Theresa May announced on Tuesday 29 January to British MPs that she would ask the EU-Twenty-Seven to reopen the agreement on an orderly Brexit (see EUROPE 12145) in order to obtain "legally binding" changes. "An exchange of letters will not be enough. We need a legally binding change to the withdrawal agreement", she told British MPs who are due to vote on amendments to the agreement in the evening, after a first rejection in mid-January (see EUROPE 12172).
The British Prime Minister has asked her parliament to give her a mandate to do so and has also confirmed that she intends to ask members of the House to vote again on the negotiations on 13 February. During this session, Mrs May also replied to the amendments tabled in particular by the Tory Yvette Cooper, which seek to request an extension of Article 50, if no agreement is reached before 26 February. The British leader considered that an extension of Article 50 without a purpose "would lead nowhere". She also claimed that an extension of Article 50 did not exclude "an exit without agreement".
She has, in any case, supported an amendment that will give her the latitude to request a renegotiation from the EU. She called on the British Parliament to support the Tory MP Graham Brady's amendment to replace the backstop for Ireland with alternative mechanisms, which is a condition for British MPs’ support for the draft agreement, or to set a time limit for it.
Speaker John Bercow initially selected seven amendments out of 14, which will be put to the vote on Tuesday evening, including the one defended by Jeremy Corbyn calling for a permanent customs union and a second referendum. An amendment that the British media did not see getting through Tuesday's vote.
The EU-Twenty-Seven, for their part, have been constantly saying since 15 January that this backstop is not open for renegotiation, unlike the declaration on the future relationship, which can be altered. On Monday 28 January, Michel Barnier’s right-hand woman, Sabine Weyand, reaffirmed this position at a public event and said that the risk of leaving without an agreement by accident and not by design was "very high". (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)