When the prime minister returns from Brussels, she has concerns to deal with

When Theresa May addressed the 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers on Monday night, she was still undecided whether to throw the government’s weight behind an amendment that effectively demolished her own negotiated deal.

Downing Street had been caught unawares by the reaction of the core group of hard Brexiters who had decided the amendment by Sir Graham Brady, seeking “alternative arrangements” to the Irish backstop, was too woolly.

May entered the packed room of Tory MPs blind, but while on her feet in the room for more than an hour, the prime minister herself made the decision that the support in the room was strong enough to whip in favour of Brady’s amendment and announced the decision there and then, sources said.

Q&A What is the Brady amendment? Show Hide The Brady amendment demands that the backstop arrangement in the EU withdrawal agreement to prevent a hard border in Northern Ireland should be replaced with 'alternative arrangements'. The backstop is hated by many Tory Brexiters because it would keep the UK in an effective customs union until an alternative solution could be found to prevent the need for infrastructure at the border. The backstop has no time limit and exit can be only by joint agreement between the UK and the EU. Brexiters would like to see the backstop replaced either by an as-yet-unknown technological solution to ensure a smooth border or at least an end date or a unilateral exit mechanism.



In order to seek this from Brussels, Theresa May decided the government should back an amendment tabled by Sir Graham Brady, a Tory backbencher, which said the backstop should be replaced. She also pledged to reopen the withdrawal agreement and change the text.

The European Union has been adamant that both things cannot happen, but Downing Street believes that gaining a majority in the House of Commons for the change would demonstrate the crucial breakthrough needed to avoid a no-deal Brexit.

After initial scepticism, members of the hard-Brexit European Research Group swung behind the government, though Tory remainers rebelled against it, and the amendment passed by 16 votes. However, the group has made it clear it will not necessarily back whichever compromise she may come back with.

It was a gamble but the amendment passed comfortably, by today’s standards. Less than 24-hours after rejecting the amendment, almost all of the European Research Group of hard Brexiters MPs came in behind the government. It was one of those rare nights for May where the whipping fell into place as rebel Labour MPs also saw off Yvette Cooper’s plan for a bill to extend article 50.

If the government was to have a chance at success on the Brady amendment, the prime minister decided she needed to switch places with her Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, and open the debate on Tuesday to give sceptical Brexiters the chance to digest her pledges before the vote .

It was clear Brexiters needed to hear May was prepared to reopen the negotiated text of the withdrawal agreement – something explicitly rejected by Brussels. There was also a push to hear May countenance the so-called “Malthouse compromise.”

Brexit: May goes back to Brussels but EU says nothing has changed Read more

That plan, which had emerged overnight, was brokered by housing minister Kit Malthouse, ex-remainer Nicky Morgan and Brexiter Jacob Rees-Mogg, and would see a replacement for the backstop and an extended transition period, or a three-year managed no deal.

May began on Tuesday with a political cabinet meeting at 8.30am, where the environment secretary Michael Gove was first to speak up in favour of Malthouse. Gove encouraged the prime minister to be warm about the prospect of compromise when she spoke at the dispatch box and stress that it was constructive to see MPs working together.

“The feeling was that if she could pull off any kind of majority after such a crushing defeat, that’s extraordinary,” one source said.

Soft Brexit cabinet ministers mainly kept their reservations to themselves, though some harbour significant doubts about the workability of the Malthouse proposal. “The mood was we just have to get through the day,” one cabinet source said.

Some did voice concern that May could have been taken for a ride by the ERG if they backed the plan, keeping them onside for now but whose real interests were running down the clock. May gave no ground when pressed by cabinet ministers of what she would do if her efforts failed. “The question was asked but not entertained,” the source said.

After leaving her cabinet, May spoke to the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, who bluntly told her it would be fruitless to come to Brussels intending to reopen the text.

How did your MP vote on the Brady and Cooper amendments? Read more

Yet May came to parliament and directly said what the ERG needed to hear – she intended to reopen the text of the withdrawal agreement and rewrite the backstop.

Still, Brexiters like Rees-Mogg and Peter Bone demanded more conditions while May stood at the despatch box. Their support for change should not be seen as a guarantee that they will approve whatever is agreed next. May was forced to accept that MPs could indeed vote for changes and still reject them when the deal came back again for ratification.

The ERG met an hour before the vote – with a surprise guest. Brady, not normally an attendee, popped into the committee room. “Thought I’d have a look,” he smiled.

Inside, Brady insisted again that by supporting his amendment, MPs were not committing to eventually back May’s deal. Eurosceptic Andrew Rosindell said he thought Brady’s chances were “50-50” but Steve Double put the number of those still objecting in “single figures”. It was even lower in the end, just one Brexiter rebel – Anne Marie Morris.

Rees-Mogg said the prime minister had given the necessary assurances but underlined that the group was not approving the deal by backing Brady. “This is not taken as approval come-what-may,” he said.

Almost simultaneously in the chamber, soft Brexiters were sounding deeply sceptical, including Sarah Wollaston and Anna Soubry. Tory remainers were seven of the eight of their rebels.

Yet there had been palpable frustration during the course of Tuesday about the splintering of the soft Brexit and remainer gang of MPs who sit high up in the so-called naughty corner of the Tory benches. “I’m off to my first People’s Front of Judea meeting of the day,” one of them quipped as they walked through Portcullis House.

The animosity was evident even in the chamber. As Morgan stood to thank the prime minister for giving her plan a hearing, Soubry grumbled beside herthat it “would have been nice to have been told that”.

In the corridors before the vote, Morgan’s backing for the Malthouse compromise was met by incredulity by some of her party allies. “It’s bonkers, it’s not even a clever version of a hard Brexit, if that isn’t an oxymoron,” one said. “Do they even understand it? Everyone is asking them that question – why?”

The Tory MPs sitting in the naughty corner above the Speaker’s right shoulder now have a mirror image in a row on the opposition benches, diametrically opposite. In the top left corner of the chamber, the Labour MPs implacably opposed to a second referendum have begun to congregate, among them Gareth Snell, Mel Onn and Gloria De Piero.

It was with those MPs who the fate of Cooper’s amendment rested and their scepticism about how a delay to Brexit would be perceived by their pro-leave constituents. Fourteen of them sank Cooper’s amendment.

Yet those MPs were firmly against a no-deal Brexit, leading most to decide to vote for Dame Caroline Spelman’s amendment – the only other to pass. Though not legally binding, it explicitly rejects the possibility of a no-deal Brexit.

“There’s been a lot of soul-searching but we now have some clarity,” Snell said. “My constituents made it very clear what they want. We want a deal and we don’t want diversions. The amendments tonight reminded me of a student essay crisis where you do everything but start your actual essay.”

The marathon number of votes – seven in total – saw several MPs show off their pedometers to hovering journalists as they walked round and round the Commons lobbies. One MP was furtively carrying an iPad under his arm, watching the football.

The outbreak of Tory unity, and the renewed support of the DUP, led one beaming cabinet minister to break out into a rendition of Lord of the Dance on his way to the lobbies.

“Vote, vote, wherever you may be, vote vote vote with the DUP!” he sang. By the time May returns from Brussels, it remains to be seen whether the party will still be singing the same tune.