A second minister has quit the Government as Theresa May's decision to hold Brexit talks with Jeremy Corbyn sparked intense anger among Tories.
Brexit Minister Chris Heaton-Harris quit his post insisting that the UK should have left the EU on March 29 as scheduled.
In a letter to the Prime Minister he wrote: "I simply cannot support any further extension to Article 50".
The move came after Wales minister and whip Nigel Adams resigned saying the Prime Minister had made a "grave error" by reaching out to the Labour leader in the hope of finding a consensus on Brexit ahead of a crunch EU summit on April 10.
Leading Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg described the offer to Mr Corbyn as "deeply unsatisfactory" and accused Mrs May of planning to collaborate with "a known Marxist".
And normally-loyal Caroline Johnson joined a clutch of Tory backbenchers at Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons who spoke out against what she called "the risk of letting down the country and ushering in a Marxist, anti-Semite led government".
Mrs May was meeting the Labour leader in her Commons office in the hope of agreeing a position which can win a majority within the next few days, allowing her to request a short delay to Brexit at next week's summit.
European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said the EU would accept an extension to May 22 if the UK had approved Mrs May's Withdrawal Agreement by a "viable majority" before April 12.
But speaking in Brussels, he said a no-deal Brexit at the end of next week was becoming "more and more likely", adding: "April 12 is the final date for possible approval. If the House of Commons does not adopt a stance before that date no short-term extension will be possible."
Mrs May told MPs that the purpose of her meeting with Mr Corbyn was "to look at those areas we agree on".
"I think we both want to deliver leaving the EU with a deal," she said. "I think we both want to protect jobs. I think we both want to ensure that we end free movement. I think we both recognise the importance of the Withdrawal Agreement.
"What we want to do now is find a way forward that can command the support of this House and deliver on Brexit, deliver on the result of the referendum and ensure that people can continue to have trust in their politicians doing what they ask us to do."
Mr Corbyn said he welcomed Mrs May's "willingness to compromise to resolve the Brexit deadlock", but otherwise avoided the issue during their weekly PMQs clash.
Mrs May was also meeting Scottish and Welsh first ministers Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford.
In his letter of resignation to the PM, Mr Adams said the Government faced two "great challenges" of delivering "the Brexit the people voted for" and preventing a Corbyn premiership.
He added: "Sadly, I fear that we are now at risk of simultaneously failing in both."
The Selby and Ainsty MP - a close ally of Boris Johnson who took part in planning for his abortive push for the leadership in 2016 - said: "Legitimising and turning to Jeremy Corbyn to assist you at this crucial stage, rather than being bold, is a grave error."
Mr Adams, who was made a whip in January 2018 and promoted to the Wales Office in November, said he continued to believe no-deal was better than a bad deal.
"It now seems that you and your Cabinet have decided that a deal cooked up with a Marxist who has never once in his political life put British interests first is better than no deal, " he told the PM. "I profoundly disagree with this approach."
Mr Adams's resignation was the first since Tuesday's Cabinet meeting and came shortly after Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay said a softer Brexit was "the remorseless logic of the numbers of the House of Commons".
Mr Barclay told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "If the Prime Minister's deal won't go through and no deal in law is taken off the table, then the consequence of that is either a soft Brexit or no Brexit at all."
He blamed hardliners in Tory ranks for the situation, saying: "It's regrettable that what we have been saying for several months now is coming to pass, but that is the remorseless logic of not backing the Prime Minister's deal."
Mr Barclay later told the House of Commons Exiting the EU Committee that there had been no agreement at Tuesday's seven-hour Cabinet meeting for any extension beyond May 22.
Legislating for and holding a second referendum would take at least a year and was not the Government's policy, he said.
He told the cross-party committee that it remained possible that European Parliament elections could take place in the UK on May 23, though he stressed this was not the Government's intention.
At Prime Minister's Questions, a succession of Tory backbenchers got up to challenge the decision to hold talks with Mr Corbyn.
North-East Derbyshire MP Lee Rowley pointed out that the PM had last week called the Labour leader "the biggest threat to our standing in the world, to our defence, and to our economy" and asked: "In her judgment what now qualifies him for involvement in Brexit?"
And former Brexit minister David Jones asked: "Does it remain the position of the Prime Minister that the leader of the opposition is not fit to govern?"
A spokesman for the Labour leader later brushed off the attacks, telling reporters: "We are clear that there needs to be a majority found in Parliament to break the Brexit deadlock.
"A few insults here or there is not going to dim Jeremy's commitment to do what is right."
International Trade Secretary Liam Fox will address a potentially explosive meeting of the Tory backbench 1922 Committee on Wednesday evening.
Meanwhile, a cross-party group of MPs was attempting to force legislation to stop a no-deal Brexit through the Commons in a single day.
The single-clause Bill tabled by Yvette Cooper requires the Prime Minister to table a motion seeking MPs' approval for an extension to the Article 50 process beyond April 12 to a date of her choosing.
Labour is backing the bill, but Conservative MPs are being whipped to oppose it, as well as a business motion which would also put a third round of indicative votes on to the Commons timetable on Monday.
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