Theresa May has been accused of tyranny and lack of respect for democracy by some of her own MPs over the government’s refusal to give parliament a say on the terms of leaving the EU.
A string of Conservatives were critical of the government’s Brexit strategy in a House of Commons debate on Monday, with some asking for more details about the government’s negotiating plan and others calling for a greater say on the way the UK will leave the EU.
The Guardian understands a group of several Tory MPs is even thinking of joining a legal suit due to be heard this week, which will challenge the government’s right to start taking the UK out of the EU without the consent of MPs.
A source close to the group said they believe that the high court case brought by activists, headed by the legal firm Mishcon de Reya, was based on sound legal argument.
“There is a proposal to attach our names as an interested party to the case. This is being considered seriously. There is so much at stake, and the process is moving so fast, that we cannot stand by the sidelines, we must do everything possible to ensure that parliament has a say,” the source said.
In response to criticism from his own side, David Davis, the Brexit secretary, ruled out holding a parliamentary vote and accused MPs of trying to “micromanage” the process of leaving the EU.
However, May is facing growing disquiet among MPs from mainstream parties over the lack of details about her strategy beyond the claim that “Brexit means Brexit” and that the UK is seeking a “bespoke” deal with the EU.
The prime minister is continuing to take soundings from European leaders about the Brexit process and received a warm welcome on Monday from the Danish leader, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, who said he hoped for a “friendly divorce”. However, she appeared to have left him none the wiser about her aims.
“It appears as if there’s quite a lot of work that needs to be done in the UK before there’s a clear view of what the British want,” Rasmussen told Bloomberg in an interview after the meeting.
Davis brushed off complaints about the lack of transparency, telling parliament that May had an overwhelming mandate to negotiate the terms of leaving the EU.
He warned European leaders, including the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the French president, François Hollande, not to make Britain pay for having opted to leave.
“If the EU adheres to a punishment plan and it fails, as I believe it would, then that’s an even bigger incentive to countries that want to leave than no punishment at all,” he said. “The damage done by a supposed punishment strategy would be primarily to the industries and farmers on the continent who export to this country.
“I’m afraid that Mr Hollande and Madame Merkel and others will find they have pressure back from their own constituents that says this is not a good strategy to pursue.”
He claimed that if things went to plan in negotiations “there will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside”.
However, some of his arguments were challenged by a succession of MPs on his own side as well as Labour, Liberal Democrats and Scottish National party members
Stephen Phillips, the Tory MP for Sleaford and North Hykeham who voted to leave in the referendum, said the government appeared intent on negotiating “without any regard to the House of Commons” in a way that was “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cuts across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.
Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”
Ben Howlett, the Conservative MP for Bath, asked for parliament to be “constitutionally involved in setting out the principles of negotiation, ie, single market membership and free movement rules”, while fellow Tory Sir Nicholas Soames called for “parliament to play its role”.
Others pressed for more details about the outcome the UK is seeking, after signs that May is intent on pursuing a so-called “hard Brexit” that would mean a loss of access to the single market in order to achieve immigration controls.
Anna Soubry, a former Tory business minister, called for assurances that the UK would stay in the single market, while Andrew Tyrie, the chair of the Treasury select committee, said the decision to keep May’s negotiating strategy secret would mean a “wholly unacceptable” situation of people finding out through leaks from Europe rather than their own government.
Earlier, Dominic Grieve, the former attorney general, told the BBC’s The World at One that the government risked falling if it did not have the support of parliament for the deal it is trying to strike on Brexit.
“If a situation arises that the government at the end of the day is about to conclude a deal for the future of the United Kingdom which can’t command parliamentary approval or at least acquiescence then it’s perfectly obvious in those circumstances such a government wouldn’t survive,” he said, adding that there would probably have to be an election in such a situation.
Davis repeatedly rejected the idea of a parliamentary vote in the debate with MPs, and agreed with Philip Davies, the strongly Eurosceptic MP who said the choice was between either Brexit or no Brexit. Davis said the terms “hard and soft Brexit are designed to deceive” as the UK would be seeking the best possible arrangement.
He dismissed recent comments emanating from France and Germany suggesting that the UK could be subject to “punishment” for opting for Brexit.
“I won’t get into tit-for-tat rudeness with our European opposite numbers but this is the first day of a two-and-a-half-year negotiation ... I think what they say today they won’t necessarily say tomorrow,” he said.
The Brexit secretary suggested Merkel and others would see resistance from their voters if they pursued retribution against the UK and cause damage to their own economies.
Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary and former director of public prosecutions, led Labour’s challenge to the government’s decision to keep its EU strategy secret from parliament.
The Labour frontbencher said it was “wholly unacceptable in a democracy” for the government to pursue Brexit without further debate about the terms. “There is no mandate to take an axe to our economy with a hard Brexit,” he said.
He was backed by Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader, who said there was “clearly a mandate for Brexit but no mandate for the particular form of Brexit”.
“Where is the government’s mandate for this negotiation either from this house or the country,” he said.
A further challenge came from Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem former deputy prime minister, who pointed out the Conservatives had a commitment to maintaining Britain’s membership of the single market in its 2015 manifesto.
“On the basis of what constitutional principle does he believe the prime minister can now arrogate to herself the exclusive right to interpret what Brexit means and impose it upon the country rather than protect the rightful role of scrutiny and approval of this house,” he said.
Davis replied: “Here we go again. He cannot tell the difference between acountability and micromanagement. It really is as simple as that. The simple truth is there will be debates galore about what the government’s strategy will be ... At every turn we will obey the conventions and laws that apply to the creation, removal and reform of treaties. This is a government that believes in the rule of law.”
