PM could pull vote on her deal

She admits it might not have enough support after DUP refuse to back plan

THERESA May’s Brexit deal suffered a potentially fatal blow last night after she wrote to MPs admitting she might not seek a third vote in Parliament next week if she does not think it will pass.

Her letter followed a decision by the DUP to rule out support for her deal and warnings from ministers that the Prime Minister could be gone within days if she presses ahead with a new plan for MPs to vote on alternative options, including a soft Brexit or second referendum.

Mrs May wrote to MPs: ‘ If it appears there is not sufficient support to bring the deal back next week, or the House rejects it again, we can ask for another extension before April 12 – but that will involve holding European Parliament elections.’

As the Prime Minister’s crisis deepened, with the Cabinet at war over the best way forward, Nigel Dodds, the DUP’s Westminster leader, accused Mrs May of an ‘ inexcusable failure’ to secure changes from Brussels and criticised her for being ‘far too willing to capitulate’. The DUP’s dramatic move came as:

■ Pro-Brexit Tories demanded that Mrs May stand down, while a member of her Cabinet criticised her television address to the nation on Wednesday night in which she blamed MPs for Brexit delays;

■ EU leaders taunted Britain by warning it faces a choice between No Deal and a softer ‘Norway-style’ Brexit if the PM’s deal fails;

■ Mrs May told Boris Johnson she would not step aside to help resolve the impasse at a meeting on Tuesday, it was claimed;

■ Nigel Farage said he will take over leadership of the new Brexit Party after its former leader resigned over anti-Islam tweets;

■ A leaked Cabinet Office document revealed that Whitehall’s doomsday scenario for dealing with a No Deal Brexit could collapse due to unforeseen crises.

Before Mrs May’s letter was released, Whitehall sources said the Commons would be given seven options to vote on next week, including remaining in the EU’s customs union, a second referendum, No Deal or cancelling Brexit altogether.

The official proposal to hold these so- called ‘indicative votes’ triggered a fierce Tory backlash. One minister said last night: ‘If MPs push through a soft Brexit it will be game over. She will not survive.’ Eurosceptics accused Mrs May of ‘declaring open war’ on her own backbenchers. Former Brexit minister Steve Baker said: ‘National humiliation is imminent through these “indicative votes”. The wrong Conservatives have the levers of power.’ Tory MP Marcus Fysh said it was the ‘most ludicrous, childish and unrealistic idea I have ever seen’.

He added: ‘We were elected on a manifesto to leave the customs union and single market. To be doing this at the last minute is just absurd. It is quite astonishing that the Government should even consider it.It would be the most monumentally stupid course of action in modern times by any government of any kind, banana republic or otherwise.’

Michael Fabricant, the Tory MP for Lichfield, said: ‘If this is true, has Theresa May now decided to declare open war on all her back- benchers following her ill-advised statement last Wednesday night?’

Business Secretary Greg Clark last night confirmed the plans to offer ‘indicative votes’. But he argued that if ministers did not do this voluntarily they would be forced to anyway by a cross-party backbench amendment tabled by Labour’s Yvette Cooper, Tory Sir Oliver Letwin and others, which will be debated on Monday and is widely expected to pass.

Mr Clark told the BBC: ‘If it [Mrs May’s deal] doesn’t get passed then the Government will facilitate... the ability for Parliament to express a majority of what it would approve. I think that is the right step.’ Asked if that meant the PM would give MPs ‘indicative votes’, he said: ‘Yes.’

David Lidington, Mrs May’s de facto deputy, met opposition leaders yesterday to discuss how the votes could work. An opposition source said: ‘He told us they are looking at whether to give MPs the chance to pick just one option each, the opportunity to rank them in order of preference, or a simple for or against vote on each one. ’In the Commons, Brexit Minister Kwasi Kwarteng said if indicative votes were to take place it would be ‘surprising’ if Conservative MPs were not given the freedom to vote according to their personal views.

Mrs May had planned to bring back her Brexit deal to the Commons next week for a third attempt to get it passed. Downing Street had been hopeful that if it got the DUP’s 10 MPs on board, then a number of Eurosceptic Tory rebels would follow. But in a statement last night, Mr Dodds said ‘nothing has changed’ on the deal, indicating the party would vote against it for a third time.

‘The Prime Minister missed an opportunity at the EU Council to put forward proposals which could have improved the prospects of an acceptable withdrawal agreement and help unite the country,’ he said. ‘That failure is all the more inexcusable given the clear divisions and arguments which became evident amongst EU member states when faced with outcomes they don’t like.

‘Nothing has changed as far as the withdrawal agreement is concerned.’

IN Greek legend, the gods punished Sisyphus for his sins by making him push a very large boulder to the top of a very steep hill. Every time he neared the summit, the boulder would roll back down to the bottom, forcing him to repeat this thankless task through all eternity. As she considers hauling her EU withdrawal deal to the Commons yet again, the Prime Minister must feel she has much in common with that hapless King of Corinth – but wonder what she did to deserve such a fate.

The portents for a successful outcome from her labours certainly look bleak. In fact, they look so ominous that she’s written to MPs admitting the deal may not even be voted on again next week as planned.

The Democratic Unionists launched an intemperate attack on Mrs May yesterday, indicating they were unlikely to back the deal – a devastating blow.

And on Monday a cross-party group of MPs will bid to mount a coup against the Government.

Their aim is to seize the Brexit agenda, hold ‘indicative votes’ to establish whether Parliament can coalesce around a single option, and, if they can, take that option back to Brussels.

If they do find a majority for anything – by no means a certainty – the most likely option is so-called Norway-plus.

True, it has superficial attractions. We would leave the Common Agriculture and Fisheries Policies, be spared from ‘evercloser union’ and be in a slightly looser customs arrangement.

But we would remain inside the single market, concede free movement, continue with huge subscription payments and stay subject to EU law.

Given the referendum result, how could anyone in all conscience favour that arrangement over the May deal which, for all its flaws, takes back control of our borders, money and laws?

Events in Brussels this week changed some of the parameters – enough, one hopes, to make Speaker John Bercow clamber down from his high horse and drop his opposition to a third meaningful vote.

If it goes ahead and passes, we will leave the EU by May 22 and be able to get on with our lives. If it falls, Parliament has until April 12 to come up with a new plan. Whatever that is, it will surely lead to a softer and more protracted Brexit.

And who would take this plan to Brussels? After all that has gone before, Mrs May can hardly champion a deal which keeps us in the single market and customs union.

Indeed any Tory leader would find it impossible to sell an ultra-soft Brexit to the party. Activists already feel Britain has been pushed around quite enough by the EU.

Labour is even more compromised. Its MPs may be overwhelmingly Remainers but two-thirds of them represent Leave-voting constituencies. If they have any regard for democracy, they should back the deal.

In normal times, the way out of the impasse would be a general election. But even that is not guaranteed to solve our problems. What if it results in another hung parliament?

So we come back to just two viable alternatives. With No Deal now effectively off the table, it’s either the May deal or Brexit in name only.

With that choice in mind, Eurosceptics such as Boris Johnson and Dominic Raab should lead by example and back the deal. If they did, many Brexiteers – and possibly the DUP – would probably follow.

Sadly, both men have been reluctant to jump so far in case it damages their leadership credentials. But now is the time for statesmanship.

The whole party is on the brink of schism. They can either help drag it back from danger – or push it over into the void.

If it is the latter, as one Cabinet minister put it this week: ‘They may win the crown, but be without a kingdom.’