The archbishop of Canterbury has been criticised by Brexiters for reportedly meeting MPs with a view to chairing citizens’ assemblies to stop a no-deal departure from the EU.

Justin Welby was reportedly in talks to chair citizens’ assemblies at Coventry Cathedral next month with leading Commons figures who were due to meet on Tuesday to discuss tactics to oppose the UK crashing out of the EU on 31 October, the Times has reported.

The series of public meetings would discuss alternatives to leaving the EU without an agreement.

The former Conservative party leader Iain Duncan Smith told the Times: “I generally don’t criticise the archbishop but he shouldn’t allow himself to be tempted into what is essentially a very political issue right now.”

Mark Francois, the vice-chairman of the European Research Group of Eurosceptic Tory MPs, said Britons were exhausted from being told why the result of the Brexit referendum should be overturned. He told the paper: “I suspect they will not be overjoyed by having it rubbed in by the archbishop of Canterbury to boot.”

Welby was also criticised by the pro-Brexit Labour MP Kate Hoey and Brexit MEPs, who called on Welby not to interfere with Brexit.

Hoey tweeted that Welby should “be in talks about why fewer people are attending [church] rather than pretend he is just trying to stop a no deal. He wants to stop us leaving!”

Martin Daubney, a Brexit party MEP for West Midlands, said: “For God’s sake, now even the archbishop of Canterbury is trying to derail Brexit.”

But the archbishop received support from fellow clergymen including the Bishop of Buckingham, and the campaign group The3million, which represents EU nationals in the UK.

Q&A What does a no-deal or WTO-rules Brexit mean? Show Hide If the UK leaves the EU without a deal it would by default, become a “third country”, with no overarching post-Brexit plan in place and no transition period. The UK would no longer be paying into the EU budget, nor would it hand over the £39bn divorce payment. The UK would drop out of countless arrangements, pacts and treaties, covering everything from tariffs to the movement of people, foodstuffs, other goods and data, to numerous specific deals on things such as aviation, and policing and security. Without an overall withdrawal agreement each element would need to be agreed. In the immediate aftermath, without a deal the UK would trade with the EU on the default terms of the World Trade Organization (WTO), including tariffs on agricultural goods. The UK government has already indicated that it will set low or no tariffs on goods coming into the country. This would lower the price of imports – making it harder for British manufacturers to compete with foreign goods. If the UK sets the tariffs to zero on goods coming in from the EU, under WTO “most favoured nation” rules it must also offer the same zero tariffs to other countries.

WTO rules only cover goods – they do not apply to financial services, a significant part of the UK’s economy. Trading under WTO rules will also require border checks, which could cause delays at ports, and a severe challenge to the peace process in Ireland without alternative arrangements in place to avoid a hard border.

Some no-deal supporters have claimed that the UK can use article XXIV of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) to force the EU to accept a period of up to 10 years where there are no tariffs while a free trade agreement is negotiated. However, the UK cannot invoke article XXIV unilaterally – the EU would have to agree to it. In previous cases where the article has been used, the two sides had a deal in place, and it has never been used to replicate something of the scale and complexity of the EU and the UK’s trading relationship. The director general of the WTO, Roberto Azevêdo, has told Prospect magazine that “in simple factual terms in this scenario, you could expect to see the application of tariffs between the UK and EU where currently there are none”. Until some agreements are in place, a no-deal scenario will place extra overheads on UK businesses – eg the current government advice is that all drivers, including lorries and commercial vehicles, will require extra documentation to be able to drive in Europeif there is no deal. Those arguing for a “managed” no deal envisage that a range of smaller, sector-by-sector, bilateral agreements could be quickly put into place as mutual self-interest between the UK and EU to avoid introducing or to rapidly remove this kind of bureaucracy. Martin Belam

The Right Rev Alan Wilson said: “In a mature democracy people would not be afraid of doing this, because it would show what people’s concerns and fears and hopes and aspirations around this subject were.”

He added: “It is essential not only in this house but for the leaders of both sides and throughout our society to challenge the attacks, the xenophobia and the racism that seem to have been felt to be acceptable at least for a while.”

Axel Antoni, a spokesman for The3million, said: “No-deal Brexit would have dire consequences for the over 3 million EU citizens in the UK and the 1.2 million British in Europe. The rights and guarantees negotiated in the withdrawal agreement would be lost overnight.

“We welcome any solution that would ensure that the citizens who have moved across borders, who put their faith into the EU and the UK, are not becoming the victims of an ugly divorce.”

Lambeth Palace has been contacted for comment.



