THE European Parliament is demanding the Brexit deal signed last Friday is converted into a legally binding text as soon as possible as it’s not confident the UK Government will keep its word.
Leading MEP Guy Verhofstadt today said remarks from David Davis over the weekend that the agreement was not binding had undermined trust in the UK among politicians on the continent.
In a TV interview on Sunday, Davis appeared to suggest that the UK could seek to alter agreements on divorce issues including the Irish border, citizens' rights and the UK's £39 billion financial settlement, saying the deal was "much more a statement of intent than it was a legally enforceable thing".
After the Irish Government branded the comment "bizarre", the Brexit Secretary took to the airwaves once again yesterday in a bid to defuse the row, saying that Britain's commitment on the border issue was "much more than just legally enforceable".
The European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas later confirmed the joint report published last week by Davis and EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier was "not legally binding" until it is incorporated in a formal Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement, expected in the autumn of 2018.
But asked if it was therefore possible for either side to back down on it, Schinas stressed that it was regarded in Brussels as "a deal between gentlemen" which was "fully backed and endorsed" by the UK Government. He noted that Prime Minister Theresa May and Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker had shaken hands on it.
Verhofstadt, the Parliament's chief Brexit co-ordinator, indicated that MEPs would like to bring forward moves to make the agreement legally binding.
"Remarks by David Davis that Phase One deal last week not binding were unhelpful and undermine trust," he said in a tweet.
"European Parliament text will now reflect this and insist agreement translated into legal text ASAP."
Verhofstadt said the UK must "stick to its commitments" and put them into a draft Withdrawal Agreement "as soon as possible" if there is to be progress in the second phase of negotiations, on trade.
He has tabled two amendments for MEPs to consider in the European Parliament, one of which says Davis's comments "risk to undermine the good faith that has been built during the negotiations".
Another calls on Britain to "fully respect" last week's Brexit deal and ensure it is "fully translated" into a draft Withdrawal Agreement.
Verhofstadt said he introduced the amendments alongside four other European Parliament groups, including the PPE group led by Manfred Weber, a close ally of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, as they are concerned about the "unacceptable description by David Davis of this agreement, saying it was merely a statement of intent, rather than a legally enforceable text".
In a Brussels press conference he went on: "And in our opinion that is really undermining the trust that is necessary in such negotiations.
"And the second amendment will therefore clearly indicate that before we can make progress in the second phase of the negotiations that that is absolutely necessary that the UK stick to its commitments and that these commitments are faithfully translated into the Withdrawal Agreement as fast as possible."
Responding, May's official spokesman told a regular Westminster briefing: "The Secretary of State set out yesterday - and the commission agreed with him - that the agreement that was reached last week is a political agreement but that will move forward into a Withdrawal Agreement which will be legally binding.
"The commitment is clear from the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union that we don't want a hard border. I think everybody understands that."
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel