THE Conservative Party was at breaking point last night as furious Brexiters condemned Theresa May’s offer of last-ditch talks with Jeremy Corbyn aimed at thrashing out an EU withdrawal plan both can agree on
They warned the lurch to a softer Brexit would cost the Conservative Party votes in future elections as the Prime Minister’s proposal could potentially result in the Tory Government breaking its manifesto pledge not to see Britain remain in the European Union’s single market and customs union.
Boris Johnson expressed disappointment the Cabinet had entrusted the “final handling of Brexit” to the Labour leader and his party.
"The PM and Cabinet have concluded any deal is better than no-deal...one that leaves us being run by the EU. I can under no circumstances vote for a deal involving a customs union as that does not deliver on the referendum," said the former Foreign Secretary.
His fellow Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg noted: “Getting the support of a known Marxist is not likely to instil confidence in Conservatives."
The Somerset MP said Mrs May’s announcement was an attempt to overturn the referendum that wanted a clear Brexit; “to do a deal with a Socialist who doesn't want Brexit and is not in line with the Conservative Party's manifesto commitments or with the referendum”.
Her offer to Mr Corbyn was welcomed by the Labour leader, who said he was “very happy” to meet the PM, insisting he would “not set any limits” on the talks.
It came in a statement in Downing Street after a marathon seven-hour Cabinet meeting, described as “divisive” and “tense”.
The PM - who is expected to meet the Labour leader on Wednesday - made clear that to avoid Britain crashing out of the EU on April 12, she would seek from Brussels a further extension to the Article 50 process; it would be “as short as possible” and end once a deal were passed.
But the proposal split the Cabinet 14 to 10 with the majority against. However, a “key intervention” by Geoffrey Cox, the Attorney General, proved decisive and the Cabinet “collectively” agreed the move.
At one point, Chancellor Philip Hammond called for a general election or a second referendum to resolve the Brexit issue but this was received badly by colleagues. It is also believed the issue of a national unity government was discussed but not agreed to.
After the 930am to 5pm Cabinet, fuelled by Chilean red wine and sandwiches, Mrs May addressed the TV cameras from inside No 10, saying: “This debate, this division, cannot drag on much longer. It is putting MPs and everyone else under immense pressure and it is doing damage to our politics.”
She announced she was taking action to “break the logjam” by offering to sit down with the Labour leader to “try to agree a plan that we would both stick to, to ensure we would leave the EU...with a deal”.
But she stressed it would have to abide by the current negotiated Withdrawal Agreement; meaning the party leaders had to focus solely on the future relationship with the EU.
The “ideal outcome” would be an agreed approach on a future relationship that delivered on the referendum result, which could put to MPs for approval and which she could then take to next Wednesday’s European Council.
But Mrs May explained if she and Mr Corbyn could not agree on a “single unified approach,” then a run-off would take place; possibly on Monday. This would involve a number of options put before MPs in a series of votes to determine the way forward.
“Crucially,” explained the PM, “the Government stands ready to abide by the decision of the House. But to make this process work, the Opposition would need to agree to this too.”
This means that, if, say, the Commons backed a customs union option, Mrs May would be duty-bound to take it to the EU.
Once an option were agreed to, the Government would then bring forward the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, which it would want to agree a timetable for to ensure it was passed before May 22, so Britain need not take part in Euro elections.
“This is a difficult time for everyone,” declared the PM. “Passions are running high on all sides of the argument. But we can and must find the compromises that will deliver what the British people voted for. This is a decisive moment in the story of these islands and it requires national unity to deliver the national interest.”
Mr Corbyn stressed his party’s plans for a customs union and access to vital markets as well as consumer, environmental and employment protections would be on the table. So too would an “absolute guarantee” the Good Friday Agreement was maintained for peace in Northern Ireland.
The Labour leader said, while the PM had thus far not compromised, he was pleased she had reached out.
“However people voted in the referendum of 2016, they didn’t vote for lower living standards or to lose their jobs. And there’s far more that unites people on both sides than divides them,” he added.
Ian Blackford for the SNP denounced Mrs May’s “can-kicking statement,” saying it merely prolonged the Brexit agony instead of providing clarity on a way forward.
He added: “What the Brexit fiasco is proving beyond doubt is that Scotland is not an equal partner in the UK and the only way to properly protect our national interests is with independence.”
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