Dear Donald
Annotated by Henry Mance Two years ago, when Mrs May invoked Article 50, it was ‘Dear President Tusk’, so at least the leaders are now on first-name terms
The UK Government's policy remains to leave the European Union in an orderly manner on the basis of the Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration agreed in November, complemented by the Joint Instrument and supplement to the Political Declaration President Juncker and I agreed on 11 March.
You will be awareAnnotated by Henry Mance This just summarises the state of play: Mrs May wants to pass her Brexit deal, but MPs aren’t playing ball that before the House of Commons rejected the deal for a second time on 12 March, I warned in a speech in Grimsby that the consequences of failing to endorse the deal were unpredictable and potentially deeply unpalatable. The House of Commons did not vote in favour of the deal. The following day it voted against leaving the EU without a negotiated deal. The day after that it supported a Government motion that proposed a short extension to the Article 50 period if the House supported a meaningful vote before this week’s European Council. The motion also made clear that if this had not happened, a longer extension would oblige the UK to call elections to the European Parliament. I do not believe that it would be in either of our interests for the UK to hold European Parliament elections.Annotated by Henry Mance This is where Mrs May starts to backtrack. Having warned parliament that it faced a long extension (beyond July 1) if it failed to pass her deal, the prime minister now rejects a key EU condition for that to happen - namely, for the UK to hold European elections on May 22
I had intendedAnnotated by Henry Mance Mrs May is saying that John Bercow, the Commons speaker, torpedoed her plans to hold a third vote this week. But some MPs will be sceptical: it’s far from clear that Mrs May had a majority in the Commons for her deal. The Democratic Unionist party, whose votes are crucial, never backed it despite negotiations over the weekend, and plenty of Tory Eurosceptics, including Boris Johnson, remained opposed to bring the vote back to the House of Commons this week. The Speaker of the House of Commons said on Monday that in order for a further meaningful vote to be brought back to the House of Commons, the agreement would have to be “fundamentally different—not different in terms of wording, but different in terms of substance”. Some Members of Parliament have interpreted that this means a further change to the deal. This position has made it impossible in practice to call a further vote in advance of the European Council. However, it remains my intention to bring the deal back to the House.Annotated by Henry Mance Last week Mrs May’s deputy, David Lidington, suggested that the government would switch to Plan B - allowing MPs to vote on different options, including a softer Brexit - if its deal didn’t pass this week. Mrs May is emphasising Plan A: her deal. But the government is committed to having a Commons debate on Monday, which MPs could use to force indicative votes on different options later in the week
In advance of that vote,Annotated by Henry Mance Mrs May doesn’t say when MPs will vote again on her deal, but Downing Street has suggested it will be next Tuesday or Wednesday I would be grateful if the European Council could therefore approve the supplementary documents that President Juncker and I agreed in Strasbourg, putting the Government in a position to bring these agreements to the House and confirming the changes to the Government’s proposition to ParliamentAnnotated by Henry Mance This is very interesting. Mrs May is saying that the government’s proposal will be different if the EU Council approves the legal reassurances that she and Jean-Claude Juncker agreed in Strasbourg. But that is contentious. Mr Bercow, the speaker, said on Monday that the legal reassurances are what persuaded him to allow a second vote on the deal this month. In other words, he’s already taken them into account. Would the fact that the EU Council has endorsed the same assurances be enough to convince the speaker that the government’s proposal was substantially different, and that MPs should vote a third time? It seems unlikely, but Mrs May could bet that even Mr Bercow wouldn’t dare block such a high-profile vote . I also intend to bring forward further domestic proposals that confirm my previous commitments to protect our internal marketAnnotated by Henry Mance Here’s the likely carrot for the DUP: Mrs May is promising to protect the internal market in response to unionist concerns that there will be different regulations in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK if the backstop is activated. It’s vague, but it could potentially take the form of a ‘Stormont lock’, giving Northern Ireland’s devolved assembly a veto over the backstop. Of course, the assembly isn’t currently in operation, because of a stalemate between the DUP and Sinn Féin, the two largest parties , given the concerns expressed about the backstop. On this basis, and in the light of the outcome of the European Council, I intend to put forward a motion as soon as possible under section 13 of the Withdrawal Act 2018 and make the argument for the orderly withdrawal and strong future partnership the UK economy, its citizens’ security and the continent’s future, demands.
If the motion is passed, I am confident that Parliament will proceed to ratify the deal constructively. But this will clearly not be completed before 29 March 2019Annotated by Henry Mance Even if MPs sign up to Mrs May’s deal tomorrow, there isn’t enough time to pass the necessary legislation. So a delay of several weeks will be needed in any case . In our legal system, the Government will need to take a Bill through both Houses of Parliament to enact our commitments under the Withdrawal Agreement into domestic law. While we will consult with the Opposition in the usual wayAnnotated by Henry Mance This is the first time in the letter that Mrs May has referenced consulting with the Opposition, and even then, it’s in the context of legislative timetables, not of reshaping her Brexit deal. She’s not reaching out to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn or to others who want a softer Brexit to plan the passage of the Bill as quickly and smoothly as possible, the timetable for this is inevitably uncertain at this stage. I am therefore writing to inform the European Council that the UK is seeking an extension to the Article 50 period under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, until 30 June 2019.Annotated by Henry Mance Finally, the date the UK wants to leave the EU. Unfortunately, almost as soon as the letter was sent, the noises from Brussels were negative: either the UK leaves on the eve of the European elections (a seven-week delay to Brexit, rather than a three-month one), or it stays until the end of the year, giving time for a rethink. Mrs May made clear on Wednesday that she would not support a long delay “as prime minister”, i.e. she would rather quit than keep the UK in the EU beyond June 30. Significantly, Labour is not calling for a longer extension
I would be grateful for the opportunity to set out this position to our colleagues on Thursday.
Yours ever
