Brexit: Theresa May's hopes for passing deal in tatters after John Bercow rules out repeat vote

Theresa May’s hopes of forcing MPs to back her Brexit deal by staging repeat votes are in tatters, after speaker John Bercow dramatically blocked the tactic, citing rules dating back to before the Gunpowder Plot.

The prime minister was left stunned by the shock announcement – which torpedoed her hopes of a third “meaningful vote” while threatening MPs with a long delay to leaving the EU if they refused to give way.

The dramatic twist, outlawing fresh votes without substantial changes, left ministers scrabbling for solutions – including an extraordinary proposal to suspend parliament and start a new session.

It also achieved the remarkable feat of uniting supporters of a no-deal Brexit and a second referendum, who both believed it made their favoured option more likely.

The solicitor general, who warned of “a constitutional crisis”, put forward the escape route of ending the current parliamentary session early to get around the 1604 convention invoked by the speaker, which lapses after a fresh Queen’s Speech.

“There are ways around this – a prorogation of parliament and a new session,” said Robert Buckland.

Experts pointed to a possible precedent from 1948, when Attlee’s Labour government prorogued parliament for a new 12-day session to pass legislation to reduce the power of the House of Lords.

No 10 is also mulling a possible vote to overturn the speaker’s ruling – but this seemed only likely to succeed if there are enough supporters of the deal in the first place.

There was no immediate official response from Downing Street, other than to express its fury that Mr Bercow gave no warning of his bombshell announcement, made in the Commons chamber.

The speaker said a further meaningful vote would be ruled out of order if the motion was “the same or substantially the same” – under a 1604 convention to stop the government bullying parliament on issues MPs have rejected.

Ms May has already admitted that the negotiations with the EU are over, making it hard for her to argue that a further meaningful vote will be on a different question.

Crucially, the speaker suggested something would have to be renegotiated with the EU to constitute a “change”, rather than, for example, a clarification of legal advice by the attorney general.

Mr Bercow told MPs: “What the government cannot legitimately do is resubmit to the house the same proposition – or substantially the same proposition – as that of last week, which was rejected by 149 votes.”

The Independent revealed in January that pro-EU MPs believed that Ms May’s tactic to bludgeon her deal through, despite heavy defeats, was barred by parliamentary rules.

Senior Tories were livid, believing the speaker had once again laid bare his anti-Brexit bias while twisting constitutional rules to suit his purpose.

Rory Stewart, the prisons minister, taunted Mr Bercow by tweeting: “‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean.’”

He added: “In the normal course of events, as the speaker says, parliament says no, and the issue is dropped.

“But in this case, this is not an option, because these votes respond to an instruction in a referendum, endorsed by parliament, which rules out dropping back to the status quo.”

Supporters of a Final Say referendum were delighted, with former Tory MP Anna Soubry telling The Independent: “It puts a second referendum very firmly at the top of the agenda – it must do. We need a way out of this and this is the only way out.”

Guto Bebb, a former Tory minister and People’s Vote supporter, said: “It is inconceivable now for ministers to carry on trying to force this broken Brexit deal on the people of the United Kingdom.”

And David Lammy, a Labour supporter of the anti-Brexit Best for Britain group, said: “If the prime minister wants us to vote on her deal again, she should add an amendment allowing for her deal to be put to the people.”

In the short term, the speaker’s intervention killed off any prospect of a third meaningful vote this week – already in doubt as the Democratic Unionist Party failed to switch sides.

It appears certain that Ms May will have to ask EU leaders for a long extension – anything between nine and 21 months – to the Article 50 process at a summit in Brussels on Thursday.

The new departure date will then be put to a “take-it-or-leave-it vote” in the Commons and Lords next week, just days before the 29 March Brexit day.

For that reason, it increases the chances of a crash-out Brexit, which the Treasury has predicted could trigger a near 10 per cent GDP decline.

However, a long extension could also open up the space for a further referendum, which some believe the prime minister might yet embrace if it is the only hope of passing her agreement.

Speaking to a silent Commons, Mr Bercow said repeat votes had been blocked on 12 occasions up until 1920 – a situation only not repeated since because of “general compliance”.

“This convention is very strong and longstanding, dating back to 2 April 1604,” the speaker said.

“It’s a necessary rule to ensure the sensible use of house time and the proper respect for the decision which it takes.”