THERESA May has admitted she may not garner enough support to get her twice-defeated Brexit deal through the Commons next week, amid mounting speculation about the future of her premiership.
The Prime Minister wrote to MPs warning that if there is insufficient support for her withdrawal agreement in the coming days that she could seek an extension to THE UK'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.
READ MORE: Brexit: David Mundell in fresh threat to quit Cabinet
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 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.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon to speak at anti-Brexit protest in London
Meanwhile, former environment and Northern Ireland secretary Owen Paterson wrote in the Daily Telegraph that Government must "stand up" for the 17.4 million people who voted for Brexit, adding a March 29 departure "provides the certainty which all sides are craving".
In reference to the April 12 extension offered by EU leaders, he added: "Apart from the further humiliation of not delivering Brexit on time, what can be achieved in two weeks that has not been achieved in two years?"
Elsewhere it emerged that Tory former foreign secretary Boris Johnson met May for talks twice this week, including on Friday.
Johnson is said to have asked the PM how she intended to change her approach, and she reportedly set out plans to restructure the Department for Exiting the European Union.
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