MPs debating Theresa May’s final Brexit deal could have a succession of options put before them in a rare procedure that second referendum campaigners fear will be used by ministers to select the answer that suits them best.
The clerk of the House of Commons has suggested that if ministers held to their insistence that no amendments could be put to May’s final deal for legal reasons, “stand-alone consecutive motions” could be debated instead.
Sir David Natzler is due to give evidence to MPs on the Brexit select committee on Wednesday morning, where he is expected to be questioned on the multiple choice procedure that could include an option to hold a second referendum.
The consecutive motion idea has been used twice before to present a series of options to MPs relating to reform of the House of Lords in 2004 and 2007, Natzler wrote. Each time, however, no real changes took place as a result.
If May is able to successfully conclude the Brexit negotiations, MPs are expected to debate whether to give their approval in the week before Christmas, with the crucial votes taking place possibly as late as 20 December.
Campaigners are considering whether to use that point to stage a vote on whether to hold a second referendum, but it is not clear whether, if passed, it would be binding on the government.
This month Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary, provoked alarm among pro-remain MPs when he submitted legal advice saying May’s final deal had to be approved via “an unequivocal decision”, indicating that approval could not be subject to amendment.
Natzler’s suggested scheme theoretically provides a compromise but second referendum campaigners said it should be rejected. The Labour MP Chris Leslie said he worried that if ministers allowed “a smorgasbord of resolutions” they could use the procedure to “conveniently ignore the resolutions they don’t like”.
Leslie said the government would only have to act on MPs’ wishes if they successfully submitted amendments to the principal motion. “They are resisting the right for MPs to table amendments prior to the main question precisely because amendments could force them to do what the Commons insists.”
Normally, amendments are debated on by MPs in the Commons before the substantive resolution is put to a vote. Ministers have indicated they are likely to propose a business motion to set aside the traditional procedure, although it is not certain in any event it would be carried, with up to 15 Tory MPs indicating they may not support it.