THE European Parliament is to demand that last week's Brexit deal is converted into a legally binding text as soon as possible after David Davis was accused of undermining trust.
Guy Verhofstadt, its chief Brexit co-ordinator, said suggestions from the Brexit Secretary that the agreement was not binding had damaged MEPs’ trust in the UK.
On Sunday, Mr Davis appeared to suggest that the UK could seek to alter agreements on divorce issues including the Irish border, citizens' rights and the UK's £39 billion financial settlement, saying the deal was "much more a statement of intent than it was a legally enforceable thing".
After the Irish Government branded the comment "bizarre", the Secretary of State took to the airwaves once again yesterday, saying that Britain's commitment on the border issue was "much more than just legally enforceable".
Margaritis Schinas, the European Commission spokesman, later confirmed that the joint report published last week by Mr Davis and Michel Barnier, the EU Brexit negotiator, was "not legally binding" until it was incorporated in a formal Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement, expected in the autumn of 2018.
But asked if it was therefore possible for either side to back down on it, Mr Schinas stressed that it was regarded in Brussels as "a deal between gentlemen," which was "fully backed and endorsed" by the UK Government. He noted that Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker, the Commission President, had shaken hands on it.
Mr Verhofstadt suggested that MEPs would like to bring forward moves to make the agreement legally binding.
"Remarks by David Davis that Phase One deal last week not binding were unhelpful and undermine trust," he said in a tweet.
"European Parliament text will now reflect this and insist agreement translated into legal text ASAP."
The former Belgian premier said the UK must "stick to its commitments" and put them into a draft Withdrawal Agreement "as soon as possible" if there was to be progress in the second phase of negotiations on trade.
He has tabled two amendments for MEPs to consider in the European Parliament; one says Mr Davis's comments "risk to undermine the good faith that has been built during the negotiations" while the other calls on Britain to "fully respect" last week's Brexit deal and ensure it is "fully translated" into a draft Withdrawal Agreement.
Mr Verhofstadt explained that he had introduced the amendments alongside four other European Parliament groups, including the PPE group led by Manfred Weber, a close ally of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, as they are concerned about the "unacceptable description by David Davis of this agreement, saying it was merely a statement of intent, rather than a legally enforceable text".
In a Brussels press conference he went on: "And in our opinion that is really undermining the trust that is necessary in such negotiations.
"And the second amendment will therefore clearly indicate that before we can make progress in the second phase of the negotiations that that is absolutely necessary that the UK stick to its commitments and that these commitments are faithfully translated into the Withdrawal Agreement as fast as possible."
In response the Prime Minister’s spokesman said: "The Secretary of State set out yesterday - and the Commission agreed with him - that the agreement that was reached last week is a political agreement but that will move forward into a Withdrawal Agreement, which will be legally binding.
"The commitment is clear from the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union that we don't want a hard border; everybody understands that," he added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel