AFTER suffering the humiliation of three consecutive Commons defeats on Brexit, a beleaguered Theresa May faced MPs, warning them that the "only certainty would be uncertainty" if they rejected her Brexit Plan next week.
At the start of the first of five eight-hour debates on the UK-EU deal, the Prime Minister said: “Don't let anyone here think that there's a better deal to be had by shouting louder. Don't imagine that if we vote this down another deal is going to miraculously appear.
"The alternative is uncertainty and risk; the risk Brexit could be stopped, the risk we could crash out with no deal," she declared.
At the end of her 66-minute speech, Mrs May told MPs: "We should not let the search for a perfect Brexit prevent a good Brexit that delivers for the British people," adding: “With my whole heart I commend this motion to the House."
Watching from the peers’ gallery, Christopher Gill, the former Tory MP, had to be told to sit down by Commons doorkeepers after standing up as she finished and shouting: "Outrageous!"
Jeremy Corbyn noted how the PM had achieved something remarkable with her Brexit Plan: "It has united both Conservative Remainers and Conservative Leavers and members of every opposition party in an extraordinary coalition against the deal.”
Just like her predecessor David Cameron, Mrs May, who could have built a consensus, was accused by the Labour leader of instead using the Brussels talks as an “exercise in the internal management of the Conservative Party".
Mr Corbyn added: "This Government is not taking back control, it is losing control."
Ardent Brexiteer Boris Johnson told MPs: “I really can't believe there is a single member of this House who sincerely believes this deal we have before us is a good deal."
At this point, one Tory MP was heard saying: "Actually, there are a lot," before Ed Vaizey, the former Conservative minister, leapt to his feet to declare his support for the PM’s deal.
The former Foreign Secretary noted: "There's one; I said sincerely."
Noting how the the Government's heart did not appear to be in the PM’s deal, he added: "It has brought us together; Remainers and Leavers, myself and Tony Blair, the whole Johnson family is united in the belief that this is, I'm afraid, a national humiliation that makes a mockery of Brexit."
Ian Blackford for the SNP berated the PM's Brexit plan over its approach to EU nationals, saying: “The thought we would take up the drawbridge and stop people coming to participate in the growth of our country is quite fundamentally repugnant to me."
Earlier in a dramatic development, MPs backed an amendment tabled by Conservative backbencher Dominic Grieve, the former Attorney General, which aims to give MPs a greater say on the way forward should Mrs May’s Brexit Plan – as is expected - be defeated.
It was approved by 321 votes to 299, a majority of 22.
Remainers believe this means that when MPs reject the PM’s proposal next Tuesday, they can table amendments to her Plan B, calling for a People’s Vote or a Norway-style option, thus ensuring the avoidance of a no-deal scenario.
Before this vote, MPs engaged in a five-hour debate on a motion claiming the Government was in contempt of Parliament for not publishing the full legal advice on Mrs May’s Brexit Plan as ordered by MPs in a recent Commons vote.
Labour’s Sir Keir Starmer moved the contempt motion, saying the Government had been "wilfully refusing to comply" with a binding order issued by MPs over the Brexit legal advice.
"That is contempt," he declared.
The Shadow Brexit Secretary accused the Government of ignoring Opposition motions "for months", adding this tactic had "got them into very deep water indeed".
But Andrea Leadsom, the Commons Leader, hit back, saying Geoffrey Cox, the Attorney General, had treated Parliament with nothing but respect, noting: “There can be no question that he or the Government has acted in a manner which is contemptuous of this House."
- READ MORE: ECJ ruling - What happens next and will it stop Brexit? Here's everything you need to know
She argued publishing the full legal text would be "irresponsible", stressing: "It would mean releasing information with no method for the House itself to review or assess the information in question before its release into the full domain."
MPs rejected a Government move to refer the contempt issue to the Commons Privileges Committee by 311 votes to 307, a majority of four, and then backed the main cross-party contempt motion by 311 votes to 293, a majority of 18.
Promising to publish the advice on Wednesday, a downcast Ms Leadsom told MPs: "We've listened carefully and in light of the expressed will of the House we will publish the final and full advice provided by the Attorney General to Cabinet but, recognising the very serious constitutional issues this raises, I have referred the matter to the Privileges Committee…”
Meanwhile, the BBC dropped plans to hold a Brexit debate between Mrs May and Mr Corbyn, saying it "could not reach an agreement" on its proposal due to have been aired on Sunday December 9, two days before the key Commons vote.
Labour said the BBC's proposed format was a "mish-mash with a lop-sided panel of other politicians and public figures" taking part but No 10 denounced the Opposition's objections as "false and flimsy".
ITV issued a statement, saying its invitation to host a televised debate on December 9 still stood.
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