DOMINIC Raab has insisted it is “not credible” for MPs to vote down any Brexit deal and then urge the UK Government to return to Brussels to seek a better one as he suggested the key Commons vote would effectively be take it or leave it.
The Brexit Secretary made clear that any deal with the EU27 would have to be sealed by the end of November to give the Commons enough time to vote on it; Westminster rises for its Christmas recess on December 20.
Mr Raab insisted the motion on a final deal could be amended by MPs but then went on to say: “You couldn’t at the end of a negotiation process - think about it seriously and credibly - have a situation where we’ve negotiated the best deal we can with the EU and then we go back and say actually we need a bit more. And for those that say, well actually we haven’t had a say on the negotiating mandate, we had eleven votes in the House of Commons on customs union, single market and all the rest. The government won each and every one of those,” he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.
Pressed on the issue, the Secretary of State said: “At the end stage of the negotiation, you can’t come back with the best deal, a few MPs or a majority of MPs say we don’t like it and think we could go back to Brussels and get better terms. That’s just not credible.”
But Sir Keir Starmer for Labour stressed it was “not in the national interest to back a bad deal” and that Parliament would not accept that the only alternative to the PM’s proposal was a no-deal.
“That majority will speak when we get to this vote,” he declared but he did not elaborate how Westminster could stop a no-deal scenario.
Sir Keir said there wa a "real lack of confidence" that Mrs May could bring back "anything by way of a good deal".
He explained: "What we're going to see is even if there's a deal, the Tory Party will try to rip it up next year; some of them are already saying they're going to do that, So, this idea of an historic moment just before Christmas in the national interest isn't going to happen. They will not stop fighting about this."
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