John Baron MP will vote against Withdrawal Agreement

MP intends to honour Article 50

Despite mounting pressure to support the Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement should it be brought back to the House of Commons this week for a third time, John Baron MP says he can only vote on the facts before him – the deal remains flawed and he will vote against it, unless the flaws are removed at the eleventh hour. He intends to honour the triggering of Article 50.

John said,

“Having campaigned to leave the EU, other colleagues and I have done all we can to honour the referendum result. I have opposed both motions taking ‘no deal’ off the table and extending Article 50. I have twice opposed the Prime Minister’s flawed deal and tried to improve it by seeking a unilateral right of exit from the backstop, yet it may return unchanged for a further vote.”

“The problem is that we Brexit MPs are outnumbered by a Remain-dominated Parliament which voted to trigger Article 50 and yet is now trying to ignore it. Trust is running very low.”

“We now have to make a difficult decision – do we support the Prime Minister’s flawed deal or risk seeing Brexit delayed or marginalised further? I respect my Brexit colleagues whatever their decision. But at such times, I can only focus on the facts before me. Making decisions based on possible political outcomes and what others may or may not do can be a fool’s game.”

“The deal remains flawed. The backstop’s ‘legal risk remains unchanged’ – we could be trapped indefinitely. I will vote against. The law as it stands says we are leaving on 29th March – with or without a deal. I intend to honour that. It is now up to Parliament if it wishes to ignore the result of the largest democratic exercise this country has ever seen.”

Notes to Editors:

• John’s efforts to improve the deal include tabling an amendment in January to the Government’s Withdrawal Agreement motion calling for the insertion of a unilateral UK right to exit the backstop. Unfortunately this was defeated (see Hansard at: http://bit.ly/2DgdYc4), but a very similar motion, tabled by Sir Graham Brady, was passed a fortnight later.