In response, the EU 27 published a series of conclusions. They made clear that it is their – and I quote – “firm determination to work speedily on a subsequent agreement that establishes by 31st December 2020 alternative arrangements, so that the backstop will not need to be triggered.” The House will forgive me, but I think this bears repeating: “the backstop will not need to be triggered.”
They underlined that “if the backstop were nevertheless to be triggered, it would apply temporarily.” They said that in this event the EU “would use its best endeavours to negotiate and conclude expeditiously a subsequent agreement that would replace the backstop.” And they gave a new assurance in relation to the Future Partnership with the UK, to make it even less likely that the backstop would ever be needed by stating that the EU “stands ready to embark on preparations immediately after signature of the Withdrawal Agreement to ensure that negotiations can start as soon as possible after the UK’s withdrawal.”
Mr Speaker, in these conclusions, in their statements at the Council and in their private meetings with me, my fellow EU leaders could not have been clearer – they do not want to use this backstop. They want to agree the best possible future relationship with us. There is no plot to keep us in the backstop.Indeed, President Macron said on Friday – “we can clarify and reassure…the backstop is not our objective, it is not a durable solution and nobody is trying to lock the UK into the backstop.”
As formal conclusions from a European Council, these commitments have legal status and should be welcomed. They go further than the EU has ever done previously in trying to address the concerns of this House.And of course they sit on top of the commitments that we have already negotiated in relation to the backstop: including……ensuring the customs element is UK-wide;…that both sides are legally committed to using best endeavours to have our new relationship in place before the end of the Implementation Period;…that if the new relationship isn’t ready we can choose to extend the Implementation Period instead of the backstop coming into force;…that if the backstop does come in, we can use alternative arrangements, not just the future relationship, to get out of it;…that the treaty is clear the backstop can only ever be temporary;…and that there is an explicit termination clause.
But Mr Speaker, I know this House is still deeply uncomfortable about the backstop.And I understand that. And I want us to go further still in the reassurances we secure. Discussions with my EU partners – including Presidents Tusk, Juncker and others – have shown that further clarification following the Council’s conclusions is in fact possible. So discussions are continuing to explore further political and legal assurances.
We are also looking closely at new ways of empowering the House of Commons to ensure that any provision for a backstop has democratic legitimacy and to enable the House to place its own obligations on the government to ensure that the backstop cannot be in place indefinitely. But it is now only just over 14 weeks until the UK leaves the EU. And I know many Members of this House are concerned that we need to take a decision soon. My Rt Hon Friend, the Leader of the House, will set out business on Thursday in the usual way. But I can confirm today that we intend to return to the Meaningful Vote debate in the week commencing 7th January and hold the vote the following week.
Mr Speaker, when we have the vote, Members will need to reflect carefully on what is in the best interests of our country. I know that there are a range of very strongly held personal views on this issue across the House. And I respect all of them. But expressing our personal views is not what we are here to do. We asked the British people to take this decision. 472 current Members of this House voted for the Referendum in June 2015, with just 32 voting against. And the British people responded by instructing us to leave the European Union. Similarly 438 current Members of this House voted to trigger Article 50, to set the process of our departure in motion, with only 85 of today’s Members voting against. Now we must honour our duty to finish the job.
I know this is not everyone’s perfect deal. It is a compromise.But if we let the perfect be the enemy of the good then we risk leaving the EU with no deal. Of course we have prepared for no deal, and tomorrow the Cabinet will be discussing the next phase in ensuring we are ready for that scenario. But let us not risk the jobs, services and security of the people we serve by turning our backs on an agreement with our neighbours that honours the referendum and provides for a smooth and orderly exit. Avoiding no deal is only possible if we can reach an agreement or if we abandon Brexit entirely. And as I said in the debate earlier this month – “do not imagine that if we vote this down, a different deal is going to miraculously appear.”
If you want proof, look at the Conclusions of this Council. As President Juncker said: “it is the best deal possible and the only deal possible”. And any proposal for the future relationship – whether Norway, Canada, or any other variety that has been mentioned – would require agreeing this Withdrawal Agreement. The Leader of the Opposition – as well as some others – are trying to pretend they could do otherwise. This is a fiction.
Finally let us not break faith with the British people by trying to stage another referendum. Another vote which would do irreparable damage to the integrity of our politics, because it would say to millions who trusted in democracy, that our democracy does not deliver. Another vote which would likely leave us no further forward than the last. And another vote which would further divide our country at the very moment we should be working to unite it.
And let us not follow the Leader of the Opposition in thinking about what gives him the best chance of forcing a General Election. For at this critical moment in our history, we should be thinking not about our party’s interests, but about the national interest.Let us a find a way to come together and work together in the national interest to see this Brexit through.
Mr Speaker, I will work tirelessly over these new few weeks to fulfil my responsibility as Prime Minister to find a way forwards. Over the last two weeks, I have met quite a number of colleagues and I am happy to continue to do so on this important issue so that we can fulfil our responsibilities to the British people. So together, we can take back control of our borders, laws and money; while protecting the jobs, the security and the integrity of our precious United Kingdom.S o together we can move on to finalising the future relationship with the European Union and the trade deals with the rest of the world that can fuel our prosperity for years to come. And so together we can get this Brexit done and shift the national focus to our domestic priorities – investing in our NHS, our schools and housing; tackling the injustices that so many still face; and building a country that truly works for everyone. For these are the ways in which, together, this House will best serve the interests of the British people.
And I commend this Statement to the House.
My God what a load of drivel.
One of Mrs May more endearing features, leaving aside all the more toxic, is her tendency to insinuate something deadly and destructive amongst other ideas that will generally attract support. Such as Gassing members of ukip as a clause in Counil Grants for the homeless and Mental health. Reese Mogg has had cause to rebuke her for this in the House. But she still carries on.and blushes prettily.
Migration is NOT a human right. You have babies at your own and their risk….That’s life . Universal compact
Why is the ‘Meaningful Vote’ debate being resumed on the 7th January when nothing has changed? The same confidence trick is clearly exposed in the words,
“If you want proof, look at the Conclusions of this Council. As President Juncker said: “it is the best deal possible and the only deal possible”.”
These are words confirming the failure of our PM to change anything.
“…our Brexit deal includes the deepest security partnership that has ever been agreed with the EU.”
Sinister words indeed. No doubt military integration is proceeding as planned, and we may well see EUROGENDFOR on our streets if we refuse to toe the line.
I would like to know the likely response of the ordinarry guys in our armed forces to that possibility. They are of the people but could be commanded to suppress those people; will they meekly obey orders or will they be willing to rise up against government and support the people?
Jack, it will be like the old Roman Empire. Use the army from one place to suppress the people in another.
And Hitler
The Romans got round the problem of local loyalties by only employing troops away from their home tribe’s region.
You can imagine the recruiting posters:
Join the British Army! Travel to foreign parts to meet interesting and exotic people. And suppress them!
JF
We’re being stitched up again!!
“Merkel declares that UN Global Compact on Migration will be “valid for all” after Dec 19th”
https://youtu.be/HgRiyiHRNKI
And ignorant, read on another Blog today someone commenting on the U.N ‘Compact’ , a straw poll of colleagues not one knew what it was or whether May had signed up to it or not. I bet though that there was lots of chat around the water cooler with full opinions on the state of play between Megan and Kate or some much more important ‘stuff’.
First we must leave the EU (really leave that is)
Then we must take down the EU working with our friends in Europe.
Then we must take down the UN.
The list of our enemies is of course much longer and dealing with them will require that we also attend to our own government.
Petition
Leave the EU without a deal in March 2019. Now 191,000 signatures.
We are wasting Billions of pounds of taxpayers money trying to negotiate in a short space of time. Leaving the EU in March 2019 will allow the UK good time to negotiate more efficiently. The EU will be more eager to accept a deal on our terms having lost a major partner.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/229963
Treason May has done her usual ineffectual meaningless timewasting action followed by a disingenuous statement to the House.
Some of the weasel words :—
She said — “this bears repeating: “the backstop will not need to be triggered.” No; ” they will work speedily on a subsequent agreement, ….. so that the backstop will not need to be triggered.”
They will work speedily, but that might still not be speedily enough so her words are meaningless and do not materially change the situation.
Also, she is concentrating on the “backstop” completely ignoring all the other dreadful inadequacies of her Agreement, and trying to distract the House and the public from the fact that it does not contain a Free Trade Agreement because the EU have separated that from the negotiations and she has agreed. So the whole of the last 2 years of negotiation have been a waste of time.
This ridiculous meaningless agreement needs to be binned so that we can leave on WTO terms and then see if the EU really do want a trade agreement.
If the backstop will never need to be triggered, one wonders why the EU doesn’t agree to drop it.
One knows very well why!
Well said George!
“The other dreadful inadequacies of her agreement”
Is anybody enumerating these inadequacies?
Have they been taken up with the PM?
Has she taken them up in any form with the EU even if they were ignored in the statement?
Discussions behind the scenes are they mentioned here?
I have seen Bill Cash in a couple of media interviews enumerating numerous inadequacies are these the ones you are referring to George? Is anybody in Government listening to him – they ought to as I think he is chairman of the EU select committee (?)
Is anybody enumerating these inadequacies?
Yes, for example listen to Tim Martin after 16 minutes of this:—
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVZktmFRmE
Have they been taken up with the PM?
Yes, read John Redwood’s (MP) blog over the past 18 months or so.
The only consistent thing about Treason May — she always ignores JR’s consistently
logical arguments and impeccable references to fact, data and Law.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/
Has she taken them up in any form with the EU even if they were ignored in the statement?
Of course not, she is a traitor and continuous liar.
A poll yesterday (Sly) showed Lab at 39% with Cons at 38% and from memory 44% thought that May is a brave principled person. As snow elephant remarks ‘ a reflection of our society that believes that’ .It does make one wonder about the society in general when again according to Sly 53% want another referendum.
1…ECJ supervision of all workikg practices To increase our costs
2….Tracebility to double our prices.
3 … Parliament will be desparate to keep VAT going for their spending pocket money
etc
Not words but actions, not efforts but results. Our politic class is reflection of the society, how low we become.