The Parliament will be able to influence the terms of the agreement between the UK and the EU, but will have no authority to fully block Brexit, The Times reports.

 The paper has reported that senior sources confirmed Members of Parliament will have to approve the agreement concluded between Britain and the other 27 member states.

However, Parliament is in no authority to amend the deal, the only option it has is vetoing the plan. But the paper said that even in case of the members resorting to veto, Brexit will still go ahead without any new trading or co-operation agreements in place.

This is the exact situation those pushing for a say in Brexit negotiations had counted on.

The Labour Party said Members of Parliament would be left between a ‘rock and a hard place’.

Nicky Morgan, the former Conservative cabinet minister, commented on the matter saying that MPs expected to contribute ‘at the start of this process — not just at the end’.

The government disclosed its position in a High Court case over whether or not ministers needed parliamentary approval for triggering Article 50, which launches the process of exiting from the EU.

James Eadie, the government lawyer, stated that ‘the government view at the moment is it is very likely that any such agreement will be subject to ratification’.

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg said: ‘This allows MPs to make a complete muddle out of Brexit but it won’t stop it happening in the first place. It is quite possible parliament will vote down a deal — but that just means we leave the EU without any deal at all, leave the single market and trade on WTO terms.’

David Davis, the Secretary of State of Exiting the European Union, stated: Businesses will encounter a ‘cliff edge’ threat if no EU trade deal is struck by 2019.

This is the first time a Cabinet minister has openly stated that the UK is under the “cliff edge” threat if Britain fails at reaching agreement on new trading arrangements before Brexit is concluded.

The best solution for Britain would be negotiating transitional arrangements, possibly on a sector-by-sector basis, starting with financial services.

However, such actions would make dedicated Brexiteers angry as it would require paying billions into the EU’s budget for many years to come and, possibly, some continued freedom of movement for EU citizens.

Related:  Octopus Investments joins the fintech race

Leave a Reply