Is PM's EU agreement good for Britain? No, says Reading East Labour MP Matt Rodda

OUR country faces a difficult and challenging situation as the Government continues to discuss its proposals for Brexit.

As a local MP, I am deeply concerned about the state of the negotiations and the risk that we may leave with no deal or a bad deal which harms our economy.

I want to see a sensible way forward which focuses on the important, practical issues facing the country and our area.

Like many people in our area, I voted to remain and I also campaigned for remain in the referendum.

However, I accept that remain lost the referendum and that the UK is now trying to negotiate a new relationship with the EU.

I am opposed to a hard Brexit, which I believe is too far even for many who voted to leave. Businesses and public services in our area depend on access to the single market and the Customs Union, both to fill skilled jobs in sectors like IT and the NHS and to sell products which are made in Berkshire and Oxfordshire.

As a result, I believe that the Government should be trying to negotiate a sensible deal to protect jobs and the economy which includes a permanent Customs Union to allow goods to move freely and full access to the single market to allow firms to move skilled staff.

I also think it is vital to protect rights at work and environmental and consumer standards, which are important to local people, and to protect our environment.

There should be no hard border in Ireland. This sensible approach was summed up in Labour’s six tests:

• Does the deal ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

• Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the single market and Customs Union?

• Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

• Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

• Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

• Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

I should add that the tests were based on the standards Theresa May herself devised when she set out her own negotiating objectives.

Yet when the Government’s proposed deal is compared against this it falls far short. After two years of negotiation, we have no clarity about what our future relationship with the EU will look like after Brexit. This is a serious failure by the Government and I believe that no government has the right to plunge the country into chaos as a result of its own failure.

Theresa May and her ministers spent too long arguing with themselves and they failed to have a clear position to discuss the future with the EU until only a few months ago, even though the referendum was held in 2016.

As a result of this failure to achieve a sensible proposal, it is looking increasingly likely that the proposals will be voted down in Parliament. If the Prime Minister’s deal is rejected by MPs, that cannot be a mandate for no deal.

If the Government is unable to negotiate a good deal in the country’s interest and win a majority in Parliament, the best outcome for the country would be a general election and the opportunity to sweep away this failed government.

If a general election were blocked, all options should be kept on the table to break the impasse and avoid a disastrous no deal, including campaigning for a public vote.