HISTORIC DAY IN COMMONS

▪ Johnson confident he will get his way ▪ Yorkshire Labour MPs to defy leader ▪ Amendment may force an extension

BORIS JOHNSON’S hopes of getting his Brexit deal passed by Parliament today have been boosted by the support of a handful of Labour MPs in Yorkshire.

Melanie Onn, Sarah Champion and Sir Kevin Barron all declared they would vote for Mr Johnson’s deal yesterday, with Caroline Flint also likely to be among a bloc of red rosettes defying leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Any Labour MPs voting for the deal were threatened by National Executive Committee member and Momentum founder Jon Lansman, who said they faced deselection if they went ahead with their plans.

But outgoing Rother Valley MP Sir Kevin said: “Threats such as this one will have no impact at all on the way I vote.”

Grimsby MP Ms Onn said: “The risk of letting this final shot at a deal slip through our fingers is too great.

“Our collective hope rests on brave Labour MPs, and indeed others, who can see that.”

In an email to a constituent, Ms Champion said: “The deal that Boris Johnson has struck is far from perfect. But we are faced with the choice between that deal and a catastrophic no-deal Brexit.”

The Rotherham MP said: “In these circumstances, and with the views of the majority of my constituents in mind, I can confirm I will vote for the deal.”

Mr Corbyn said he would rather deal with dissenters through the “power of persuasion rather than the power of threat”.

But in a sign of MPs’ distrust of Downing Street, an amendment to the vote has been proposed for Mr Johnson to ask for a Brexit delay before the legislation is passed.

Exiled Tory Sir Oliver Letwin and Leeds Central Labour MP Hilary Benn have requested an amendment that, if selected by Commons Speaker John Bercow,

could mean MPs withhold support of the deal until the Brexit legislation has been safely approved.

This would trigger the Benn Act introduced by MPs opposed to a no-deal departure from the European Union and compel the PM to request a delay until the end of January.

Sir Oliver said the one issue that concerned him was keeping the Benn Act extension in place as an insurance policy until the implementing legislation was passed by both Houses of Parliament and the UK withdrawal ratified.

He said the purpose of his amendment was to “remove from the Government’s motion the bits that would have had the legal effect of satisfying the Benn Act conditions and would therefore have removed the need for the PM to seek an extension”.

By way of explaining what has confused many, he added: “In short, my aim is to ensure that Boris’s deal succeeds, but that we have an insurance policy which prevents the UK from crashing out on October 31 by mistake if something goes wrong during the passage of the implementing legislation.”

Despite the uphill battle, Mr Johnson said he was “very confident” MPs will back his lastminute deal as he urged parliamentarians to “come together and get this thing done”.

Getting the deal approved would avoid an almighty clash over whether the PM abides by the Benn Act and asks for a delay, a move he has repeatedly ruled out.

But any delay would need the consent of the EU and Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar warned MPs they should not make the assumption all 27 remaining EU leaders would give this despite Ireland being “open to it”.

Yorkshire Conservatives were on the whole supporting Mr Johnson’s deal, while many Labour MPs were following their party’s lead in rejecting it.

Paula Sherriff, Labour MP for Dewsbury, said: “We’ve had no assurances over employment and consumer rights, safeguards for our environment or continuity of security arrangements.

“It is becoming increasingly clear Johnson’s deal could provide a vehicle for a no-deal Brexit, which I have consistently opposed.

“My constituents did not vote to become poorer and I will not support a deal that sells out our economy, manufacturing and jobs and paves the way for a sell-off of our NHS and public services.”

But Scarborough and Whitby Tory Robert Goodwill said: “I supported Mrs May’s deal three times and this is a much-improved compromise.

“To do otherwise would be to fall into the Labour Party’s trap and conspire with them to steal Brexit from the British people.” Pudsey MP Stuart Andrew added: “I am backing the deal because people said the Prime Minister was not really interested in securing a deal and that one would not be possible.

“However he has proved them wrong on both counts.

“Also, more crucially, the overwhelming message I have received from constituents is they want a deal and to get Brexit done. That is what this deal allows us to do.

“So I will be voting for it and I hope that those in Parliament who have been wanting to stop a no-deal scenario will do the same.”

The DUP has rejected the deal, making today’s vote even closer. Arlene Foster’s party has also started a bid to convince Conservatives to vote with its 10 MPs. The Northern Irish party wields significant influence over Tory Brexiteers and is seen as being able to swing members of the hardline ERG.

Parliament will sit from 9.30am today – the first Saturday sitting since 1982 after Argentina’s invasion of the Falkland Islands.

We have to consider how long we can delay and seem to frustrate what was a pretty clear democratic expression of the will of the people and I think that it would be a great and a fine thing if we could get it done ...

Prime Minister Boris Johnson, speaking on the eve of the vote in the House of Commons

IT WAS an irony of timing that Simon Weston CBE, the most famous and recognisable survivor of the Falklands conflict, should have been the guest speaker at The Yorkshire Post literary lunch this week as MPs prepare for a historic Saturday sitting over Brexit.

The last time that Parliament convened at a weekend came in April 1982 immediately after the Argentine invasion of the South Atlantic islands when MPs sanctioned the sailing of a Royal Navy task force to liberate the Falklands.

Even though proceedings were not broadcast on television, families across the country huddled around radios, listening to every cough and spit of the debate, because they recognised that this country’s international reputation was effectively on the line. More pertinently, the lives of those sent in to defend the nation’s sovereignty were also at stake in a debate which had consequences. And, ultimately, more than 250 British military personnel did not return home – including the 48 killed when the Sir Galahad was bombed in Saint Carlos Water.

A lucky survivor of the explosions and blaze that followed, it makes Simon Weston’s comments even more apropos. Talking about his lifelong physical and mental scars with characteristic dignity, he respects the sincerity of MPs who took part in that historic debate in spite of a rather naive view that Argentina would back down before the Task Force passed Ascension Island.

However, while the liberation of the Falklands is very different to Brexit, in spite of the military metaphors used so liberally, and sometimes irresponsibly, by Boris Johnson and others, today’s occasion is just as historic.

Like 1982, Britain’s standing in the world is on the line – albeit whether this country’s future global prestige, from an economic perspective, is best served by continued membership of the European Union or not.

And though the tone of the debate is likely to be far more rancourous than the still memorable exchanges a generation ago, not least because Brexit has become all-consuming for so long, many MPs will find themselves in an invidious position as they try to wrestle personal and political conflicts of loyalty.

In doing so, they need to resolve two fundamental questions – which outcome will be in the best interests of their constituents and what, in their view, is the best way of honouring the outcome of the 2016 referendum so Britain, and its partners in the EU and wider world, can begin to move on with certainty, clarity and confidence.

And here the comparison with the Falklands becomes event more valid. The decision taken on April 3, 1982, galvanised and united a dispirited and divided nation at a time of profound social unrest and economic tumult.

Yet the outcome of proceedings on October 19, 2019, another day of destiny, risk having precisely the opposite effect unless MPs on all sides show statesmanship and begin to chart Britain’s future course. Brexit is not primarily about them. It is about the livelihoods of families across the land

– a point that they must recognise as they prepare to take the defining decisions of their political careers.