EU leaders have rejected Theresa May’s attempt to delay Brexit until June 30.
In a fresh snub for the Prime Minister, the EU Council summit in Brussels yesterday decided to approve her request for an Article 50 extension in principle – but were locked in discussions late last night over what length of time they would be prepared to grant.
A meeting to finalise the offer dragged on long after its scheduled conclusion, amid reports that the text was being torn up and rewritten.
READ MORE: EU chiefs reject Theresa May's Brexit extension proposal
As we went to press last night it appeared the EU had settled on a date of May 22 for the UK to leave under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement – provided the Commons backs it as the PM hopes next week. This is five weeks short of the June 30 date requested by the Prime Minister and would present her with a race against time to complete legislation needed for an orderly UK withdrawal.
However, should MPs vote down May’s deal the EU were prepared to offer a different extension to avert an “accidental no deal” outcome, until April 11 – the very last moment the UK could decide to participate in European Parliament elections.
By then, the EU would expect the UK to have made up its mind on a Plan B. A softer Brexit, a no deal exit, a general election or a second referendum would all be among the options which presumably could yet be considered.
May made the case for a June 30 extension in a 90-minute presentation to the EU27, before leaving them to discuss their response in her absence.
The draft communique suggested that an extension could stretch beyond the May 23-26 European elections only if the UK takes part.
READ MORE: Petition calling for Article 50 to be revoked soars past 2 million signatures
“Given that the UK does not intend to hold elections to the European Parliament, no extension is possible beyond that date,” said the draft.
The communique also suggested the EU would formally adopt two documents agreed by May with European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker in Strasbourg last week, with the intention of reassuring MPs that the controversial backstop will not be permanent.
As she arrived in Brussels for what was slated to be the UK’s final EU summit as a member of the bloc, the Prime Minister said she “sincerely hopes” Britain will be able to leave with a deal.
But several leaders warned that if MPs turn down her Withdrawal Agreement for a third time, the UK could be heading for a no-deal Brexit.
Describing the UK as being in “political crisis”, Macron said: “There needs to be a profound political change if there is to be an extension which is anything other than technical.”
Luxembourg’s prime minister Xavier Bettel said: “At the moment, there are more non-options on the table than options ... I sometimes have the feeling that we are in the waiting room, a bit like Waiting for Godot. But Godot never came so I hope this time they will come.”
Italian PM Giuseppe Conte said: “We think a short delay could be useful. We need to wait for a new vote in the British Parliament.”
Jeremy Corbyn held what he described as “very constructive discussions” in Brussels with EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier and European Commission secretary general Martin Selmayr which he said had focused on the means to prevent a no-deal Brexit next Friday.
The Labour leader declined to rule out the option of halting Brexit by revoking the Article 50 letter informing Brussels of Britain’s intention to quit.
Asked if he was willing to consider revocation if it was the only way to prevent no-deal Brexit, he said: “These are hypotheticals.
“So far as we’re concerned, we think there’s an urgency in constructing a majority for an agreeable solution and that’s what we’re concentrating on at the moment.”
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