1. SOUNDBITE: (English) Lord John Kerr, member of the House of Lords and drafter of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty:
"They have been very careful not to say in public that we could not take back Mrs. May's letter, during the Miller case (Gina Miller, businesswoman who took the British government to court in a successful bid to win Parliament a vote on Brexit) and at the dispatch box in both houses, government spokesmen have consistently said only that as a matter of firm policy we won't take the letter back, as a matter of firm policy. That phrase in itself confirms that we could take it back if we so wanted, and we could. The fact is that it's a political decision that has been made in this country to maintain that there can be no going back. Actually, as far as Brussels is concerned, as far as the treaty is concerned, this country still has a free choice about whether to proceed. As new facts emerge, people are entitled to take a different view and there's nothing in Article 50 to stop them. I think the British people have the right to know this. They shouldn't be misled."
2. SOUNDBITE: (English) Lord John Kerr, member of the House of Lords and drafter of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty:
"I don't know why Mrs. May was in such a rush to send her letter in March before her cabinet had an agreed plan. It was odd to start the clock ticking and not start negotiating, instead calling an election and I don't know why both government and opposition now seem to discount the possibility of seeking an extension. The provision for doing so is in the treaty. Predicting how the 27 would react to such a request is actually harder than predicting how they would react to our withdrawing the letter. And if anybody refused an extension there would be no extension. I believe much would depend on our perceived motive. If we were seen as simply wanting to take a deadlocked financial negotiation into extra time, I don't think we could be sure of the necessary unanimous consent. But if, for example, we were to need time for parliament to consider a final deal or to have an election and/or to pass the legislation necessary for another referendum giving the people a final say in this process, to check that the country still wanted to leave having seen all the facts that have emerged during the negotiation process, if that was the scenario I do not see any of 27 democracies denying us the chance to consult the people. "
3. SOUNDBITE: (English) Lord John Kerr, member of the House of Lords and drafter of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty:
"My conclusions are simple. And again they are four: The national debate about Brexit should take account of the facts, the facts that our Article 50 letter could be withdrawn without cost or difficulty - legal or political. Secondly, a standstill agreement is no panacea. Thirdly, once out there is no easy way back in and there would be a price to pay. Fourth, while still in the option of stopping the clock in order to consult the people again is always available. All four facts will still be relevant when Parliament next Autumn gets the chance as it must to assess the outcome of these negotiations. Thank you."
Lord Kerr, the former British ambassador to the European Union who played a key role in drafting Article 50 said triggering it didn't mean Brexit was inevitable.
"As far as Brussels is concerned, as far as the treaty is concerned, this country still has free choice about whether to proceed," he said in a speech at an event hosted by the pro-EU Open Britain campaign, adding "I think the British people have the right to know this, they shouldn't be misled."
British voters, and lawmakers, remain divided over Brexit.
Prime Minister Theresa May warned Friday she would not tolerate attempts "to try to block the democratic wishes of the British people by attempting to slow down or stop our departure from the European Union."
Negotiations are ongoing for Britain's exit from the bloc which is scheduled for March 2019.
Technical talks started Thursday in Brussels for a two-day round, as the sides look to move forward on the key issues of Britain's financial commitments, the status of Irish borders and the future of citizens hit by Britain's departure.
EU leaders are increasingly frustrated with Britain's reluctance to signal how much it is willing to pay to settle its commitments to the 28-nation bloc.
The Brexit bill - estimated by the EU at somewhere around 60 billion euros (70 billion US dollars) - is a key sticking point preventing the EU from allowing talks to move on to trade and future relations.