British lawmakers disrupt prime minister’s Brexit plan

Just as Britain appeared on the cusp of a history-making, up-or-down vote on its long-delayed departure from the European Union, the British Parliament struck an impasse on Saturday as lawmakers adopted a measure that delayed a vote on Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal with Brussels.

The turbulent events left Johnson’s agreement in limbo, legally obliging him to seek yet another extension for Britain’s departure, which he had once vowed never to do. It was the latest twist in a debate that has convulsed the country ever since the British public voted in 2016 for a divorce from the European Union.

On a dramatic day in which lawmakers debated while enormous crowds of anti-Brexit protesters marched outside the Houses of Parliament, Johnson implored lawmakers to approve his agreement, which would pave the way for Britain to leave the European Union at the end of the month.

The prime minister argued that it was the best deal Britain could hope to strike with Europe — one that, in his telling, would position the country for a thriving future as an agile, free agent in the global economy — and that any further delay would be “pointless, expensive and deeply corrosive of public trust.”

“As someone who passionately believed we had to go back to our European friends to seek a better agreement,” Johnson said, “I must tell this House that with this deal, the scope for future negotiations has run its course.”

Instead, they passed a last-minute amendment, brought by Oliver Letwin, an expelled member of Johnson’s Conservative Party, that would delay a vote on the agreement until Parliament had passed the detailed legislation that enacts it.

The motion put forward by Letwin, a veteran lawmaker who was purged from the Conservative Party last month for supporting a law intended to prevent Britain leaving the European Union without any agreement, which many see as risking a disorderly, economically damaging rupture.

The amendment brings into play that law to prevent a no-deal Brexit, pressuring Johnson to request another delay from the European Union — something he said he would rather be “dead in a ditch” than do.

Letwin, who actually supports Johnson’s plan, argued that his amendment was simply a safety net that prevented pro-Brexit hard-liners from sabotaging the implementing legislation and, in the ensuing political vacuum before the Oct. 31 deadline, engineering the no-deal rupture that some want.

But some opponents of the Brexit blueprint supported the Letwin amendment too. For Johnson, who has staked his claim to No. 10 Downing St. on delivering the withdrawal, the amendment was another in a long series of setbacks in Parliament, preventing him from forcing lawmakers into a binary decision on whether to support his plan or not.

The government plans to press ahead with its Brexit blueprint, forcing another critical vote on Tuesday. But that could also present opponents with the opportunity to try to amend his plan.

Assuming that Johnson does request another Brexit delay, as he is obliged to do, the European Union would have to decide whether to grant it and, if so, for how long. European leaders would calculate whether to grant a brief delay of a few more weeks to resolve the technical details, or a longer delay to allow a general election or perhaps a second referendum.

Meeting on a Saturday for the first time since the Falklands War in 1982, members of the House of Commons rose, one after the other, to fervently endorse or reject Johnson’s deal. The debate seemed to be ultimately less about the details of the plan, with its fiendishly complicated arrangements for trade with Northern Ireland, than about whether Britain could finally put Brexit behind it.

Opponents of the plan accused Johnson of negotiating a shoddy deal that would leave a post-Brexit Britain vulnerable to predatory trade deals with other countries, not least the United States.

“This deal would inevitably lead to a Trump trade deal, forcing the UK to diverge from the highest standards and expose our families to chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef,” said the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, referring to fears of chemically-treated imports from the United States.

For Johnson, 55, a flamboyant politician and former mayor of London who has been in office since July, it was a crucial moment. He spoke with a tone of gravity and conciliation that contrasted starkly with the inflammatory language he has used during previous parliamentary debates over Brexit.

A victory could fuel Johnson’s Conservative Party in the general election he is likely to call for the coming weeks. A further delay could paint Johnson as a leader stymied by Brexit, much like his predecessor, Theresa May, who lost three thumping votes in Parliament on her Brexit agreement.

© 2019 The New York Times Company