Michel Barnier confirms Brexiteer fears

When Eurosceptic MPs voted down Theresa May’s Brexit deal last week, the hope was that this would send a strong signal both to the Prime Minister and Brussels that strong changes were needed if it were to have any hope of passing. The problem is that the scale of the defeat – by 230 votes – means that the changes Leave MPs want to see are not the changes that the EU has in mind.

In an interview with the Luxembourg Times, chief negotiator Michel Barnier says that he does not believe the troubled backstop is ‘the central issue’. Instead, he believes the numbers for a Brexit deal can be found by focussing on the future relationship – and making it more precise about the demand for a softer Brexit:

‘If the UK government wants to be more ambitious in its future relationship which is not part of the withdrawal agreement, we can do so, and then come to an agreement on the entire package. That would make the question of the backstop less prominent.

Looking at it objectively, I have the impression that the backstop is not the central issue. Ultimately, the debate in Britain is about what the future of the UK will look like. I believe that we can overcome the current difficulties when we discuss that issue together.’

What Barnier appears to be angling at is the idea that May could win Labour votes by committing to at minimum a permanent customs union in the political declaration. This would in theory reduce the problems surrounding the backstop as pivoting to a softer Brexit would mean a reduced chance of border issues and therefore make it less likely that the UK would ever fall into the backstop.

The problem here is that this is the opposite of what Conservative Leave MPs want to see changed. As I say in the i paper, a chunk of Brexiteer MPs now worry that by sending Theresa May’s Brexit deal down to a historic defeat last week, they might have blown up the whole thing, rather than just the backstop. Brussels looks at the scale of the defeat and sees what it wants to see: that parliament would prefer a softer Brexit.

One rebel who is already concerned is Sir Graham Brady, the shop steward of the Tory backbenches. He told me at the weekend: ‘What’s important now is that we don’t misread that very heavy vote against the withdrawal agreement, because so much of the vote against was from people who simply couldn’t support a potentially permanent backstop, if that can be sorted out I think we might get that withdrawal agreement through.’

This is a message that has been echoed among Brexiteer MPs. Nadine Dorries has said her ‘kamikaze Remain colleagues’ could be enough of an incentive to vote for the deal with a backstop change. Even Jacob Rees-Mogg has admitted he would back May’s deal if his preferred option of no deal is not possible. While a number of Brexiteers remain convinced that all they have to do is sit tight and no deal will emerge – the group is increasingly divided. Others see the Commons attempts to take no deal off the table and worry they could be successful. As one Leave MP representing a Leave seat put it, ‘We voted down the deal because we needed to send that message. Now we have made that point, we don’t need to make it twice.’ Such MPs are looking for a ladder to climb down in the form of an EU concession which means they can vote for the deal.

Will they get what they are looking for? Now it may be that this is in part fighting talk and Brussels will come up with a concession further down the line but negotiators feel the job has been made more difficult as a result of recent events. The problem is not only must May somehow convince Brussels a backstop concession can still get the deal through, she must also bat off new Commons attempts to change the rules of engagement in favour of no Brexit or a soft Brexit. Perhaps then, the main ray of light for the Leavers is that it’s not all peace and harmony on the other side. As MPs work to soften Brexit, a fierce rivalry has broken out between the groups advocating a second referendum and those pushing for a Norway-style arrangement. Neither side is willing to compromise, even though by combining they could have the numbers to move things. If these MPs can’t agree on an alternative, Brussels may yet be convinced that May’s proposal is the best chance of passing a deal after all.