Bercow bombshell blocks May’s third vote on Brexit
● After Speaker derails strategy, PM faces asking EU for lengthy extension
The government’s dwindling hopes of passing its Brexit deal have been thrown into disarray by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, who dramatically ruled out a third vote unless there were substantial changes.
Mr B er cow said parliamentary rules dating back to 1604 made clear that a government could not bring back the same or similar motion “ad infinitum” even though MPS keep rejecting it.
With just ten days until Brexit is scheduled to take place, it means the Prime Minister has little alternative but to ask EU leaders for a lengthy delay of up to two years at a summit in Brussels on Thursday.
“Decisions of the House matter. They have weight,” the Speaker said. “It is a necessary rule to ensure the sensible use of the House’s time and the proper respect for the decisions which it takes.”
Critics of Mrs May’s deal on both sides of the Brexit debate cheered the shock announcement, with Brexiteers arguing the government should embrace a no-deal exit, while campaigners for a second EU referendum said the only way for the government to save its agreement was to accept
putting it to the people. The Speaker blindsided ministers with his intervention yesterday afternoon, which means that without changes to the Brexit deal, a further vote cannot be held until a new parliamentary session begins.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “The Speaker did not warn us of the contents of the statement or indeed the fact that he was making one.”
AD owning Street spokesman later said Mr B ercow’s statement“requires proper consideration”, but Solicitor General Robert Buckland said the UK was in the grips of a“major constitutional crisis” and warned that the government could be forced to prorogue parliament, asking the Queen to bring the current session to an end several months early.
“There are ways around this – a prorogation of parliament and a new session – but we are now talking about not just days but hours to 29 March,” Mr Buckland said. “Frankly we could have done without this, but it’s something we’re going to have to negotiate with and deal with.”
Citing rules set out in the parliamentary handbook Erskine May, Mr Bercow told MPS: “If the government wishes to bring forward a new proposition that is neither the same nor substantially the same as that disposed of by the House on 12 March, this would be entirely in order.
“What the government cannot legitimately do is resubmit to the House the same proposition – or substantially the same proposition – as that of last week, which was rejected by 149 votes.”
Any change must be“not different in terms of wording but different in terms of substance” and would need to be “in the context of a negotiation with others outside the UK”, Mr Bercow added.
While the government had signalled it wanted to bring back the deal for a third vote today or tomorrow, Downing Street said yesterday that it wouldn’t do so until it was clear that it could win.
A number of leading critics of the deal, including European Research Group chairman Jacob Rees-mogg, said they were now willing to back it to avoid a lengthy delay.
However, in a newspaper column, Boris Johnson said it was impossible for“anybody who believes in Brexit” to back the deal in its current form, and 23 Eurosceptic Tory MPS also said they were still opposed.
There is also no sign of the government’ s DUP shifting their stance to support the deal despite talks between the party and ministers over the weekend.
“The deal can’t be brought back,” Mr Blackford told jour- na lists after the Speaker’ s statement. “If there’s an extension, you have to ask – for what purpose?
“There has to be a purpose to it, and ultimately we have to reach the conclusion that we need to put this back to the people. That’s the right thing to do.”
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable said the Prime Minister would be forced to “change the deal in a fundamental way or face the other alternative, which is taking this back to the people with the option to remain”.
Mr Blackford added that if the government tried to push ahead with a no - deal Brexit, parliament would seek to have Article 50 revoked. “In such a scenario, we have to be able to apply a handbrake,” he said. Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit deal has a “slim chance” of being approved if it returns to the Commons, a minister has admitted.
Going before MPS after Speaker John Bercow ruled out a third vote on the deal until significant changes were made, Brexit minister Kwasi Kwarteng was pushed by both Remain and Leave MPS to give details of the delay the Prime Minister is set to ask the EU for this week.
At one stage Mr Kwarteng insisted the UK would leave with no-deal on 29 March if an extension to Article 50 was refused, having earlier accepted that MPS had taken no-deal off the table.
Former cabinet minister Justine Greening also questioned the “appropriateness” of Brexit
May’s deal has ‘slim chance’ of getting past MPS, minister admits
By Angus Howarth
Secretary Steve Barclay’s role in negotiating an extension to the Brexit process, given that he voted against an extension last week.
Labour asked if Mr Kwarteng believed his own statement to the Commons as he, like Mr Barclay, voted against the motion on extending Article 50.
After Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake asked what the reason for a long extension to the Brexit process would be, Mr Kwarteng said: “In a spirit of optimism I still believe there is a chance, it maybe a slim chance, that the meaningful vote will go through. People can scoff and laugh but I still believe that.”
Conservative Brexiteer Mark Francois was heard shouting “cuckoo, cuckoo” at this point.
Ms Greening, who secured an urgent question on an extension to Article 50, said: “We had a free vote in this House last week and I respect that. I also respect the way [Mr Barclay] chose to cast that vote, that was absolutely within his right.
“However, he chose to vote to leave come what may on 29 March. I take a different view to him, the House takes a different view to him.
“It is simply not appropriate or credible for him to be the lead person negotiating on this country’s behalf with the European Union.”
The Labour chairman of the Brexit committee Hilary Benn asked if the government intended to agree the extension at the meeting of the European Council this week and “does not intend to bring back the length of that extension to the House for endorsement”.
Mr Kwarteng replied: “The Prime Minister would write a letter and the length of time of the extension would be agreed between the EU and the UK government.”
Eurosceptic Sir Bill Cash, Conservative chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee and MP for Stone, said Mr Kwarteng had been unable to explain to his “satisfaction” why the UK needs an “extension at all” - particularly a long extension of the Article 50.
And Tory former minister Sir Desmond Swayne asked how “onerous” would the conditions for granting an extension have to be for the Government to “desist” from its intention to change the exit date in law.
Mr Kwarteng replied: “That ball is now rolling I’m afraid.”