This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/08/mps-brexit-vote-blank-cheque-government-iain-duncan-smith
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Brexit vote not a blank cheque for government, say remain MPs | |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| MPs were split on the implications of an overwhelming Commons vote to back a government plan to begin the Brexit process next spring, with pro-remain voices insisting it did not mean the government had been granted a free hand on the departure process. | MPs were split on the implications of an overwhelming Commons vote to back a government plan to begin the Brexit process next spring, with pro-remain voices insisting it did not mean the government had been granted a free hand on the departure process. |
| In contrast, Iain Duncan Smith, the strongly pro-leave former Conservative leader, said on Thursday that the previous night’s vote was “historic”, and gave the government what he called a “blank cheque” to press ahead on Brexit. | |
| MPs passed a Labour motion calling for “the prime minister to commit to publishing the government’s plan for leaving the EU before article 50 is invoked” by 448 to 75 votes – a majority of 373 – but only after it was amended by Downing Street to “call on the government to invoke article 50 by 31 March 2017”. | MPs passed a Labour motion calling for “the prime minister to commit to publishing the government’s plan for leaving the EU before article 50 is invoked” by 448 to 75 votes – a majority of 373 – but only after it was amended by Downing Street to “call on the government to invoke article 50 by 31 March 2017”. |
| This amendment was key, Duncan Smith told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “I think this was a historic vote,” he said. “I don’t use that lightly. This is without doubt the first time that the House of Commons has overwhelmingly vote for a completely new departure which is, essentially, leaving the European Union.” | This amendment was key, Duncan Smith told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “I think this was a historic vote,” he said. “I don’t use that lightly. This is without doubt the first time that the House of Commons has overwhelmingly vote for a completely new departure which is, essentially, leaving the European Union.” |
| The Commons was now “in line with the public vote” in the June referendum, Duncan Smith argued. | The Commons was now “in line with the public vote” in the June referendum, Duncan Smith argued. |
| “The last vote we had on this was about the referendum, and the power of the public to vote on this,” he said, agreeing that this amounted to a “blank cheque” on the issue for the prime minister from Labour. | “The last vote we had on this was about the referendum, and the power of the public to vote on this,” he said, agreeing that this amounted to a “blank cheque” on the issue for the prime minister from Labour. |
| He said: “I believe at the end of the day that what they have said to the government is: we accept now what you have to do is get on and do this.” | He said: “I believe at the end of the day that what they have said to the government is: we accept now what you have to do is get on and do this.” |
| Duncan Smith added: “This is the first time we had an opportunity to say: ‘Are you in favour of triggering article 50, and by a deadline date which Theresa May had given, 31 March next year?’ And the overwhelming answer was yes. There are some caveats in there, I accept.” | Duncan Smith added: “This is the first time we had an opportunity to say: ‘Are you in favour of triggering article 50, and by a deadline date which Theresa May had given, 31 March next year?’ And the overwhelming answer was yes. There are some caveats in there, I accept.” |
| But, speaking later on the same programme, the Conservative former attorney general Dominic Grieve said that while he backed the motion he took a very different meaning from it. | |
| “We do not govern in this country by parliamentary motions in the House of Commons,” he said. “A parliamentary motion in the House of Commons is an expression of the views of members of parliament. A referendum is a political expression of the view of the public.” | “We do not govern in this country by parliamentary motions in the House of Commons,” he said. “A parliamentary motion in the House of Commons is an expression of the views of members of parliament. A referendum is a political expression of the view of the public.” |
| Much would depend on next month’s supreme court verdict on whether the government needed parliamentary approval to enact article 50, which begins the two-year departure process. | Much would depend on next month’s supreme court verdict on whether the government needed parliamentary approval to enact article 50, which begins the two-year departure process. |
| “If in fact the government doesn’t have the necessary authority under the royal prerogative to trigger article 50, the only way it can seek it is by enacting primary legislation – laws – through parliament,” he said. “What we did yesterday is completely different.” | “If in fact the government doesn’t have the necessary authority under the royal prerogative to trigger article 50, the only way it can seek it is by enacting primary legislation – laws – through parliament,” he said. “What we did yesterday is completely different.” |
| It was a “fantasy” for Brexiters to say a demand for scrutiny amounted to trying to block the process, Grieve said. | |
| “I think there’s a fundamental misunderstanding about firstly the position of parliament in this, and secondly the process. I’ve never been in any doubt since 23 June that in response to the referendum, parliament would sanction our removal from the EU,” he said. | “I think there’s a fundamental misunderstanding about firstly the position of parliament in this, and secondly the process. I’ve never been in any doubt since 23 June that in response to the referendum, parliament would sanction our removal from the EU,” he said. |
| “There is then a process issue. As the law of the land stands at the moment, the government does not have authority to trigger article 50. And if the judgment of the high court stands they will have to do it by enacting the legislation through both houses of parliament in the ordinary way. | “There is then a process issue. As the law of the land stands at the moment, the government does not have authority to trigger article 50. And if the judgment of the high court stands they will have to do it by enacting the legislation through both houses of parliament in the ordinary way. |
| “That is what the issue is that is being discussed in the supreme court, which is really substantially unrelated to what happened yesterday.” | “That is what the issue is that is being discussed in the supreme court, which is really substantially unrelated to what happened yesterday.” |
| Grieve said he had little doubt parliament would approve article 50: “The issue is, how do we manage the process of leaving the European Union in a way that does not do appalling damage, potentially, to the economic wellbeing and quality of life of the citizens of the United Kingdom?” | Grieve said he had little doubt parliament would approve article 50: “The issue is, how do we manage the process of leaving the European Union in a way that does not do appalling damage, potentially, to the economic wellbeing and quality of life of the citizens of the United Kingdom?” |
| The Labour MP Ben Bradshaw, who opposed the motion, said he agreed with Grieve, and also backed his party’s frontbench in seeking to push ministers on Brexit plans. | The Labour MP Ben Bradshaw, who opposed the motion, said he agreed with Grieve, and also backed his party’s frontbench in seeking to push ministers on Brexit plans. |
| “The reason I didn’t vote for it is that I don’t have confidence this plan will amount to very much,” he said. “I want to see a white paper, which is the normal way of doing things.” | “The reason I didn’t vote for it is that I don’t have confidence this plan will amount to very much,” he said. “I want to see a white paper, which is the normal way of doing things.” |