David Cameron became the fifth former prime minister to criticize a new bill trying to reverse the Brexit exit agreement.

The draft law on the internal market will be presented to MPs later, and the government will call it an “insurance policy”.

Mr. Cameron said he had “concerns” about this and that breaking an international treaty should be a “last resort.”

Former Tory prime ministers Theresa May and Sir John Major, as well as Labor’s Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, condemned the plan.

Earlier, Police Secretary Keith Malthouse called this a “practical” step.

He echoed comments made Sunday by Attorney General Robert Buckland, who said the bill was in place in case the UK and EU would not agree to a post-Brexit trade deal.

Boris Johnson was expected to speak to reporters at the event later, but Number 10 confirmed that the event was canceled due to urgent parliamentary affairs.

The government is expected to win the House of Commons vote later in the next phase of the bill, which takes place around 22:00 BST (21:00 GMT), but it is also expected to face more difficulties in later stages, especially when the law comes up for debate in the lords.

Former Attorney General Jeffrey Cox said he would vote no, accusing Johnson of ‘Shameless’ damage to the UK’s international reputation…

A senior government source told the BBC that “there are all options” in terms of possible action against conservative MPs who do not support the bill.

Tory MP Rehman Chishti, Special Representative of the Prime Minister for Freedom of Religion and Belief: resigned due to proposed lawsaying, “I have always acted in accordance with the principles of the rule of law … [and] voting for this bill as it stands would be contrary to my dearest values. ”

Labor secretary Ed Miliband also called the proposed law “legislative hooliganism.”

Britain left the EU on January 31, signing an exit agreement with the bloc.

Both sides are now in the final week of negotiating a post-Brexit trade deal before transition period ends December 31 – informal talks will take place in Brussels this week.

A key part of the withdrawal agreement, which is now an international treaty, was the Northern Ireland protocol designed to prevent the return of the hard border to the island of Ireland.

The government’s proposed internal market bill will take precedence over the goods part of the agreement and will allow the UK to change or rethink the “government aid” rules for subsidies to firms in Northern Ireland in the event the two parties fail to agree on a future trade deal …

Last week, Northern Ireland Secretary of State Brandon Lewis said the bill would “violate international law” in a “specific and limited manner.”leading to criticism from all sides of the political spectrum.

And here it is again … the Brexit deadline is approaching, there is a lot of buzz in Westminster, and the UK and EU cannot come to an agreement.

And yes, again, there is a swirling jargon soup in every other sentence.

Take a few steps back, however, and here’s what it all boils down to – how the UK will trade with its closest neighbors from next January and how different parts of the UK will trade with each other.

It matters both economically and politically.

The Brexit process has long exposed tensions between the UK and Brussels, but don’t underestimate the tensions it creates for the UK as well.

Those in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales who have long campaigned to free themselves from the shackles of London as they see it, argue that Brexit is the best example to illustrate their argument.

And so the Westminster government is facing the delicate task of pulling Britain out of one union, the EU, and at the same time keeping another, Britain.

All of these ranks have a central purpose.

Mr Cameron, who called the EU referendum when he was prime minister, said he had “concerns about what is being proposed.”

Addressing reporters, he said: “The adoption of a parliamentary act with the subsequent violation of obligations under an international treaty is the very, very last thing you should think about. This should be the absolute last resort. “

Mr Cameron said the “big picture” is an attempt to strike a trade deal with the EU, urging the government to “keep this context. [and] this big prize is in the mind. “

The comments followed stronger criticism from four other surviving former UK prime ministers.

Ms May, who is still a Member of Parliament in the House of Commons, said that breaking international law would harm Britain’s “credibility”, while Mr Brown said it would be akin to “self-harm” for the country.

Sir John and Mr Blair, who were both in power during key periods of the Northern Ireland peace process, wrote a joint article for the Sunday Times accusing Mr. Johnson of “embarrassing” Britain; and calling on MPs to reject the “shameful” attempt to revoke parts of the withdrawal agreement.

“The problem to be solved”

Mr Malthus defended the law, saying that it “solves the problem we face” regarding the future of trade with the EU.

He told BBC Breakfast: “We have made a transparent statement that this is a situation that we think could happen – this is certainly what the EU is hinting at. This is a problem that we have to solve, so here is a bill that addresses it.

“In the end, those people who oppose this bill must tell us what the resolution is about.”

Attorney General Buckland told the BBC on Sunday that he hopes the powers sought by ministers will never be needed and that he will step down if Britain ends up violating international law “in the way that I I consider it unacceptable. “

But Labor leader Sir Keir Starmer accused government ministers of spreading “disinformation” over the weekend and “spinning” the reasons why they were pushing the new bill.

He told LBC: “[Mr Johnson] makes the mistake of withdrawing from the contract, which would damage the reputation of the UK

“I would tell the prime minister: look, go, go back to the drawing board, drop these problems, don’t act so reckless and wrong, and we’ll take another look at the legislation.”

Media playback is not supported on your device

Opinions on the Tories were divided in the bill.

MP Sir Desmond Swain said he would support the bill, praising the government for preparations if no agreement on a trade deal is reached by the end of the year.

He told BBC News: “If the government had not taken precautions against this possibility, it would have been completely careless. It is right that it will arm itself with power just in case. ”

But his colleague and chairman of the Justice Ad Hoc Committee, Sir Bob Neal, said the government and its supporters needed to “calm the tongue.”

He said that there is already a mechanism for solving the problems of the government, but he is ready to “meet halfway” by amending the law, allowing the use of only those elements that violate international law, if the parliament signs it.

• RULE OF SIX: What’s in the small print?
• CONSIDER WITH A SANE MIX: Shut down and run away