Parliament can no longer block no-deal Brexit, senior Tory insists
Matt Hancock said no-one inside government is talking about an early general election
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Parliament is no longer able to block a no-deal Brexit, a senior cabinet minister has said.
Health secretary Matt Hancock is the first minister in Boris Johnson’s administration to echo the reported claims of senior adviser Dominic Cummings that MPs have left it too late to stop no-deal going ahead on 31 October.
Leading Tory opponent of Brexit Dominic Grieve insisted on Sunday that there remain “a number of things” which the House of Commons can do to prevent no-deal, including bringing down the Government and setting up a new one in its place.
But asked whether he believed parliament could stop Mr Johnson from taking the UK out of the European Union without a withdrawal agreement, Mr Hancock told BBC Radio 4’s Today: “ I now don’t think it can.
“I thought that it could and the votes went differently to what I anticipated. When the facts change, even as a politician you have to change your mind.”
Mr Hancock denied that the government was planning for an early election to force no-deal through.
“Honestly, I haven’t talked to Dominic or the prime minister or anybody else in Westminster about this idea,” he said.
"I don't want one. I don't think we need one.
"I think what we need is to deliver Brexit and to deliver on our top domestic priority, which is the NHS.”
During the campaign for the Tory leadership, Mr Hancock was one of the few candidates ruling out the no-deal option, which he said was “unachievable” because of the scale of opposition in the Commons.
“No-deal is not a policy option available to the next prime minister, whether they like it or not,” he said in June.
He said that he changed his mind after a vote a few days later on 12 June, in which the Commons rejected by 309 votes to 298 a motion tabled by Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn, which would have allowed MPs to take control of the parliamentary timetable in the autumn to stop no-deal going through.
“Parliament was asked if it would stop a no-deal Brexit,” said Mr Hancock. “I thought that would go through and in fact the government won by 11. It has changed my mind because the parliamentary arithmetic didn’t play out as I expected.”
Just 10 Conservative MPs rebelled against the government in the 12 June division. Opponents of no-deal hope that their ranks would be swollen in any future vote by former ministers who followed the whip on that occasion, such as Philip Hammond, David Gauke, Rory Stewart and Greg Clark, and others who baulked at backing a motion tabled by the Labour leader.
Labour MP Anna McMorrin, a supporter of the People's Vote campaign for a second referendum, said: “Matt Hancock is simply wrong to say our sovereign parliament cannot stop a disastrous no-deal. MPs from all parties, including a number of Conservatives, have shown they are ready to seize control of the agenda or, if necessary, bring the Government down. To claim there is no majority against no-deal is patently absurd.
“Rather than downplaying the risks of no-deal, perhaps the health secretary should ask those working in the NHS what the impact would be. It is an outrage that he is willing to force this on the health service and the country without anyone except the 0.1% of the population who voted for Boris Johnson having any say over it whatsoever.
“This Brexit crisis has now come down to a simple question about whether we live in a democracy: can we allow Boris Johnson to force no-deal - or another vicious form of Brexit - on our country, without all of us having our voice heard? The only way to resolve this crisis is to give the public the final say.”
Mr Grieve has admitted that there are “ a whole series of obstacles” to a successful attempt to stop no-deal, but insisted it could still be done by voting no confidence in Mr Johnson.
However, Mr Cummings is reported to have said that Mr Johnson could respond to a no-confidence vote by calling a general election for a date after 31 October, meaning that the UK would leave the EU during the campaign.
As parliament voted to approve the UK’s Article 50 notification of its intention to leave the EU, no further legislation is needed for no-deal to happen. It can be stopped only if the UK and EU ratify a withdrawal agreement, the prime minister requests and is granted an extension to negotiations or the UK revokes its Article 50 letter.
Mr Hancock said: "My view has always been that we have got to deliver on the result of the referendum and I think the best way to do that is with a deal, and the government as a whole thinks of course that is best done with a deal, but we need to deliver on it by 31 October."
Asked about the possibility of an early general election, Mr Hancock sided with "Brenda from Bristol" who famously responded with horror when told on TV that Theresa May had called a snap poll in 2017.
"I agree with Brenda," said the health secretary. "I want to get on running the health service and keep doing that."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments