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/live/2018/dec/06/brexit-debate-theresa-may-deal-latest-may-interviewed-on-today-politics-live

The article has changed 22 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Brexit: May floats plan to give MPs vote on extending transition in bid to avert Commons defeat - Politics live Brexit: May floats plan to give MPs vote on extending transition in bid to avert Commons defeat - Politics live
(35 minutes later)
In a speech in Dublin today Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, is saying that Theresa May should withdraw article 50 if she loses the Brexit vote next week. According to extracts released in advance, he is saying:
The worst possible outcome – which remains a grave concern given the political uncertainty in Westminster - is that the UK leaves the EU with no Brexit deal at all.
This would not only be devastating for London’s economy, but would actually hurt businesses and economies across Europe – including here in Dublin – and increase the chance of a hard border on the island of Ireland.
In my view, the prospect – the very notion – of a no deal Brexit must be taken off the table by the British government.
It’s just too dangerous to leave as a possibility.
That’s why – today – I’m calling on Theresa May to withdraw article 50 if the British Parliament rejects her deal next week, which is looking extremely likely.
This move would be the single best way to guarantee that we avoid falling off the cliff edge.
It would stop the clock that is ticking down towards a no deal Brexit, and it would provide the breathing space to decide how we resolve this mess.
If the British prime minister refuses to take this precautionary step – we would continue heading towards a no-deal Brexit in just a few months’ time – and would risk us having to explain to future generations why the government of the day knowingly put our economy, our prosperity and our place on the world stage in such grave peril.
It is worth stressing that Khan is calling for article 50 to be revoked in the event of May losing the vote. That is not the same as asking for article 50 to be extended. Extending it would delay Brexit beyond 29 March. Withdrawing it would cancel Brexit altogether.
Under the Lisbon treaty, article 50 can be extended, with the unanimous agreement of all EU member states.
On Monday the European court of justice will give a definitive ruling on whether the UK can revoke article 50 unilaterally. Earlier this week the court’s advocate general issued an opinion (pdf) saying a state could revoke article 50 unilaterally. Opinions like this are normally a reliable guide to what the court will decide, and if the ECJ follows the advice of its advocate general, then Khan’s proposal will in theory be do-able.
But the article 50 case was mostly about a country that changes its mind about leaving the EU. Khan says the UK should withdraw article 50 to give itself more time to take a decision. During the ECJ hearing the lawyer for the European council expressed concern about the possibility of a country being allowed to withdraw article 50 as a negotiating tactic and, in his opinion (pdf), the advocate general said the right to revoke article 50 should be subject to “certain conditions and limits” in order to “prevent abuse of the procedure”. It is not clear whether or not revoking article 50 just to “stop the clock” would count as such an abuse.
Another problem is that, under the EU Withdrawal Act, the UK will be leaving the EU’s legal regime on 29 March anyway. To stop Brexit, as well as revoking article 50, the PM would have to repeal all or part of that Act.
David Mundell has admitted he dropped his threat to resign over the Northern Ireland backstop because he needs to shore up Theresa May’s beleaguered Brexit deal and prevent her government collapsing.David Mundell has admitted he dropped his threat to resign over the Northern Ireland backstop because he needs to shore up Theresa May’s beleaguered Brexit deal and prevent her government collapsing.
The Scottish secretary and his close ally Ruth Davidson threatened to resign in October over the backstop, telling May in writing: “We could not support any deal that creates a border of any kind in the Irish Sea [or] leads to Northern Ireland having a different relationship with the EU than the rest of the UK, beyond what currently exists.”The Scottish secretary and his close ally Ruth Davidson threatened to resign in October over the backstop, telling May in writing: “We could not support any deal that creates a border of any kind in the Irish Sea [or] leads to Northern Ireland having a different relationship with the EU than the rest of the UK, beyond what currently exists.”
In a press conference today he was challenged on whether the planned backstop failed that test.In a press conference today he was challenged on whether the planned backstop failed that test.
The previously-secret legal advice on Brexit issued to the cabinet by Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, said that if the backstop were implemented, Northern Ireland would remain in the EU single market while the rest of the UK would not. Cox warned this meant: “GB is essentially treated as a third country by NI for goods passing from GB to NI”. Nigel Dodds, the Democratic Unionist party MP, claimed that would erect trade barriers within the UK and was “economically mad”.The previously-secret legal advice on Brexit issued to the cabinet by Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, said that if the backstop were implemented, Northern Ireland would remain in the EU single market while the rest of the UK would not. Cox warned this meant: “GB is essentially treated as a third country by NI for goods passing from GB to NI”. Nigel Dodds, the Democratic Unionist party MP, claimed that would erect trade barriers within the UK and was “economically mad”.
Mundell said he had had to make a judgement call:Mundell said he had had to make a judgement call:
What I have said is that if you weigh up what is the greatest threat to the integrity of the UK. My judgement is that is having a no deal Brexit or a chaotic exit from the EU and I regard that as the most unsatisfactory possible outcome in terms of standing up for the integrity of the UK.What I have said is that if you weigh up what is the greatest threat to the integrity of the UK. My judgement is that is having a no deal Brexit or a chaotic exit from the EU and I regard that as the most unsatisfactory possible outcome in terms of standing up for the integrity of the UK.
Now that is a judgement; I accept I have made that judgement.Now that is a judgement; I accept I have made that judgement.
I have looked in detail at the proposals for Northern Ireland. I have been quite clear that I’m not totally comfortable with those arrangements but what I tried to set in context in my speech is the practical impact of those arrangements compared to the arrangements that currently exist [by preserving similar rules for farming, food and industrial products] … so I believe in the balance, if your prime motivation is to ensure the integrity of the UK then that is to stop a no deal Brexit.I have looked in detail at the proposals for Northern Ireland. I have been quite clear that I’m not totally comfortable with those arrangements but what I tried to set in context in my speech is the practical impact of those arrangements compared to the arrangements that currently exist [by preserving similar rules for farming, food and industrial products] … so I believe in the balance, if your prime motivation is to ensure the integrity of the UK then that is to stop a no deal Brexit.
The Scottish National party MSP Tom Arthur likened Mundell’s stance to the contortions used during the Iraq war by “Comical Ali”, Saddam Hussein’s former information minister, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, by claiming black was white. Arthur said:The Scottish National party MSP Tom Arthur likened Mundell’s stance to the contortions used during the Iraq war by “Comical Ali”, Saddam Hussein’s former information minister, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, by claiming black was white. Arthur said:
David Mundell is increasingly delusional and is fast becoming the Comical Ali of Brexit. The UK government’s legal advice confirms what we already knew – that Theresa May’s deal doesn’t just breach Mundell’s red line, it demolishes it.David Mundell is increasingly delusional and is fast becoming the Comical Ali of Brexit. The UK government’s legal advice confirms what we already knew – that Theresa May’s deal doesn’t just breach Mundell’s red line, it demolishes it.
Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, has been reprimanded by the Commons standards watchdog for failing to register payments he has received on time. Most of them were royalties from books. There were nine late declarations, of payments worth a total of £52,722.80.Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, has been reprimanded by the Commons standards watchdog for failing to register payments he has received on time. Most of them were royalties from books. There were nine late declarations, of payments worth a total of £52,722.80.
In a report to the Commons standards committee, Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary commissioner for standards, says:In a report to the Commons standards committee, Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary commissioner for standards, says:
Most of the late registrations are of payments which might reasonably be regarded as unpredictable, in the form of royalties and payments arising from the sale of books already written. However, these payments cannot have been entirely unexpected and, given that the House has made explicit that it expects members to fulfil their responsibilities “conscientiously”, it would have been prudent for Mr Johnson to have had an administrative system in place to ensure his compliance with those rules. It appears that he did not arrange that until after I had begun my inquiry.Most of the late registrations are of payments which might reasonably be regarded as unpredictable, in the form of royalties and payments arising from the sale of books already written. However, these payments cannot have been entirely unexpected and, given that the House has made explicit that it expects members to fulfil their responsibilities “conscientiously”, it would have been prudent for Mr Johnson to have had an administrative system in place to ensure his compliance with those rules. It appears that he did not arrange that until after I had begun my inquiry.
Although Mr Johnson has told me that the late registrations were “inadvertent”, the fact that the late registrations had happened on four separate occasions and involved nine payments, suggests a lack of attention to, or regard for, the House’s requirements rather than oversight or inadvertent error.Although Mr Johnson has told me that the late registrations were “inadvertent”, the fact that the late registrations had happened on four separate occasions and involved nine payments, suggests a lack of attention to, or regard for, the House’s requirements rather than oversight or inadvertent error.
In its own report, the standards committee says Johnson should apologise to the Commons for breaking its rules. The committee says:In its own report, the standards committee says Johnson should apologise to the Commons for breaking its rules. The committee says:
We conclude that Mr Johnson breached the rules of the House by failing to register remuneration within the required timetable on nine occasions.We conclude that Mr Johnson breached the rules of the House by failing to register remuneration within the required timetable on nine occasions.
We recommend that Mr Johnson should make an apology to the House, on a point of order, for this breach of the rules. We recommend that in that apology he should address the specific comments we make in this report, and that he should undertake to ensure that his future registrations of remuneration are made in a timely way.We recommend that Mr Johnson should make an apology to the House, on a point of order, for this breach of the rules. We recommend that in that apology he should address the specific comments we make in this report, and that he should undertake to ensure that his future registrations of remuneration are made in a timely way.
The prime minister was not being entirely frank in her interview on the Today programme, and the reality of the situation will do little to calm parliamentary concerns about her deal. In an attempt to peel off some Brexiters to her deal, Theresa May suggested in her morning interview that going into the backstop would be a choice made by the UK six months before the end of the transition period, set to last until the end of 2020.The prime minister was not being entirely frank in her interview on the Today programme, and the reality of the situation will do little to calm parliamentary concerns about her deal. In an attempt to peel off some Brexiters to her deal, Theresa May suggested in her morning interview that going into the backstop would be a choice made by the UK six months before the end of the transition period, set to last until the end of 2020.
She suggested that the British government could opt for an alternative at this decision making point in July 2020 - and that would be an extension of the transition period. May further offered parliament a role in deciding whether to extend the transition period or to go into the backstop solution for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland. The backstop involves the whole of the UK remaining in a customs union with the EU for an indefinite period, without the unilateral right to get out.She suggested that the British government could opt for an alternative at this decision making point in July 2020 - and that would be an extension of the transition period. May further offered parliament a role in deciding whether to extend the transition period or to go into the backstop solution for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland. The backstop involves the whole of the UK remaining in a customs union with the EU for an indefinite period, without the unilateral right to get out.
Unfortunately, the prime minister did not mention the decisive role of the EU at the ‘rendezvous’ point.Unfortunately, the prime minister did not mention the decisive role of the EU at the ‘rendezvous’ point.
In reality, the withdrawal agreement states that a joint EU-UK committee will decide whether an extension of the transition period “by up to one or two years” is to be triggered.In reality, the withdrawal agreement states that a joint EU-UK committee will decide whether an extension of the transition period “by up to one or two years” is to be triggered.
The EU’s position on this will be decided, in effect, by unanimity of its member states as the bloc’s 27 heads of state and government have been given the say, according to a document published at the November summit. The leaders never vote, but seek to come to a decision by consensus.The EU’s position on this will be decided, in effect, by unanimity of its member states as the bloc’s 27 heads of state and government have been given the say, according to a document published at the November summit. The leaders never vote, but seek to come to a decision by consensus.
This would allow a country concerned, for example, about the lack of a satisfactory agreement on fisheries, to block an extension of the transition period. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, has already suggested that he might be willing to do such a thing.This would allow a country concerned, for example, about the lack of a satisfactory agreement on fisheries, to block an extension of the transition period. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, has already suggested that he might be willing to do such a thing.
Should an extension be blocked by the EU, the default position would be for the UK to fall into the indefinite customs union envisaged in the backstop in the withdrawal agreement.Should an extension be blocked by the EU, the default position would be for the UK to fall into the indefinite customs union envisaged in the backstop in the withdrawal agreement.
But it gets worse. For disputes between the EU and the UK after the transition period ends, there is the possibility for the UK to appeal to an independent arbitration body if it feels that the bloc has not acted in good faith.But it gets worse. For disputes between the EU and the UK after the transition period ends, there is the possibility for the UK to appeal to an independent arbitration body if it feels that the bloc has not acted in good faith.
But during the transition period - and that includes at the pivotal ‘rendezvous point’ - the UK’s only recourse in the case of a dispute will be to the EU’s court, the European court of justice. There is no independent arbitration panel to which the British government can appeal.But during the transition period - and that includes at the pivotal ‘rendezvous point’ - the UK’s only recourse in the case of a dispute will be to the EU’s court, the European court of justice. There is no independent arbitration panel to which the British government can appeal.
Parliamentarians may well be given a say on British government policy with regard to triggering a transition extension or falling into the backstop. But the reality is that the UK will once again be beholden on the EU to agree. They may well not. And it will be the EU’s court that will be the final arbiter.Parliamentarians may well be given a say on British government policy with regard to triggering a transition extension or falling into the backstop. But the reality is that the UK will once again be beholden on the EU to agree. They may well not. And it will be the EU’s court that will be the final arbiter.
My colleague Rafeal Behr has posted a good threat on what might happen next with Brexit. “Sanity could still fall through the gaps,” he concludes (rightly, imho). The thread starts here.My colleague Rafeal Behr has posted a good threat on what might happen next with Brexit. “Sanity could still fall through the gaps,” he concludes (rightly, imho). The thread starts here.
short thread on a conversation many people having in parliament: 1. everything proceeds from presumption that there is no majority for May's deal. Also, there is no majority for no deal ...short thread on a conversation many people having in parliament: 1. everything proceeds from presumption that there is no majority for May's deal. Also, there is no majority for no deal ...
Anne-Marie Trevelyan, a Tory Brexiter, has dismissed Theresa May’s proposal for MPs to get a vote on whether or not the UK enters the backstop or extends the transition as “just hot air”, ITV’s Paul Brand reports.Anne-Marie Trevelyan, a Tory Brexiter, has dismissed Theresa May’s proposal for MPs to get a vote on whether or not the UK enters the backstop or extends the transition as “just hot air”, ITV’s Paul Brand reports.
NEW: Anne-Marie Trevelyan tells me on Around the House that the idea of a ‘parliamentary lock’ on the backstop is just ‘hot air’ and it will not change Brexiteers’ minds. 😬 pic.twitter.com/2G6QOS0TtDNEW: Anne-Marie Trevelyan tells me on Around the House that the idea of a ‘parliamentary lock’ on the backstop is just ‘hot air’ and it will not change Brexiteers’ minds. 😬 pic.twitter.com/2G6QOS0TtD
The European court of justice has announced that it will deliver its judgment in the article 50 case at 8am UK time on Monday. This will be the ruling that will clarify whether or not the UK can revoke article 50 unilaterally.The European court of justice has announced that it will deliver its judgment in the article 50 case at 8am UK time on Monday. This will be the ruling that will clarify whether or not the UK can revoke article 50 unilaterally.
Earlier this week’s the court’s advocate general delivered an opinion saying that the UK could revoke article 50 unilaterally. These opinions are normally, but not inevitably, a guide to the the court’s final decision.Earlier this week’s the court’s advocate general delivered an opinion saying that the UK could revoke article 50 unilaterally. These opinions are normally, but not inevitably, a guide to the the court’s final decision.
#Brexit: the ruling on the reversibility of #Article50 TEU (case C-621/18 Wightman) will be delivered on 10th December at 9 CET#Brexit: the ruling on the reversibility of #Article50 TEU (case C-621/18 Wightman) will be delivered on 10th December at 9 CET
CET is central European time, which is one hour ahead of GMT.CET is central European time, which is one hour ahead of GMT.
Here are the main points from Theresa May’s Today interview.Here are the main points from Theresa May’s Today interview.
May suggested that she could promise MPs a vote on whether to extend the transition or enter the backstop if one of those options becomes necessary. The withdrawal agreement says that, if he customs arrangements coming into force after the transition is due to end in December 2020 won’t avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland, it will be up to the UK government to choose between extending the transition or entering the backstop. In her interview May said that she was “looking at the question of the role of parliament in that choice”. She went on:May suggested that she could promise MPs a vote on whether to extend the transition or enter the backstop if one of those options becomes necessary. The withdrawal agreement says that, if he customs arrangements coming into force after the transition is due to end in December 2020 won’t avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland, it will be up to the UK government to choose between extending the transition or entering the backstop. In her interview May said that she was “looking at the question of the role of parliament in that choice”. She went on:
There will be a choice between, if we get to that point, a choice between going into the backstop and extending the transition period.There will be a choice between, if we get to that point, a choice between going into the backstop and extending the transition period.
Now, there are pros and cons of both sides of that.Now, there are pros and cons of both sides of that.
People have a concern of the backstop, that we could be in it indefinitely.People have a concern of the backstop, that we could be in it indefinitely.
But in the backstop we have no financial obligations, we have no free movement, we have very light level playing field rules with the EU.But in the backstop we have no financial obligations, we have no free movement, we have very light level playing field rules with the EU.
In the implementation period, we still have to negotiate the terms, but, there will be concerns about the fact that they would require, I’m sure they would require, some more money to be paid, for example.In the implementation period, we still have to negotiate the terms, but, there will be concerns about the fact that they would require, I’m sure they would require, some more money to be paid, for example.
So there would be arguments on different sides.So there would be arguments on different sides.
This offer has limited significance because it is hard to imagine that parliament would not have been consulted anyway about a decision like this. In fact, the government’s 56-page document (pdf) explaining what the withdrawal agreement means says as much. It says (bold type added by me):This offer has limited significance because it is hard to imagine that parliament would not have been consulted anyway about a decision like this. In fact, the government’s 56-page document (pdf) explaining what the withdrawal agreement means says as much. It says (bold type added by me):
Whether it would be preferable for the backstop to come into effect for a temporary period, or to request a temporary extension of the implementation period, will be a sovereign choice for the UK government. This would allow the UK government, with an appropriate role for parliament, to consider the right approach in the national interest.Whether it would be preferable for the backstop to come into effect for a temporary period, or to request a temporary extension of the implementation period, will be a sovereign choice for the UK government. This would allow the UK government, with an appropriate role for parliament, to consider the right approach in the national interest.
She played down reports that she might postpone the vote on Tuesday. Asked about this, she did not categorically say that the vote would go ahead on Tuesday night, but she said:She played down reports that she might postpone the vote on Tuesday. Asked about this, she did not categorically say that the vote would go ahead on Tuesday night, but she said:
We are in the middle of five days of debate in parliament which will lead up to a vote on this issue.We are in the middle of five days of debate in parliament which will lead up to a vote on this issue.
That questions was prompted by today’s Times splash, which says that Gavin Williamson, the defence secretary, and other cabinet ministers are urging May to postpone the vote.That questions was prompted by today’s Times splash, which says that Gavin Williamson, the defence secretary, and other cabinet ministers are urging May to postpone the vote.
The Times: May urged to call off Brexit vote #tomorrowspaperstoday pic.twitter.com/d1VuJB1beuThe Times: May urged to call off Brexit vote #tomorrowspaperstoday pic.twitter.com/d1VuJB1beu
But, as Jack Blanchard points out in his London Playbook briefing, to postpone the vote now May would have to pass a new business motion, which would involve another vote.But, as Jack Blanchard points out in his London Playbook briefing, to postpone the vote now May would have to pass a new business motion, which would involve another vote.
She repeatedly claimed that there were just three possible outcomes: her deal passing, the UK leaving the EU with no deal, or no Brexit.She repeatedly claimed that there were just three possible outcomes: her deal passing, the UK leaving the EU with no deal, or no Brexit.
She claimed that it was for her critics, not her, to come up with a “plan B”.She claimed that it was for her critics, not her, to come up with a “plan B”.
She said she hoped to be invited onto the Today programmes “more times” as prime minister.She said she hoped to be invited onto the Today programmes “more times” as prime minister.
And here are some general Twitter comments on the interview from journalists.And here are some general Twitter comments on the interview from journalists.
From the Evening Standard’s Kate ProctorFrom the Evening Standard’s Kate Proctor
I actually think not having a TV debate is a blessing for Downing Street considering this @BBCr4today interview. Pure Maybotism. Going round the houses and trotting out the usual phrases with zero passion. Neither the public nor MPs will be rallied by this.I actually think not having a TV debate is a blessing for Downing Street considering this @BBCr4today interview. Pure Maybotism. Going round the houses and trotting out the usual phrases with zero passion. Neither the public nor MPs will be rallied by this.
From the Observer’s Sonia SodhaFrom the Observer’s Sonia Sodha
Real prob for May that properly explaining the withdrawal agreement is so complicated. Sounding like she’s tied in knots.Real prob for May that properly explaining the withdrawal agreement is so complicated. Sounding like she’s tied in knots.
From Paul Mason, the former Channel 4 News and Newsnight broadcasterFrom Paul Mason, the former Channel 4 News and Newsnight broadcaster
May live on radio. Sounds bonkers, talking too fast at 0800 hrs. Enmired in detail and not communicating to electorate....May live on radio. Sounds bonkers, talking too fast at 0800 hrs. Enmired in detail and not communicating to electorate....
From Philip Webster, the former Times political editorFrom Philip Webster, the former Times political editor
May sounds so beleaguered that even JH sounds sympatheticMay sounds so beleaguered that even JH sounds sympathetic
From my colleague John CraceFrom my colleague John Crace
Why is Theresa May doing Today interview? Is she secretly a double agent working against her own government? #radio4todayWhy is Theresa May doing Today interview? Is she secretly a double agent working against her own government? #radio4today
Here is some comment from journalists on the PM’s hint that she might offer MPs a vote on whether the extend the transition as an alternative to the backstop, should that prove necessary. (See 8.50am.)Here is some comment from journalists on the PM’s hint that she might offer MPs a vote on whether the extend the transition as an alternative to the backstop, should that prove necessary. (See 8.50am.)
They are not impressed.They are not impressed.
From Newsnight’s Nicholas WattFrom Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt
So Theresa May is basically telling Today: parliament may have the right to make choices set out in withdrawal agreement (extend transition or go into NI backstop)....not change the withdrawal agreement @theresa_maySo Theresa May is basically telling Today: parliament may have the right to make choices set out in withdrawal agreement (extend transition or go into NI backstop)....not change the withdrawal agreement @theresa_may
Given that Theresa May is offering parliament the right to exercise choices set out in a withdrawal agreement currently opposed by a majority of MPs....PM will be very lucky if this one fliesGiven that Theresa May is offering parliament the right to exercise choices set out in a withdrawal agreement currently opposed by a majority of MPs....PM will be very lucky if this one flies
From the Financial Times’ George ParkerFrom the Financial Times’ George Parker
May was just describing what is *already* in the withdrawal treaty. In mid-2020, if trade deal not ready, Britain can choose whether to extend the transition (until end of 2022) or go into the backstop. Giving parliament a say in that choice hardly surprising.May was just describing what is *already* in the withdrawal treaty. In mid-2020, if trade deal not ready, Britain can choose whether to extend the transition (until end of 2022) or go into the backstop. Giving parliament a say in that choice hardly surprising.
From the Sunday Times’ Tim ShipmanFrom the Sunday Times’ Tim Shipman
May offering parliament a vote on entering the backstop. It is a choice. May has said Brexit must secure control of money, borders and laws while preserving jobs, security and the union. The backstop is better for the first 3 and remaining in the transition better for the last 3May offering parliament a vote on entering the backstop. It is a choice. May has said Brexit must secure control of money, borders and laws while preserving jobs, security and the union. The backstop is better for the first 3 and remaining in the transition better for the last 3
There are reports around yesterday that Theresa May was considering promising MPs that, if the UK gets to the point in 2020 where the backstop might be needed (because the customs arrangements coming into force after the transition ends in December 2020 won’t avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland), they will get to choose whether the UK enters the backstop or extends the transition. Both options are allowed under the withdrawal agreement. What May did this morning was confirm in her own words what her aides were briefing yesterday.There are reports around yesterday that Theresa May was considering promising MPs that, if the UK gets to the point in 2020 where the backstop might be needed (because the customs arrangements coming into force after the transition ends in December 2020 won’t avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland), they will get to choose whether the UK enters the backstop or extends the transition. Both options are allowed under the withdrawal agreement. What May did this morning was confirm in her own words what her aides were briefing yesterday.
Laura Kuenssberg is right to say that Tory Brexiters are unlikely to be impressed. This is what one of them, Nigel Evans, said about the suggestion in the debate yesterday.Laura Kuenssberg is right to say that Tory Brexiters are unlikely to be impressed. This is what one of them, Nigel Evans, said about the suggestion in the debate yesterday.
I have heard a rumour that the prime minister is thinking about a change, by saying that parliament should be able to vote on putting us into the backstop, and giving parliament that power. I do not want that power. Getting into the backstop is not the problem; it is getting out that is the problem. That is where this parliament needs to be able to make a decision—the decision to say, “Thank you. We’re leaving.”I have heard a rumour that the prime minister is thinking about a change, by saying that parliament should be able to vote on putting us into the backstop, and giving parliament that power. I do not want that power. Getting into the backstop is not the problem; it is getting out that is the problem. That is where this parliament needs to be able to make a decision—the decision to say, “Thank you. We’re leaving.”