Brexit: Dominic Grieve tables two bills calling for a second EU referendum One bill seeks to launch preparations for a referendum, while the other seeks to carry out the vote

A Brexit rebel is calling for a second referendum on Britain’s departure from the European Union after Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement was overwhelmingly defeated.

Dominic Grieve, the former Attorney General, has tabled two bills for Wednesday which call for a European Union Referendum.

One bill seeks to launch preparations for a referendum while the other seeks to carry out the vote.

The i politics newsletter cut through the noise Email address is invalid Email address is invalid Thank you for subscribing! Sorry, there was a problem with your subscription.

“Bill to provide for a referendum about the United Kingdom’s future relationship with the European Union,” reads the wording of the second bill.

What is a bill? It is a proposal for a new law, or a proposal to change an existing law that is presented for debate before Parliament.

People’s vote

There have been growing calls for a so-called People’s Vote but without the backing of Labour – Jeremy Corbyn has so far been reluctant to support it – it is unlikely there will be enough MPs in favour to pass it.

Mr Grieve’s bills are only being presented in Parliament on Wednesday – any debate will take place during a second reading of the bills at a later date. But it seems unlikely that they will lead to a second referendum. There would need to be enough support in both the House of Commons – which is highly unlikely – and the House of Lords to approve it and actually turn it into a law.

Mr Grieve, a staunch Remainer and one of many Conservative backbenchers who voted down Mrs May’s deal on Tuesday night, has been clear that he would support a second vote on Brexit.

After the meaningful vote defeat, he told BBC Five Live that he has consistently argued for “a further referendum” as he believes it is the “only way out”.

“It’s a very strange experience to be a backbench MP and participate in a huge rebellion against the Government that defeats it by such a substantial margin,” he said.

“But that’s a reflection of the fact that the House of Commons collectively looked at the deal the Government has negotiated and concluded that it’s a deal which is not in the national interest.

“Now that’s not the Prime Minister’s fault in my view – we would have had a different leader and a different prime minister and we’d have still ended up with the same deal – the problem is the direct result and consequence of the Brexit decision,” he added.

‘Only way out’

“Any deal, I believe, is going to be an unsatisfactory one as viewed by the Commons. Either my ERG colleagues say that it doesn’t fulfil their dreams of what Brexit was supposed to be about, or people like me look at it and say ‘but this is a third-rate future for our country and frankly we would be much better staying in’.

“I have always argued for a further referendum because I believe that it is the only way out, and in doing that I am respectful of the fact that the electorate might turn around and say ‘oh no we want to leave on the Prime Minister’s deal’,” he added.

In an article penned for the Evening Standard ahead of the meaningful vote, Mr Grieve said there should be “a further public consultation” on how to proceed with Brexit if the deal was voted down.

“As a strong believer that Brexit is a very damaging mistake that becomes more obvious every day, I see sound democratic reasons for asking the electorate to confirm what it wants to do.

“But in doing so I entirely accept that if the choice is to leave the EU then we must do so, and both choices are now implementable.

“But getting there, or indeed to any other destination, needs proper debate,” he added.

Grieve amendment

Earlier in January, MPs passed – with a majority of 11 – Mr Grieve’s amendment that demanded the Government return to the Commons with a new Brexit plan within three working days if it loses the meaningful vote on Mrs May’s draft agreement.

Commons Speaker John Bercow faced backlash for selecting the motion to be tabled.