SOUTH Essex MPs are split over the Brexit vote today.

Out of the seven in the region, four have decided to vote down the deal, two will support it, and one is calling for an amendment.

Mark Francois, Rayleigh and Wickford MP, James Duddridge, MP for Rochford and Southend East, Sir David Amess of Southend West and John Baron of Basildon and Billericay will all vote against the deal.

Stephen Metcalfe, MP for South Basildon and East Thurrock, will push for an amendment on the deal, but did not state for certain how he would vote if this does not pass.

Castle Point MP Rebecca Harris and Thurrock MP Jackie Doyle-Price will vote for the deal.

Mark Francois said: “During the Brexit debate last Friday, I confirmed to the House that I would not be voting for the Government’s Brexit deal as I strongly believe it is a very bad deal for the UK, which would leave us hanging ‘half in and half out’ of the EU. This would be completely against the spirit of the 2016 EU Referendum, when 17.4 million people voted to leave.

“My colleagues in the European Research Group (ERG), led by Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, and I have been arguing for a deal referred to as ‘Super Canada’, based on an existing EU-Canadian Free Trade Agreement with Europe. Ideally, I do not want to leave without a deal but I do believe that a temporary no deal situation, leaving on World Trade Organisation terms would be better than the Government’s proposal, which I describe in the House of Commons as ‘the best deal since Munich’.”

James Duddridge said: “I will be voting against this deal. I campaigned to leave, the electorate voted to leave and that is what we must deliver.

“The Prime Minister’s deal only delivers a half in, half out version of Brexit. One where we are forced to remain in a Customs Union indefinitely, one that places a hard border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, threatening the very existence of the United Kingdom, and one where we are forced to pay £39 Billion to the European Union.

“The electorate voted to ‘Take back control’ this deal simply hands over more control to the European Union turning the United Kingdom into a supplicant puppy to a federal block. It does not deliver Brexit!

“During my recent Brexit survey 85 per cent of respondents told me they did not support this deal either. Instead, most of them called for a clean break onto World Trade Organisation rules, the basis that most countries trade under, where we can make our own trade deals, keep the £39 billion and use technology on the Northern Irish border to stop a hard border.

“We can then go back to the European Union to renegotiate a trade deal that benefits everyone and allows the United Kingdom to take back control and once again become a truly global player. This is the alternative deal that I support.”

Rebecca Harris said: “Personally I would be happy with a so-called a No Deal Brexit. However, having now seen how utterly determined so many MPs are to undermine the referendum result I think there may now be no realistic alternative to the Prime Minister’s deal.

“I am genuinely concerned that if this deal does not go through there is a very severe risk of there being no Brexit at all. I recognise some fellow Brexiteers may hold a different view, but I think the stakes are too high to risk No Brexit at all.”

Jackie Doyle-Price said: “I have received a number of letters from constituents expressing a variety of views. Some have asked me to revoke article 50 and cancel Brexit. Some have asked for a second referendum. Some demand that we leave with no deal. Some demand I support the Prime Minister’s deal.

“When the country voted to leave the European Union, it voted to take back control of our laws, our borders and our money. It is my intention that Parliament delivers on that promise and that we leave the European Union as promised on March 29th this year. By supporting the Prime Minister’s deal, we will leave on that date.

“However, in implementing the decision of the 17.4m people who voted to leave we must also take with us the 48 per cent of the country that wished to stay. On that basis we need an orderly exit, which is why the Prime Minister has battled with Brussels to deliver a good deal for our country.

“No negotiation delivers an outcome that is universally approved by all sides. I am firmly of the view that alternatives to the deal are all inferior.

“It should be noted that this is not the end. The deal establishes the terms under which we will leave the European Union. It remains the intention of all member states of the EU to agree a free trade deal with the UK as soon as possible. Under the terms of EU law it cannot negotiate one until we have left. Some have expressed concern that Britain could remain trapped in the backstop. I believe this fear is misplaced.

“I am satisfied that the EU would not wish to allow the backstop to exist indefinitely for the simple reason that we would be enjoying access to the single market without having to comply with freedom of movement or paying a penny. I am also confident that it is in everyone’s interest to agree a free trade deal as soon as possible.

“A ‘No deal brexit’ brings with it risks to business and jobs. We currently enjoy borderless trade with our biggest market. Imposing borders where there are currently none, which would be a consequence of a no deal Brexit on WTO terms, would inevitably add costs to businesses engaged in trade. Those costs will mean higher prices for consumers and risks to people’s jobs. That is not a gamble I am prepared to take.

“If the deal fails to be passed by Parliament there is a real risk that Brexit will not be delivered at all. Whilst it is enshrined in law that we do leave on March 29th, there is clearly not a majority in Parliament for a ‘no deal brexit’. There is growing support for a Norway style relationship which does not deliver taking back control of our laws or our borders. For me that just isn’t leaving.

“So I will be voting in support of the deal in order that we do leave the European Union on March 29th of this year. The public is becoming increasingly impatient and will be very unforgiving of Parliament if it is delayed or frustrated.

Stephen Metcalfe said: “I am still listening carefully to the debate and examining all the options, however I remain greatly concerned about the implementation of the so-called Backstop and its opened nature.

“I therefore still hope that the amendment I have supported will gain support in the House and we can limit the impact of the Backstop. As someone who supported Brexit, voted for Brexit and want to see Brexit succeed.

“I will therefore vote in what I believe to be the best way to make that happen.”

David Amess said: “For me, the vote to leave was fundamentally about opportunity: the opportunity to set our own laws; the opportunity to embrace global free trade; and the opportunity to forge our own path in the world once again.

“From the start, the Government have not fully embraced those opportunities or attempted to understand them, and this agreement reflects that failure. This so-called “deal” most certainly does not match up to the expectations of the millions who voted to leave the EU, and I cannot and will not support it.

“But regardless of what decision this House comes to in the vote at the end of the debate, I will be leaving the European Union at 11 pm on March 29, and I am delighted to be doing so.”

John Baron said: “Whilst the transition period is uncomfortable, it has a defined end. The backstop is the real problem. My amendment (f) seeks to give the UK the unilateral right to exit the backstop, otherwise the EU could tie us in for years. In its present form, I will be voting against the Withdrawal Agreement if my amendment is not passed.”