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/2019/oct/22/soft-brexit-tories-might-back-deal-if-wto-loophole-closed

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Boris Johnson faces clash with soft Brexit Tories over WTO default Johnson threatens to scrap Brexit bill and seek election before Christmas
(32 minutes later)
Boris Johnson faces a clash with soft Brexit MPs that could derail his Brexit bill, as Downing Street indicated it would not give way to demands to potentially extend the transition period beyond 2020 if this avoided a default to World Trade Organisation terms. Boris Johnson has threatened to pull the Brexit legislation and seek an election before Christmas if MPs vote to stop him rushing it through the House of Commons in three days.
Philip Hammond, among a series of moderate Conservatives and ex-Conservatives who have expressed concern at the bill’s rapid parliamentary timetable, told the Times that the bill was “a camouflage to a no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020”. Speaking in the House of Commons, the prime minister said a vote against his timetable would delay Brexit for three months if the EU decides to grant the extension.
Rory Stewart, another of the 21 Tories who had the whip withdrawn last month, said he and some of his fellow rebels had been negotiating “through the night” to give parliament more control over the next phase of the Brexit negotiations, including being able to vote for an extension to the talks. “I will in no way allow months more of this. If parliament refuses to allow Brexit to happen and instead gets its way and decides to delay everything until January or possibly longer, in no circumstances can the government continue with this. And with great regret, I must say the bill will have to be pulled and we will have to go forward to a general election,” he said.
MPs have been given just three days to consider the withdrawal agreement bill (WAB), the legislation which formally puts the Brexit deal into law under treaty, prompting concern the process is being rushed. A No 10 source highlighted the key caveat that the bill would be pulled only if the EU grants a three-month extension – the length of delay requested under the Benn act. It raises the possibility that Johnson could accept a shorter extension if one were to be offered by the EU.
Johnson made the threat as Downing Street tries to face down soft-Brexit Conservative MPs who are refusing to agree to the accelerated timetable without further concessions to stop a no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020
Philip Hammond, the former chancellor, and Rory Stewart, another former cabinet minister, are leading the rebellion against the programme motion if there is no mechanism to stop crashing out on World Trade Organization terms at the end of 2020.
Hammond told the Times the bill was “a camouflage to a no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020”. Stewart, another of the 21 Tories who had the party whip withdrawn last month, said he and some of his fellow rebels had been negotiating “through the night” to give parliament more control over the next phase of the Brexit negotiations, including being able to vote for an extension to the talks.
However, the group of 21 former Tory MPs is split, meaning the government could possibly narrowly still win with the backing of some Labour MPs.
Margot James, another of the whipless Tories, told the Guardian she was planning to support the government on all votes. Ed Vaizey, another former Conservative, also indicated he was planning to vote for Johnson’s timetable, although he said he may change his mind if Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the House of Commons, continued to send “ludicrous tweets” saying “a vote against the programme motion is a vote against Brexit”.
Others are agonising over the decision, amid fears there could be consequences of Johnson’s Brexit deal that will take longer than three days to spot.
No 10’s threat to pull the bill appear intended to scare MPs who want a Brexit deal passed before an election.
MPs have been given three days to consider the withdrawal agreement bill (WAB), the legislation that formally puts the Brexit deal into law under treaty, prompting concern the process is being rushed.
The Commons will vote on Monday evening on the so-called programme motion, which sets out this timetable, shortly after voting on the second reading for the bill.The Commons will vote on Monday evening on the so-called programme motion, which sets out this timetable, shortly after voting on the second reading for the bill.
Several MPs have raised the worry that a clause of the WAB allowing an extension to the transition period beyond the end of 2020 can only be triggered by ministers, not parliament, and that if no trade deal was completed before then, it could be a “trap door” to no deal. Many MPs have raised the worry that a clause of the WAB allowing an extension to the transition period beyond the end of 2020 can only be triggered by ministers, not parliament, and that if no trade deal was completed before then, it could be a “trapdoor” to no deal.
However, Johnson’s spokesman insisted the 2020 deadline was sufficient, and that the PM had no intention of allowing a longer extension period.However, Johnson’s spokesman insisted the 2020 deadline was sufficient, and that the PM had no intention of allowing a longer extension period.
“It’s set out very clearly in the political declaration that the UK and the EU sides both agree that the implementation period concludes at the end of 2020,” he said. “The prime minister has been clear on any number of occasions that he is not intending to extend the implementation period.”“It’s set out very clearly in the political declaration that the UK and the EU sides both agree that the implementation period concludes at the end of 2020,” he said. “The prime minister has been clear on any number of occasions that he is not intending to extend the implementation period.”
Separately, in a message aimed at wavering rebels, No 10 sources hinted that if MPs voted down the programme motion that would be seen as a sign no Brexit bill could be passed by the current parliament, and that the WAB would be doomed, potentially requiring. an election. To deal with the issue of a 2020 crash-out, Nick Boles, a former Tory, said he had tabled an amendment that would go even further, making a two-year extension to the transition period automatic if there were no trade deal in place by the end of next year.
The sources noted that the only previous time a programme motion was voted down, in 2012 over House of Lords reform, the relevant bill was dropped. He said it would “would require the government to seek an extension to the transition to December 2022 unless MPs vote to the contrary … essential to stop hardline ERG members forcing through a no-deal Brexit in December 2020.”
It sets up a potentially crucial clash in the vote over the programme motion, which could be lost if Hammond and enough other ex-Tories oppose it.
Speaking earlier to the BBC, Stewart said a priority should be “making sure that any parliament that is sitting has proper control over the mandate for the future trading negotiations”.
He suggested he was still against “ramming through” the bill without due scrutiny, with talks ongoing.
Nick Boles, a former Tory, said he had tabled an amendment that would go even further, making a two-year extension to the transition period automatic if there were no trade deal in place by the end of next year.
He said it would “would require the government to seek an extension to the transition to December 2022 unless MPs vote to the contrary … essential to stop hardline ERG members forcing through a no-deal Brexit in Dec 2020.”
Margot James, another of the whipless Tories, told the Guardian she was planning to support the government on all votes. Ed Vaizey, another former Conservative, also indicated he was planning to vote for Johnson’s timetable, although he said he may change his mind if Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the House of Commons, continued to send “ludicrous tweets” saying “a vote against the programme motion is a vote against Brexit”.
A third former Tory, Richard Benyon, told Sky News he would be backing the programme motion, too. “Whether you had three days, three weeks or three months debating this, you would not hear one original argument that we hadn’t otherwise heard in this process,” he said.
The support of the former Tory independents will be crucial for Johnson’s chances of getting his timetable through, but the prime minister would probably also need some Labour MPs and former Labour independents to back him.
Clause 30, among a series of contentious clauses identified in the 115-page WAB, which MPs first saw on Monday evening, dictates that only ministers can seek a longer transition period, even though this must then be approved by parliament.Clause 30, among a series of contentious clauses identified in the 115-page WAB, which MPs first saw on Monday evening, dictates that only ministers can seek a longer transition period, even though this must then be approved by parliament.
Hilary Benn, the Labour MP who chairs the Brexit select committee, tweeted: “What happens if the government doesn’t propose an extension? Parliament would have no say and we would exit the transition period on the 31 Dec 2020 even if a trade agreement hadn’t been reached by then with the EU; ie no deal.” Hilary Benn, the Labour MP who chairs the Brexit select committee, tweeted: “What happens if the government doesn’t propose an extension? Parliament would have no say and we would exit the transition period on the 31 December 2020 even if a trade agreement hadn’t been reached by then with the EU; ie no deal.”
The Green MP Caroline Lucas called the clause “the trapdoor to no deal”, adding: “If the government doesn’t propose an extension to the transition, MPs have no say, and therefore if negotiations on future relationship unfinished by end of December next year, we’re out.”The Green MP Caroline Lucas called the clause “the trapdoor to no deal”, adding: “If the government doesn’t propose an extension to the transition, MPs have no say, and therefore if negotiations on future relationship unfinished by end of December next year, we’re out.”
BrexitBrexit
Rory StewartRory Stewart
European UnionEuropean Union
EuropeEurope
Foreign policyForeign policy
Boris JohnsonBoris Johnson
newsnews
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content