PETER Kyle may have provided an answer to Brexit after his compromise solution received backing from the Labour Party.

The MP for Hove and Portslade is leading the charge on an amendment which would see a public vote held on Theresa May’s controversial deal.

Now his party has agreed to back his amendment, which could see the Brexit deadlock broken.

Mr Kyle said: “The Labour Party has united behind a compromise. It’s a way forward that can get Brexit out of Westminster and back into our communities.”

Mr Kyle previously said that if the Prime Minister does not agree to his proposal, her premiership will come to a “turbulent and uncontrolled end”.

If his proposal gets enough support, Theresa May’s controversial deal will be put to the country in the form of a referendum.

The UK would stay within the union under the current arrangements if the Prime Minister’s deal is rejected in the public vote.

The so-called “compromise deal” is a fresh attempt for a second referendum.

But instead of voting for or against Brexit, the public would vote on the Prime Minister’s deal – a “compromise” which Mr Kyle hopes can get enough support in Parliament.

He said: “It’s a big ask of citizens but I truly believe that people want an end to this Brexit nightmare.

“This is the most credible way of doing so with a hope of healing our divided nation afterwards.

“[Theresa May’s] clearly running scared of Parliament but we’re now in the endgame.”

Peter Kyle is a

long-term advocate against Brexit.

Both Brighton and Hove and the Lewes district voted to remain in the European Union in the June 23 referendum.

But a Sussex Conservative MP, who has consistently voted for a Brexit deal, has also indicated he may back the proposal.

Huw Merriman, MP for Bexill and Battle, said: “If MPs will not back the deal then I am asking myself if [Peter Kyle’s amendment] is the only option left to deliver.”

The amendment will be attached to the third vote on the Prime Minster’s deal which is expected to happen this week.

However, it will only be allowed if the deal is “substantially different” to the last.