Further indicative votes were held on 1 April on the proposals selected by the spokesperson.  The government rejected the Lords` proposal to give the House of Commons the power to decide the next steps for the government if the withdrawal agreement is rejected by Parliament.  In July 2017, David Jones, Minister of State for leaving the European Union, told the House of Commons that he expected Parliament`s vote on the Brexit deal with the EU to take place „before the debates and votes of the European Parliament on the final agreement”. Asked what would happen if MPs and members of the House of Lords decided they did not like the deal, Mr Jones said: „The vote will be either to accept the deal. Or there will be no agreement.  At a withdrawal meeting of the European Union`s special committee in October, Labour MP Seema Malhotra Davis asked: „The vote of our Parliament, the British Parliament, could be after March 2019? to which Davis replied, „Yes, it could be.  This has been criticised by Labour MPs and some Conservative MPs.   Following the Letwin First Amendment, indicative votes were held on 27 March on the Brexit options favoured by Parliament. Eight proposals were voted on, eight of which failed. If the British Parliament voted against the agreement, the government would have to present an alternative, a „Plan B”.  As a result, Grieve has tabled an amendment to the business request that deals with the procedure if Parliament votes against the agreement.  The amendment states (italic amendment):  On 23 October, the House of Commons debated three technical provisions concerning the UK`s withdrawal from the EU. The legislative debate focused on the repeal of certain technical provisions enshrined in British law with regard to the EU. If these three acts were to be voted on, they would only come into force if the UK finally left the EU.
The three points discussed related to changes to existing UK legislation to remove 1) THE EU`s free movement provisions  2) the UK`s regulatory oversight by third countries 3) regarding EU-codified financial services.  All three amendments were put to a divisive vote and all three passed the vote in the House of Commons.    The text of the clause [Note 1] has been hotly contested by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, with the Lords proposing an amendment to the act conferring additional powers on Parliament.