LABOUR will back the Yvette Cooper and Nick Boles amendment "to reduce the threat of the chaos of a no-deal exit" but will seek to shorten the extension to Article 50, a party source said.
He went on: "The Cooper Bill could give MPs a temporary window to agree a deal that can bring the country together. We will aim to amend the Cooper Bill to shorten the possible Article 50 extension."
John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, is due to announce shortly which amendments he has selected for debate and a vote.
The amendment tabled by senior Tory backbencher, Sir Graham Brady, which calls for "alternative arrangements" to the Irish backstop, has the backing of Theresa May's Government, which will whip MPs in favour of it in tonight's vote.
No 10 announced that the Prime Minister will open the Commons debate rather than close it as originally planned, so she could explain why she was backing the Brady amendment.
She told the weekly Cabinet meeting this morning that she is ready to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement to seek legally-binding changes to the backstop, in the hope of winning the support of Parliament for her Brexit deal.
Her spokesman said she aimed to return to the Commons "as soon as possible" with a revised deal which would be subject to a "meaningful vote" by MPs. If this were rejected by MPs, she would table a further amendable motion for debate the next day.
If no new deal had been reached with the EU by February 13, Mrs May would then make a statement to the House that day and table an amendable motion for debate the following day.
Meanwhile, support was growing from members of both the Remain and Leave camps of the Conservative party for a so-called Plan C.
The proposal - dubbed the The Malthouse Compromise after minister Kit Malthouse who brought the parties together - would lead to Britain leaving the EU "on time and with a functioning government", former Brexit minster Steve Baker explained.
The plan "provides for exit from the EU on time with a new backstop, which would be acceptable indefinitely, but which incentivises us all to reach a new future relationship".
It would extend the transition period - the period where the UK would continue to follow EU rules and pay into its budget - from the end of 2020 and into December 2021 which would "allow both parties to prepare properly for WTO terms, but also provide a period in which the parties could obviate this outcome by negotiating a mutually beneficial future relationship".
Interestingly, DUP leader Arlene Foster gave her party's support to the Malthouse Compromise.
"We believe it can unify a number of strands in the Brexit debate including the views of Remainers and Leavers," she said.
"It also gives a feasible alternative to the backstop proposed by the European Union which would split the United Kingdom or keep the entire United Kingdom in the customs union and single market.
"Importantly, this proposal would also offer a route towards negotiating a future trade relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union.
"If the Prime Minister is seeking to find a united front, both between elements in her own party and the DUP, in the negotiations which she will enter with the European Union, then this is a proposition which she should not turn her back on.
"There is no better time to advance this alternative given the confusion and disarray which is now manifesting itself in Brussels. This has been displayed both by the contradictory EU statements and the panic-stricken behaviour of the Irish Government," she 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