Theresa May’s future as Prime Minister is in serious jeopardy after she conceded she might not garner enough support to get her twice-rejected Brexit deal through the Commons next week.
She warned MPs that if there is insufficient support for her Withdrawal Agreement in the coming days she could seek an extension to Britain's EU membership beyond the European Parliament elections.
It came after the DUP - whose support will be crucial if the Government is to win - indicated they would not back her deal, with the party's deputy leader Nigel Dodds lamenting the PM's failure to secure any changes to the Northern Ireland backstop while in Brussels.
"Nothing has changed as far as the Withdrawal Agreement is concerned. We will not accept any deal which poses a long-term risk to the constitutional and economic integrity of the United Kingdom," he said.
May sought to soften her approach in her letter to parliamentarians, offering to hold talks with MPs and thanking those who have backed her plan previously.
And she laid out the choices available to the Commons after she agreed a delay to Brexit with EU leaders in Brussels on Thursday night.
The PM said the UK could revoke Article 50; leave without a deal; ask for an extension beyond April 12 if her deal is rejected or not voted on; or leave on May 22 if it is finally approved.
May wrote: "If it appears that there is not sufficient support to bring the deal back next week, or the House rejects it again, we can ask for another extension before 12 April - but that will involve holding European Parliament elections.
"If it appears that there is sufficient support and the Speaker permits it, we can bring the deal back next week and if it is approved we can leave on 22 May."
It came as ministers moved to try to head off an attempt by MPs to seize control of Commons business in a bid to secure a "softer" Brexit.
A cross-party group of pro-EU MPs claimed they had the numbers to force a series of "indicative votes" on alternatives to Mrs May's Brexit deal.
But Business Secretary Greg Clark said the Government was prepared to enable Parliament to express a view on the various options if May's deal is rejected by the Commons for a third time next week.
Defeat for the Government on Monday on the amendment - tabled by former ministers Sir Oliver Letwin and Dominic Grieve and Labour MP Hilary Benn - would be a further humiliation for May.
If the amendment is passed, it would pave the way for a series of "indicative votes" in the House on Wednesday, effectively taking control of the Brexit process out of the hands of the Government.
As May battles to stay in Number 10, Prisons Minister Rory Stewart said replacing her would not help the situation.
"I would rather she stayed because I don't believe that changing Theresa May for someone else is going to resolve this problem," he told the BBC.
"The problems are deep in the wounds of the vote, Parliament, the European Union - it's not about a single individual."
Education Minister Nadhim Zahawi warned of a "political meltdown" if Brexit is delayed further, and said he was "not prepared" to tell his constituents that the UK would take part in the EU elections.
"If Parliament decides to vote down the Prime Minister's Withdrawal Agreement then I think it would be political meltdown and Parliament would have failed, he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
"Each and every one of us will have to ask ourselves the question: 'Am I prepared to go back to my constituents and say we're not leaving the EU, we're going to go for a much longer extension, and we're going to take part in the European elections?'
"I'm not prepared to do that. I don't think the Prime Minister is prepared to do that."
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