rudd, David Gauke and Greg Clark.
READ MORE: MPs pass amendment to block no-deal Brexit in all circumstances
READ MORE: The BBC just cut off Ian Blackford's speech to interview Nigel Farage
It is believed those Cabinet ministers are hoping to retain their positions.
Mundell has since tweeted that he remains behind the Prime Minister's deal, which implicity means he will not resign over the issue.
He said: "I’ve always opposed a no-deal Brexit.
I’ve always opposed a no deal Brexit. The House made its view clear by agreeing the Spelman amendment, I didn’t think it was right for me to oppose that.The PM has my full support in her objective of leaving the EU with a Deal to deliver an orderly Brexit
— David Mundell (@DavidMundellDCT) March 13, 2019
"The House made its view clear by agreeing the Spelman amendment, I didn’t think it was right for me to oppose that.
"The PM has my full support in her objective of leaving the EU with a Deal to deliver an orderly Brexit."
The convention of collective cabinet responsibility dictates that members of the Cabinet resign should they vote against their government or abstain on a government motion.
Commenting on Mundell abstaining on the vote to take no deal off the table, shadow Scottish Secretary, Lesley Laird said: “This is an absolute abdication of duty.
“Last night David Mundell proclaimed that he would vote to take no deal off of the table but he appears to have caved under pressure.
“No deal is an economic and social calamity for our country. If he is not sacked, he should resign for the simple reason that his party thought it was a good idea to inflict that on the Scottish people.”
Meanwhile a Department for Work and Pensions source said that Sarah Newton has resigned as a minister at the DWP over the Brexit vote. She is believed to have voted against the Government.
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