AFTER MPs failed to back any Brexit alternative in the Commons last night, the SNP’s Ian Blackford said now was time for another General Election.
He said that Parliament and the government had failed to find a solution to the Brexit crisis, and that the only reasonable thing to do was to put it back to the people.
Of the eight options put in front of MPs yesterday, it was the call for the customs union, rejected by 272 to 264, and the proposal for a confirmatory referendum, rejected by 295 to 268 votes, that received the most support.
READ MORE: What were the Brexit options ... and how did MPs vote last night?
Blackford told MPs: “This is a very serious moment for all of us.
“We have to reflect that this House of Commons has tried to find a way through the Brexit crisis and we have failed.
“And we need to reflect on the fact that when the Government talks about bringing their deal back, that on two occasions, the government got 202 and 242 votes, that deal should be dead.
“Indeed, the People’s Vote got 268 votes tonight. I know we didn’t win, but we got more votes for the People’s Vote than the government did for its proposition.
“It’s becoming increasingly clear that this House cannot find a way forward. This government, this Prime Minister has failed to provide leadership.
“The only thing we should now be doing is going back to the people of the United Kingdom in a General Election to end this impasse.”
It was an historic if completely chaotic day in the Commons.
MPs have already voted to have another debate on Brexit alternatives on Monday.
It’s not yet entirely clear what form that will take. There was some suggestion MPs could be asked to vote on the three most popular proposals. The DUP, the LibDems and the SNP abstained on the customs union motion, tabled by Tory veteran Ken Clarke.
The second referendum call, in the name of Labour MP Margaret Beckett, which pushed for a public vote to confirm any Brexit deal passed by Parliament, would have passed if just 14 MPs switched sides. The SNP’s Pete Wishart and Angus MacNeil both abstained.
Monday’s votes, and the fate of any these Brexit alternatives, could be completely redundant though if Theresa May’s deal gets the support of enough MPs in Meaningful Vote 3, which could happen as soon as tomorrow.
Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay said the failure of the yesterday’s votes to indicate a clear winner should push MPs to get behind that agreement.
“The results of the process this house has gone through today strengthens our view that the deal the government has negotiated is the best option.
“Furthermore, Mr Speaker, although this was not a significant feature of today’s debate, any deal must include a withdrawal agreement.
“It is the government’s firm wish to get the Withdrawal Agreement approved by this house, and I urge all members, no matter the view on what the future relationship should be, if you believe in delivering on the referendum result by leaving the EU with a deal, then it’s necessary to back the Withdrawal Agreement.
“If we do not do that, then there are no guarantees about where this process will end. It is for that reason that I call on all members from across this House, in the national interest, to back the PM’s deal.”
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