THERESA May’s senior ministers will discuss whether to offer MPs a menu of Brexit options in an effort to break the Parliamentary deadlock over the process of leaving the European Union.
Today’s Cabinet meeting is expected to consider the possibility of holding indicative votes in order to find something that the Commons can back.
The legislation for the Brexit deal – the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) – is due in the Commons in the week beginning June 3 and faces strong opposition following the failure of cross-party talks to reach a compromise.
Brussels is left looking on at the chaotic political picture in the UK, with little progress having been made since the Brexit deadline was extended to October 31.
“It’s clear that we are in a situation where London talks to London, so there is nothing that we can do at this stage,” European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas said.
The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier again stressed that an “orderly withdrawal remains the best basis of trust for the future” and Brussels is “ready to be more ambitious in the political declaration” setting out the future UK-EU relationship.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman was unable to say when the WAB will be published, with work still being carried out on the legislation.
“We have been working on that piece of legislation for a long time so the vast bulk of the work is completed but there is still work ongoing,” the spokesman said.
Asked how the WAB would be different to the deal previously voted on, the spokesman added: “I think ministers have set out that they had good discussions with the opposition in relation to areas such as workers’ rights and environmental protections.”
May is set to present the WAB as a “bold offer” with concessions to MPs from across the House in an effort to build as much support for it as possible.
The package is expected to include provisions on future trade arrangements with the EU, on environmental protections, and on Northern Ireland, including the use of technology to avoid the need for border controls with the Republic.
It will not, however, seek to re-open the withdrawal agreement – which included the Northern Ireland “backstop” – after the EU repeatedly made clear it could not be re-negotiated.
The showdown on the WAB could see May forced out of Number 10 sooner than expected if she is defeated, as she is due to meet Tory 1922 Committee chairman Sir Graham Brady to set out the leadership contest following the vote on the Bill.
Meanwhile, the contest to succeed May is gathering pace with potential leadership candidates setting out their stalls. The former Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey yesterday launched the Blue Collar Conservatism Group aimed at winning over working-class voters to the Tories.
She said May’s successor must be somebody who “believes in Brexit” and has the “passion” to drive it forward as she accused her former Cabinet colleagues of attempting to dismantle Brexit.
Earlier, Health Secretary Matt Hancock refused to rule out a bid for the job, saying he had a “strong view about the sort of leader we need”, while the One Nation group meeting last night saw Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd, along with former Cabinet ministers Damian Green and Nicky Morgan set out their vision for a centre-ground Tory Party.
The group is also viewed as an attempt to prevent a hard Brexiteer such as Boris Johnson from steering the UK out of the EU without a deal.
“There are no simple answers to complex questions,” said Rudd. “A pragmatic, compassionate centre-right has never been more vital.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here