Brexit: Dozens of Tory MPs prepare new Brexit revolt on ‘illegal’ changes

Up to 30 Tory MPs are fighting ‘illegal’ plans that would allow Boris Johnson to renege on parts of his Brexit deal.

Boris Johnson is facing a major revolt amongst his MPs. Picture: Getty Images.

Boris Johnson is facing a revolt by up to 30 Tory MPs over plans that would break international law and allow him to renege on parts of his Brexit deal.

The rebels have tabled an amendment that would bar the government from overriding the withdrawal agreement without parliament’s support.

Mr Johnson’s government is also facing opposition from peers. Lord Howard of Lympne, a prominent Brexiteer, became the third former Tory leader to reject the plans, warning that they would damage Britain’s global standing.

Lord Lamont of Lerwick, a former chancellor of the exchequer and another Brexiteer, said there was “no way” that the legislation, which would allow ministers to override elements of the withdrawal agreement, would pass through the Lords.

A government source told The Times that MPs who voted against the government over the Internal Market Bill would not have the whip removed, unlike those who voted against Mr Johnson’s Brexit deal last year. “We’re not in the same place,” the source said.

European Commission vice president Maros Sefcovic leaves Europe House, the headquarters of the EU delegation in the UK in London. Picture: AFP.

The European Union warned Mr Johnson that he had three weeks to abandon his drive for the new powers. The UK government is planning to fast-track the legislation through the Commons by the end of the month.

Maros Sefcovic, a European Commission vice-president, said that it amounted to an “extremely serious violation of international law” and threatened to resort to “legal remedies”.

The EU’s deadline coincides with the final round of trade negotiations and the view in Brussels is that failure to withdraw the threat will inevitably lead to a no-deal Brexit. “The UK has seriously damaged trust between the EU and the UK. It is now up to the UK government to re-establish that trust,” the commission said.

Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, met Mr Sefcovic on Thursday and rejected the demand, saying that Britain “could not and would not” comply. He added: “I made it perfectly clear to Vice-President Sefcovic that we would not be withdrawing this legislation. He understood that. Of course he regretted it.”

It was revealed that Lord Keen of Elie, the advocate-general for Scotland, warned that changes to the Brexit deal would be a breach of the ministerial code. “It is his opinion that [the ministerial code] includes the obligation under international law to act in good faith with respect to the UK’s treaty obligations,” an official paper leaked to The Guardian said. Suella Braverman, the Attorney-General, and Michael Ellis, the solicitor-general, were “confident” there was no breach of the code.

Simon Case, the new cabinet secretary, was dragged into the row after The Times learnt he had authorised civil servants to work on the legislation despite claims that it was in breach of their obligations under the civil service code. In an internal email to staff, Sir Jonathan Jones, the law officer who resigned in protest at the move, said: “Staff will wish to note that the cabinet secretary has determined that, notwithstanding the breach of international law, civil servants are operating in accordance with their obligations under the civil service code.”

His comments are significant because the civil service code requires officials to “comply with the law”. As Treasury solicitor, Mr Jones would be expected to advise Mr Case on the interpretation of that law.

EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier (L) walks trough central London to a conference centre for trade talks. Picture: AFP.

Sir Bob Neill, a Tory MP and chairman of the justice select committee, tabled an amendment to introduce a “parliamentary lock” on the powers. It is likely to be voted on next week. Theresa May, Mr Johnson’s predecessor in No 10, has expressed opposition to the legislation but could miss the vote because she is away.

Other prominent opponents of the powers include Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the foreign affairs select committee, and Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence select committee.

Lord Howard told the Lords: “Does [the minister] not understand the damage done to our reputation for probity and respect for the rule of law by those five words uttered by his ministerial colleague in another place on Tuesday – words that I never thought I would hear uttered by a British minister, far less a Conservative minister.

“How can we reproach Russia or China or Iran when their conduct falls below internationally accepted standards when we are showing such scant regard for our treaty obligations?”

Andreas Michaelis, the German ambassador to London, said: “In more than 30 years as a diplomat I have not experienced such a fast, intentional and profound deterioration of a negotiation. If you believe in partnership between the UK and the EU like I do then don’t accept it.”

In a letter to The Times Sir David Normington, permanent secretary at the Home Office, and Sir Leigh Lewis, permanent secretary at the Department for Work and Pensions, said that civil servants implementing the powers would find themselves in “wholly unprecedented constitutional waters”.

The Times