Brexit vote: Newark MP Robert Jenrick will oppose delaying Article 50

Newark MP Robert Jenrick has reiterated his position on Brexit ahead of this week's significant vote in the House of Commons.

He said attempts to delay Article 50, the process to leave the EU, were "arrogant and undemocratic" and confirmed his determination to support Prime Minister Theresa May's proposed deal, and oppose calls for a second referendum.

Mr Jenrick said on his Facebook page that he had received thousands of messages from constituents, some supporting no deal, some backing the Prime Minster's proposed deal, and some trying to remain in the EU via a second referendum.

He said that overall the views received "suggest that few have changed their positions from the referendum ­— and although totally unscientific, a majority want to leave, deal or no deal."

He said his own position had long been clear: "I want us to leave the EU on March 29, both because that honours the outcome of the referendum... and because I sincerely believe this is the best outcome for the country. We cannot continue to go round in circles. We have made a decision ­— and it is one we can and will make a success of.

"A second referendum will only create many months of further uncertainty and damage to the economy, with no guarantee of a resolution at the end. Those who voted to leave in 2016 would rightly feel their politicians had let them down and failed to follow through on the promise made when they triggered the referendum."

Mr Jenrick also disagreed with the proposal to delay Article 50.

"Delay is not a decision... I strongly disagree with those like Dominic Grieve who are using every obscure parliamentary device to make our exit more difficult and weaken our negotiating position. It appears very arrogant and undemocratic to the public," he said.

"My preference throughout the negotiations has been for the UK to secure a deal with the EU so that we can leave in an orderly manner... I voted for the Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement earlier this year, despite serious reservations... There was a strong likelihood that without this deal, we would head to a softer form of Brexit (such as Norway/EEA/EFTA and a permanent customs union) or to a second referendum."

He said a protest vote against an unsatisfying deal might have seemed attractive but would have put Brexit at risk, "plunging the country into deeper strife."

Mr Jenrick said he opposed the "various forms of soft Brexit... All involve the U.K. being subject to most of the rules of the EU, without influence over their formulation. I don’t see this as a sustainable settlement for an economy of our size and a people as independently-minded as ourselves." He also said he was willing to contemplate exit with no deal. "Taking no deal off the table fatally weakens our negotiating position. I am shocked that anyone with an ounce of business or negotiating experience would suggest such a position.

"Colleagues need to stop saying what they dislike - that’s easy - and support a deal. Some MPs need to grow up, stop posturing and see what the options are now."

He said a deal improving backstop arrangements, the measures protecting a frictionless border in Ireland, would be immensely preferable in his view.

"There is an amendment this week in the names of Andrew Murrison and Graham Brady which seems sensible. We will have to see if Parliament supports that and then if the EU is willing to compromise ­— by no means certain... This will go down to the wire and we must hold our nerve."