Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Davis and Rudd contradict each other over whether 'no deal' Brexit 'unthinkable' - Politics live

David Davis in the Commons.
David Davis in the Commons. Photograph: HO/AFP/Getty Images

Afternoon summary

  • Davis and Amber Rudd, the home secretary, have contradicted each other about the acceptability of a “no deal” Brexit. Rudd said the idea was “unthinkable” (see 5.16pm), but Davis said it was important for the government to keep the option open. (See 3.26pm.)

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

Barnier says EU not to blame for slow pace of Brexit talks

Speaking at a news conference in Luxembourg, Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has denied that the EU is to blame for the slow pace of the Brexit talks. He said:

If you take a look at the timetable, take a look at the date of the Brexit referendum, the date when we received Theresa May’s letter which triggered the negotiating process almost a year later and then we had to await the general election to allow us to begin at the end of June.

In the light of that, just look at the timetable. The EU is not holding anything or anybody back. We are ready and willing to even speed up the negotiations.

Updated

No 10 plays down significance of rift between Davis and Rudd over 'no deal'

Downing Street has played down the significance of the rift between David Davis and Amber Rudd over the acceptability of a “no deal” Brexit. (See 3.22pm.) A Number 10 spokeswoman said:

I think if you look at her words in full, she’s referring to the fact that a deal is in the best interests of both sides and that’s something the prime minister absolutely agrees with.

In her evidence to the Commons home affairs committee Rudd said:

I think it is unthinkable that there would be no deal.

It is so much in their interest as well as in ours; in their communities’, in their families’, in their tourists’ interests to have something in place. We will make sure there is something between them and us to maintain our security.

Davis said something very different during his Brexit statement in the Commons chamber. (See 3.26pm.)

Theresa May is meeting with three potential Tory rebels over universal credit. Heidi Allen, Sarah Wollaston and Johnny Mercer are in Downing Street with the work and pensions secretary, David Gauke, seeing the prime minister.

They have expressed serious concerns about the welfare change - which they support in principle but believe needs to be adjusted to prevent some of the poorest people in society facing a financial squeeze.

The main concerns revolve around a six week wait for payments, which has forced people to turn to foodbanks.

The prime minister will be concerned about any rebellion during an opposition day debate led by Labour tomorrow on this issue.

May tells Spain UK will not recognise Catalonian independence

Theresa May has told her Spanish counterpart, Mariano Rajoy, that the UK will not recognise Catalonian independence and thinks the referendum was illegal, Number 10 has revealed. It has just released this readout of a conversation May and Rajoy had earlier today. Here it is in full.

This afternoon the prime minister spoke to Prime Minister Rajoy of Spain. The prime minister expressed her condolences over the loss of life and the damage caused by the forest fires in northern Spain.

The two leaders discussed the ongoing situation in Catalonia. The prime minister reiterated that the UK is clear that the referendum had no legal basis and that any unilateral declaration of independence would be inconsistent with the rule of law. She added that the UK would not recognise any such declaration of independence by Catalonia.

On Brexit, the prime minister and Prime Minister Rajoy discussed progress in the negotiations and looked ahead to meeting at this week’s European Council.

ITV’s Robert Peston is out to wind up Liam Fox, the international trade secretary.

He has posted this comment ...

... on this tweet.

Bill Clinton believes Brexit was a vote against economic inequalities and a protest against rapid social change in the world.

The former US president also described the UK vote to leave the EU as about people thinking differences with others were more important than what they have in common.

Clinton was speaking after being awarded an honorary doctorate for his efforts to secure peace in Northern Ireland and in particular his role in bringing about the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

On Brexit Clinton said:

Now there are lots of people who think they are less human now given the economic inequalities and rapid pace of social change and all the upheaval that’s going on ....

People are reassessing whether what we have in common is more important than our differences ... A lot of people begged to differ. That’s really what the Brexit vote is all about.

But the ex-president warned that many Brexit voters had not considered the full impact of leaving the EU especially in terms of a loss of access to European markets.

Bill Clinton receiving an honorary doctorate from Dublin City University.
Bill Clinton receiving an honorary doctorate from Dublin City University. Photograph: Niall Carson/PA

EU27 more united than UK1, says Finnish official

Earlier Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, effectively blamed the UK for the slow pace of the Brexit talks. (See 2.15pm.)

Other EU leaders have been making the same argument.

As the Times (paywall) reports, in an interview for BBC Northern Ireland’s Spotlight Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, said:

You can’t have the benefits of being a member of a club if you don’t obey the rules and you won’t pay the membership fee. So, it is quite a difficult negotiation when people who want to leave the EU in Britain don’t really seem to agree among themselves what that actually means.

And the Express’s Nick Gutteridge has this quote from Samuli Virtanen, the state secretary at the Finnish foreign ministry. (In Finland a state secretary is a senior official, not a minister.)

Turning back to the OECD’s report on the UK, Sky’s Ed Conway has posted a good thread on Twitter with some of the charts from the documents illustrating the economic impact of Brexit. It starts here.

My colleague Jennifer Rankin has been tweeting the key points from an EU briefing about the Brexit talks.

Tom Brake, the Lib Dem Brexit spokesman, has put out this statement about the split between David Davis and Amber Rudd over the thinkability of a “no deal” Brexit. (See 3.22pm.) Brake said:

David Davis claims those warning about a ‘no Brexit’ deal are scaremongering, so does that include his cabinet colleague Amber Rudd?

The Brexit secretary is living in fantasy land. There’s no way the government can negotiate a final deal in time with the EU when cabinet ministers can’t even agree amongst themselves.

David Davis is either sneakily pushing us towards a no-deal, or has no idea what he’s doing. Either conclusion spells chaos for the British people and businesses.

This underlines why the public must get the final say, with the choice to avoid a chaotic Brexit and stay in the EU.

My colleague Alan Travis has some more lines from Amber Rudd’s evidence to the home affairs committee.

This is what David Davis said to the SNP MP Peter Grant in the Commons earlier about why the government had to prepare for the possibility of a “no deal” Brexit. He said:

We are intending, we are setting out, we are straining every sinew to get a deal. That will be the best outcome.

But for two reasons, we need to prepare for all the other alternatives. One, because it’s a negotiation with many people and could go wrong, and so we have to be ready for that.

Secondly, because in a negotiation you always have to have the right to walk away - if you don’t, you get a terrible deal.

Rudd says 'no deal' Brexit 'unthinkable' - as Davis claims the opposite

Amber Rudd, the home secretary, has been giving evidence to the Commons home affairs committee. As my colleague Alan Travis reports, she said it is “unthinkable” that the UK would leave the EU without a Brexit deal.

This flatly contradicts what David Davis, the Brexit secretary, told MPs earlier. Although he repeatedly said he thought there would be a deal, he said the government had to prepare for the possibility that it might have to leave without one, a) just in case everything went wrong, and b) because it was important for the EU to know that the UK had the option of leaving without one. (See 1.42pm.)

David Davis's Brexit statement - Summary

Here are the main points from David Davis’s Commons statement on Brexit.

  • Davis, the Brexit secretary, effectively accused the EU of dragging out the Brexit talks in the hope of getting the UK to pay more. He said:

The simple truth is, of course we are in a negotiation. And they are using time pressure to see if they can get more money out of us. Bluntly, that’s what’s going on. It is obvious to anybody ... But we will get there in time, I’m quite sure, to get a decent outcome for everybody.

  • He rejected claims in a Resolution Foundation report today that Brexit without trade deal would lead to average household bills rising by £260 a year. He described the report as “scaremongering”. Asked if he was worried about what it said, he said:

If I thought it reflected the reality, I wouldn’t be relaxed about it. But the simple truth is that it doesn’t. It doesn’t reflect the effect of free trade deals. It doesn’t reflect what we would have to do under those circumstances.

Later he said the report did not take into account the impact of the tariffs that the UK currently has to impose on food imports from outside the EU because of the EU’s common external tariff.

  • He hinted that EU leaders may make a surprise concession on the transition at their summit later this week. Asked about lack of progress so far, he said there had been five rounds of talks. He went on:

Indeed, I had another meeting with Mr Juncker and Mr Barnier last night. Let’s just see what the European council comes up with on Friday, shall we?

  • He said that the proposed transition period would not apply unless there was a final Brexit deal as well. He said:

Such a transition phase will only be triggered once we have completed the deal itself. You cannot carry on negotiating through that.

  • He said the UK’s offer on the rights of EU nationals was more generous than the EU’s. He said:

In many of these areas, it is a straightforward statement of fact that our proposals go further, and provide more certainty, than those of the commission.

  • He accused Labour MPs warning about the economic impact of Brexit of “talking down the economy”.
  • He said today’s OECD report says the UK economy will continue to grow even if it has to trade with the EU on World Trade Organisation terms.

Updated

UK and EU blame each other for slow pace of Brexit talks

The Davis statement is over. It did not last as long as these statements normally do. I will post a summary soon.

Meanwhile, in Luxembourg, Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been talking about last night’s dinner with Theresa May.

These are from my colleague Jennifer Rankin.

And this is from AFP’s Danny Kemp.

So Barnier is effectively renewing his claim that the UK is to blame for the slow pace of progress in the Brexit talks. (How else can you interpret “it takes two to accelerate”?). It is a claim Barnier has often made before.

But Davis is claiming the EU is to blame. See 1.43pm.

  • UK and EU blame each other for slow pace of Brexit talks.

Labour’s Wes Streeting says the chancellor is being savaged by Tory MPs for pointing out the disadvantages of Brexit. What assurances can Davis give that there will be a transition deal?

Davis says people like Streeting have been talking down the economy for two years. They predicted a recession. But “the reverse is true”. The economy is growing and employment is at a record high.

Richard Drax, a Conservative, says the UK has to leave the EU to honour the results of the referendum. So leaving with no deal has to be on the table, he says.

Davis says this point is “entirely logical”.

Davis says, for an implementation phase to have value, it has to be agreed soon. The government wants to get this underway as soon as possible, he says.

Davis says transition deal will not apply unless there is overall final Brexit deal as well

Rishi Sunak, a Conservative, asks what the government will do to ensure that the transition does not become a “bridge to nowhere”.

Davis says the government will try to get the transition agreed as soon as possible.

But he says it will only come into force if there is a final deal, he says.

  • Davis says transition deal will not apply unless there is an overall final Brexit deal as well.

David Jones, the Conservative former Brexit minister, asks if the government will consider alternative options if the EU refuses to discuss trade talks.

Davis says he expects the EU to do what is in their interests. That involves having a deal. So that is what he expects to happen, he says.

Labour’s Heidi Alexander asks if the UK will seek to remain a member of EU regulatory bodies after Brexit.

Davis says control of these issues will come back to the UK. Then there will be a procedure to manage convergence, he says.

Davis hints EU leaders might offer some sort of progress towards transition later this week

Labour’s Chris Leslie says we still have not got an agreement on a transition deal yet. The cliff edge starts at the end of this year, he says. Who will Davis be talking to to make sure we get an agreement on a transition this week.

Davis says:

Let’s just see what the European council comes up with on Friday, shall we?

  • Davis hints that EU leaders might offer some sort of progress towards a transition at their summit later this week.

Davis accuses Resolution Foundation of “scaremongering” about the impact of a no deal Brexit

Labour’s Pat McFadden asks about the Resolution Foundation report about the extra costs to householders of a no deal Brexit.

Davis says he would not be relaxed if he thought the Resolution Foundation report was accurate. But it is not, he says. It does not take into account how the government would respond. He says he is “knocking down scaremongering”.

  • Davis accuses Resolution Foundation of “scaremongering” about the impact of a no deal Brexit.

Labour’s Hilary Benn asks about a transition deal and how long it will last.

Davis says Theresa May has said around two years.

Davis accuses EU of dragging out Brexit talks in hope of getting better deal

Owen Paterson, the Conservative former environment secretary, says up to 29,000 jobs in the German car making sector could go if there is Brexit with no trade deal. When will EU partners realise this?

Davis says it is obvious that EU leaders are delaying because they think that will help them get a better deal. But he is confident there will be a deal in the end.

Updated

The SNP’s Europe spokesman, Peter Grant, says before you accelerate, you should check to see whether you are heading for the cliff edge.

He asks if it is reasonable to go into talks with red lines.

And Davis may say he is not talking up no deal. But will he talk it down, and say it would be very bad.

Davis says the government is “straining every sinew” to get a deal.

But it could go wrong, and so it has to prepare for that. And in a negotiation you have to have the option of being able to walk away, he says.

Sir Bill Cash, a Conservative, asks about how the government will guarantee the rights of EU nationals in UK laws.

Davis says the government is looking at various options. Adjudication will of course by by the UK courts, he says.

Davis is responding to Starmer.

He denies talking up a no deal Brexit.

He says Starmer “carps and carps, but has not option of his own”.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is responding.

He says the government has failed to hit an important deadline (getting the EU to agree to move the talks on to phase two in October.)

He says Davis is being too confident.

Davis and Theresa May were right to go to Brussels last night, he says. He says he would like to claim that was a result of his call for a fresh round of emergency talks last week.

Starmer says May’s Florence speech was helpful. But it was then undermined by “self-interested antics” by some cabinet ministers, he says.

He says he is glad there was an agreement at the dinner to “accelerate” the talks. But they have been moving at a glacial speech. It is not much for a car moving at 2mph to accelerate to 4mph.

(He has nicked this metaphor from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, who used it last night in a blog.)

He says Davis should make it clear that no deal is not an option. Davis should not talk up no deal, he says.

David Davis's Commons statement on Brexit

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, is making a Commons statement on Brexit.

His opening statement summed up what has been achieved in the talks so far.

He said the two sides were reaching the limit of what could be achieved without discussing the future trade relationship.

Boris Johnson at Foreign Office questions - Summary

Here are the main points from Foreign Office questions.

  • Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, said it was now time for the EU to “get serious” about the Brexit talks. (See 1.06pm.) This is unlikely to go down well in Brussels where the slow pace of the Brexit talks is widely attributed to the UK government’s failure to make more specific commitments about money.
  • He accused Labour MPs of being “supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies”, claiming they would be willing to pay as much as €100bn to the EU. He told MPs:

What I said in answer to an honourable friend on these benches was that some of the sums that I heard spoken of were in my view eye-watering, in my honourable friend’s, eye-watering, that they were far too high.

Now, the figure I heard was €100bn - is that side of the House, would they cough up a hundred? Would you? Would you?

I think they would, I think they would, the supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies. They would.

I think that’s the sort of money they’d readily fork out. I think that’s too much.

  • He claimed it was a “scandal” that Labour MPs were willing to appear on RT (formally Russia Today). He said:

If you study the output of Russia Today, and if you consider the state of the press in Russia at present, it is a scandal that members of the party opposite are continuing to validate and legitimate that kind of propaganda by going on those programmes. I’m assured by my ministerial team none of them do so.

  • He accused Russia of behaving as though it was in a new cold war. He said:

The tragedy is that in many ways Russia is behaving as though there is indeed a new Cold War, and our objective is to prevent that from getting any worse. To constrain Russia, to make sure we penalise Russia for its malign and disruptive activities where they’re taking place, but also to engage where we can. And that’s why, for instance, I’ll be going to Russia later on this year.

He said Russia was “up to all sorts of mischief in many countries”. But he said the government had not so far been able to “pinpoint any direct Russian cyber attacks on this country”.

  • He repeatedly refused to apologise for his comments about “dead bodies” in Libya, accusing the opposition of “trivialising” the issue. In response to a comment from the SNP’s Stephen Gethins, he said:

I don’t believe that political point scoring of this kind, or trivialising or ignoring the reality of the security situation in Sirte does any favours to the people of Libya.

Afterwards Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, suggested he was guilty of hypocrisy. (See 11.56am.) The SNP’s David Linden responded by issues a fresh call for Johnson to resign. (See 11.50am.)

Boris Johnson arriving at Number 10 for cabinet this morning.
Boris Johnson arriving at Number 10 for cabinet this morning. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images

Boris Johnson says EU must 'get serious' about Brexit negotiations

Here is the full quote where Boris Johnson told the EU to “get serious” about the Brexit negotiations. He was responding to the Lib Dem MP Jamie Stone (see 12.31pm) who asked Johnson how he would respond to the comments from the German politician Michael Fuchs on the Today programme this morning. Fuchs claimed Johnson was holding up progress in the Brexit talks because he was preventing Theresa May from making a more acceptable offer. (See 9.24am.)

Johnson said:

It is up to our friends and partners in the EU now to look seriously at the offer we are making, particularly on citizens, and to make progress. Everybody wants to make progress. Everybody wants to give the 3.2m EU citizens in this country the maximum possible reassurance and security. That can only happen once our friends and partners decide to get serious in these negotiations.

Tuesday’s post-cabinet briefing from Theresa May’s official spokesman brought no real updates on the Brexit process. We were told that last night’s dinner in Brussels was not even discussed.

At the end of the cabinet, the spokesman said, the PM had updated her ministers on the plans for the European council summit later this week, explaining that she believed her speech in Florence on Brexit last month “had created momentum”.

There would be a time during the summit, still to be pinned down on the schedule, “where she would set out the UK’s position in relation to the UK leaving the European Union”, the spokesman said, adding: “She said that the Florence speech had had a positive impact on negotiations going forward.”

The update came at the end of cabinet, he added, and there was no discussion among ministers.

The cabinet also had “a very constructive discussion” on the upcoming budget, the spokesman said, with the chancellor, Philip Hammond, saying he “looked forwards to receiving contributions from colleagues in coming weeks”.

Foreign Office has finally finished. It is only supposed to last an hour, but John Bercow, the Commons speaker, has let it overrun by almost 20 minutes.

I will post a summary shortly.

Johnson says it is a “scandal” that Labour MPs have appeared on Russia Today. By doing so they “validate and legitimate” Russian propaganda, he says.

He was responding to a question from a Tory MP that may have been prompted by this Guido Fawkes blog.

Here is a nice detail that the BBC’s Esther Webber picked up earlier.

In response to a question from Labour’s Hilary Benn, Johnson says the UK does not know yet if the EU will agree to have an “implementation period”.

Here is the Labour MP Chi Onwurah about Boris Johnson’s claim a few minutes ago about Tory unity on Brexit. (See 12.26pm.)

Onwurah is ignoring the fact that Johnson seemed to be exaggerating for comic effect, and so the “self delusion” charge is probably unfair. But you could argue that not taking the question seriously is also a serious failing.

Johnson says EU states need to 'get serious' about Brexit talks

Jamie Stone, a Lib Dem, asks Johnson if he thinks his recent interventions on Brexit have helped the government.

Johnson says the government is united behind the government’s approach.

And he says the UK’s friends in the EU need to “get serious” about these talks. He suggests they are dragging their feet on the issue of the rights of EU nationals.

  • Johnson says EU states need to “get serious” about Brexit talks.

Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, asks if Johnson accepts now that the UK will have to pay a divorce bill to the UK. And how much should it be?

Johnson says Thornberry has misquoted him. He said he was opposed to the UK paying a substantial sum. Some people were talking €100bn. Would “supine” Labour pay that much? He thinks they would, he says.

Thornberry says Johnson has said both that the government is planning for no deal and isn’t. Which is it?

Johnson says there is a ruthless consistency in everything he has said. Tory MPs are united behind the principles of the Lancaster House speech, the article 50 letter and the Florence speech, he says.

Updated

Labour’s Jeff Smith says Johnson said earlier this year that Labour had been far too pessimistic about Donald Trump. Does he accept he was wrong?

Johnson says President Trump has not juncked the Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA. Britain intends to keep it alive.

Sir Edward Leigh, a Conservative, asks Johnson if he intends to encourage Trump to encourage a negotiated solution to the Korean crisis.

Johnson says he wants to see “jaw-jaw, not war-war.”

Johnson says British aid workers responded fantastically to the recent hurricanes.

Yet before the hurricane was even over, he received a letter two select committees criticising the UK’s response, he says. He says that was “premature”.

Turning away from Foreign Office questions for a moment, the OECD has just published its report on the UK.

Here is the Guardian’s story about it.

And here is how it starts.

Britain must secure “the closest possible economic relationship” with the European Union after Brexit to prevent the economy suffering a long-term decline, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD) has warned.

The thinktank to the world’s richest nations, which has predicted the UK’s growth rate will fall to just 1% next year, said a “disorderly” exit from the EU single market and customs union in 2019 “would hurt trading relationships and reduce long-term growth”.

But the report said that the reversal of the Brexit decision by a change of government or a second referendum would have a “significant” positive impact on the UK’s growth.

Entering the debate over Brexit at a crucial stage in negotiations, the OECD added that steep falls in the UK’s productivity performance relative to other major economies alied with the failure of its export industries to grab a slice of expanding world trade have left it in a weak position to operate outside the EU.

Here is the OECD’s news release about its report.

Updated

Johnson says there are two “ecosystems of terror” that the UK faces: one at home, and one abroad. He says the government is tackling both.

The space the terrorists have in Iraq and Syria has been greatly reduced in the last year, he says.

Johnson is still taking questions on Russia. He says there is no direct evidence of a Russian cyber attack on the UK.

In one of his answers on Libya Boris Johnson accused the opposition of “trivialising” the security situation in Libya.

Here is Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, effectively accusing him of hypocrisy.

In response to a question about Russia, Boris Johnson says the UK cannot have a normal relationship with the country. But he says it is important to engage with it.

Fresh call for Boris Johnson to resign after he fails to apologise for Libya 'dead bodies' comment

The SNP MP David Linden, who asked the first question (see 11.37am), is saying Boris Johnson should resign in the light of his answer on Libya.

The SNP’s Stephen Gethins asks how Johnson thinks his comments impacted on Libya.

Johnson says he is trying to bring people together.

Gethins agrees. He has brought people together to condemn what he said.

Johnson accuses Gethins of “political point scoring”. Ignoring the security problems in Libya does no one any favours, he says.

Johnson refuses to apologise for his comment about 'dead bodies' in Libya

Labour’s shadow foreign minister Fabian Hamilton says Johnson said that the only people criticising him over his Sirte comments had no knowledge of Libya. Quoting a Libyan politician saying the remarks were offensive, he asks Johnson to apologise.

Johnson says MPs should get behind the plan to bring security to Libya and Sirte. That would honour those who died, he says.

  • Johnson refuses to apologise for his comment about “dead bodies” in Libya.

Boris Johnson takes questions in the Commons

Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, is taking questions in the Commons.

The SNP’s David Linden asks Johnson if he will apologise for his comments at the Tory conference about the need to clear away the dead bodies in Sirte.

Johnson says we must all be aware of the tragic absence of security in Libya and Sirte. But, when those problems are resolved, Libya has fantastic prospects.

This year’s Conservative party conference often ended up sounding like a seminar on South America because most speakers seemed to find it impossible to make a contribution without going on about Venezuela.

But, in an interesting column in the Telegraph (paywall), the Conservative MP Kemi Badenoch says this was a big mistake. The party is using the wrong language to make the case against Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour, she argues. Badenoch, who is seen as one of the stars of the new Tory intake (she was chosen to introduce Theresa May at the Conservative conferences), explains:

I asked two of my staff members what they thought of the increased enthusiasm for Corbyn. Separated by 30 years, I listened to these two Conservatives, argue about the problem with young people. It was illuminating.

My head of office vividly remembered going hungry every time there was a strike and her father lost his wages. The 3-day week, waiting months for a telephone line and how terrible British Rail was. The carnage after a Left-wing government was obvious. She had seen socialism fail, again and again. “Look at what’s happening in Venezuela!”. I watched my 23 year old researcher’s eyes deaden as she said that.

“Yeah, what about Venezuela?” he asked. “I don’t care about Venezuela. I care about what’s happening here. Yes, you waited 6 months for a telephone line, but my family’s been waiting years for a mobile phone signal in my house, the trains are still late but more expensive and I still live at home because a cheap flat is ten times my salary”.

The generational and political divides have never been wider, and some of this can be explained by how the Right uses language.

Pointing to Venezuela and thinking we’ve successfully won the argument defending capitalism against socialism doesn’t work. It was easier when people had lived through both.

The Times’ Rachel Sylvester has another interesting story about reforming parliament. She says John Bercow, the Commons speaker, and Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, are backing a proposal to give MPs six-months paid “baby leave”. In her column (paywall) she writes:

At the moment, MPs have no maternity or paternity rights because they are not technically employees but elected representatives. Under the plan drawn up by Harriet Harman, the former Labour deputy leader, and backed by John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, politicians would be able to nominate a parliamentary colleague as proxy to vote on their behalf in the Commons while they are on parental leave. In a parallel move, they would be allowed to hire somebody to stand in for them in their constituency during their absence, funded by the taxpayer. The change is expected to be endorsed by the cross-party Commons Reference Group on Representation and Inclusion, chaired by the Speaker, possibly as early as this week. The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, which would be responsible for funding the constituency cover, is “very supportive in principle”, a spokesman tells me. Its chairwoman, Ruth Evans, was previously the director of the Maternity Alliance and has long campaigned for improved parental rights. Andrea Leadsom, the Commons leader (who famously said that motherhood made her a better politician because it gave her a “stake in society”) also backs the introduction of baby leave for MPs.

Lucy Fisher has a good story in the Times today (paywall). She says a Lords committee will recommend putting a 15-year time limit on new peerages. Her story goes on:

The Lords has almost 800 members, making it the second largest legislative chamber in the world after the National People’s Congress of China, but pressure has grown on the government to reduce its size. There is no retirement age or limit on how long peers can serve.

The Lords committee tasked this year with cutting membership of the house will propose the time limits in its report this month. It will also call on the four large parts of the Lords — 252 Tory peers, 199 from Labour, 100 Lib Dems and 180 crossbenchers — to commit to cutting the size of their blocs in stages.

A 15-year time limit on new members will be proposed as a way of maintaining a smaller house while providing for a greater degree of continuity in its membership than in the Commons.

(Presumably after 15 years these new peers would still be able to call themselves Lord or Lady so-and-so. If the authorities were really serious about discouraging people from wanting to sit in the House of Lords, they would abolish the titles too.)

The Electoral Reform Society says these proposals do not go far enough. In a statement its chief executive Darren Hughes said:

It’s welcome that peers now recognise the need the cut down the size of the upper house. At around 800 members, Britain’s bloated second chamber is crying out for change, so these proposals are a start. Years of pressure and public outrage have finally forced the Lords into cleaning out their stables.

However, these reforms avoid dealing with the real problem in the Lords – a total lack of democracy and transparency in how it is composed.

These hyper-cautious proposals are sticking plaster politics, and would do nothing to stop prime ministers packing the chamber with party donors and political friends. The light-touch reforms only apply to new peerages, meaning any substantial reduction in size could take decades.

Nor would the changes go any way to addressing the crisis of representation. Over half of peers are aged over 70, nearly half live in London and the South East, and – contrary to claims of independence – almost all vote solely along party lines ...

The public are not just fed up with the Lords because it is too big – they are fed up with repeated expenses scandals, allegations of cronyism and the ludicrous continuation of hereditary peers. And they are sick of the Mother of All Parliaments being viewed as a members club for a small elite.

Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s lead Brexit spokesman, is one of the most outspoken critics of the UK government in Brussels. He has been at it again this morning, commenting on this story from the Independent.

Clark announces plans to give government new powers to block takeover bids on national security grounds

Greg Clark, the business secretary, has this morning announced plans to make it easier for the government to intervene to block company mergers on national security grounds. He has explained the plans in a written ministerial statement here and in a press release here.

Here’s an extract from the news release.

Today’s proposals include enabling the government to intervene in mergers that raise national security concerns, even when they involve smaller businesses. These changes are targeted at key areas, specifically companies that design or manufacture military and dual use products, and parts of the advanced technology sector.

In these areas, currently the government can only intervene in mergers involving companies with a UK turnover of more than £70m or where the share of UK supply increases to 25% or over. Today’s proposals will close these loopholes to enable greater scrutiny of foreign investment in a changing market.

In these areas, the government will lower the threshold whereby ministers can scrutinise investment to businesses with a UK turnover of over £1m, and remove the requirement for a merger to increase a business’s share of supply of, or over, 25%.

Clark will be publishing a green paper and making a statement in the Commons later.

Updated

Anas Sarwar has received a useful endorsement in his quest to become the next Scottish Labour leader. In a joint statement Andy Burnham, the Labour mayor of Greater Manchester, and Steve Rotheram, the Labour Liverpool metro mayor, have both endorsed him. They say:

We need Labour back in power in Scotland and across all the regions and nations of the UK.

Having worked closely with Anas in Westminster and witnessed the passion with which he led the Labour campaign to strengthen Scotland’s place in the UK, it’s clear that he has the energy and experience to lead Labour back to power.

Anas is a committed devolutionist, and knows that we need to devolve power from Whitehall to our cities and regions.

In these challenging times, we need to work together to ensure we can increase jobs and grow the economies of our great cities such as Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Edinburgh.

Sarwar needs all the help he can get. His opponent, the more leftwing Richard Leonard, is the clear favourite in the contest, which ends with the result being announced on 18 November.

Sarwar, who is now an MSP, served as an MP for five years between 2010 and 2015, which is why Burnham and Rotheram know him well. Leonard has only ever been an MSP.

Hate crime in England and Wales up by 29%

The number of hate crimes recorded by police has increased by 29% since last year - the largest annual rise since records began, the Press Association reports.

In 2016/17 police recorded 80,393 offences where hate was deemed to be a motivating factor, compared to 62,518 in 2015/16.

Since the government began collecting such data in 2011/12, recorded hate crime has steadily increased, with the sharpest rise occurring in the last year.

The Home Office report [pdf] said: “The increase over the last year is thought to reflect both a genuine rise in hate crime around the time of the EU referendum and following the Westminster Bridge terrorist attack, as well as ongoing improvements in crime reporting by police.”

Yesterday the BBC’s Adam Fleming tweeted a picture of a mystery chart that Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, had at a meeting.

Today he has managed to find out what it is.

Inflation hits 3%

Inflation has hit 3%, its highest level for five and a half years.

My colleague Graeme Wearden has more on his business live blog.

Michael Fuchs' Today interview - Summary

Here are the main points from this morning’s Today programme interview with Michael Fuchs, vice chair of the of the CDU/CSU group in the German parliament.

  • Fuchs claimed that Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, was holding up progress in the Brexit talks by preventing Theresa May making an acceptable offer to the EU. (See 9.24am.) But Fuchs also made it clear that he was not asking for Johnson to be sacked. “Of course not,” he said, when this suggestion was put to him.
  • He said that the UK had not offered to pay enough money to the EU as it left. When it was put to him that Theresa May had made a financial offer, he replied:

But that was not enough. Of course, it was not accepted, this proposal ...

You have to accept that there are a lot of things to be paid. Let me just say - pensions, which is not solved. This problem has to be solved and the UK has to come up with decent proposals.

May’s offer in her Florence speech was “not a decent proposal”, he said.

  • He said European thought that the UK was trying to cherry pick (ie, to keep the advantages of EU membership without accepting the disadvantages). He said:

You remember my chancellor’s [Angela Merkel’s] words; in is in, and out is out. And you cannot have just one part soft and the others not. That’s one of the real big problems. Everyone in Europe at the moment has a feeling that there is a little bit of cherry picking going on, and that’s not acceptable.

Boris Johnson holding up progress in Brexit talks, claims Merkel ally

Theresa May’s flying visit to Brussels last night for a 90-minute dinner with Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, ended without any significant breakthrough in the Brexit process. The Guardian’s overnight story is here, and Sky has footage of Juncker embracing May and David Davis, the Brexit secretary, as they left. (Davis seemed to get away without a proper continental-style kiss, although perhaps it would have been better for the national interest if he’d copied Tony Blair.)

Today Davis will be in the Commons giving MPs an update on the Brexit talks. Before he speaks, his fellow cabinet Brexiter, Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, will be taking questions.

On the Today programme this morning Michael Fuchs, vice chair of the CDU/CSU group in the German parliament and hence an ally of Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, suggested that Johnson was to blame for the lack of progress on the Brexit talks. He told the programme:

We have to have a fair deal. I think Theresa May has to come up with fair proposals. At the moment it is not really that much.

But I know there are internal problems. Whatever she’s offering, Boris Johnson is saying it’s too much ...

His influence seems to be pretty strong. Otherwise she would come up with other proposals, I guess. The problem is she has internal trouble with the Tories.

I’ll post more from his interview shortly.

I will be covering Johnson’s question session in the Commons and the Davis statement in full.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.30am: The cabinet meets.

9.30am: Inflation figures are released.

9.30am: The Home Office publishes figures on hate crimes.

10am: Energy companies and Ofgem give evidence to the Commons business committee on price caps.

11.15am: Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England, gives evidence to the Commons Treasury committee. My colleague Graeme Wearden will be covering it on his business live blog.

11.50am: Philip Hammond, the chancellor, and Angel Gurria, the OECD secretary general, hold a press conference to launch the OECD’s economic survey of the UK.

12.30pm: David Davis, the Brexit secretary, gives a statement to MPs.

2.30pm: Amber Rudd, the home secretary, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee.

As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web.

You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.

Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news from Jack Blanchard’s Playbook. The ConservativeHome round up of the political stories in today’s papers is here. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’ top 10 must reads.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Austin rideshare driver has a passenger named Bradley. Then he issues a warning to Bradley’s girlfriend after what he overhears
An Austin rideshare driver has gone viral after a passenger made some startling revelations in the back of his car. Revelations so startling, in fact, that the driver decided to issue a PSA to his girlfriend.
The Mary Sue
The Mary Sue
We’ve Reached The Point(e) Where Real-Life Ballerinas Are Weighing In On Timothèe Chalamet Ballet And Opera Controversy
The dancers shared their thoughts.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Server asks table if they have any allergies. One man’s response stuns her into silence—then it gets worse: ‘God forbid I do my job’
A server just had one of the most annoying and difficult encounters with a table she didn’t even ask for. That’s because a table vehemently refused her service despite sitting down in a full-service restaurant. 
The Mary Sue
The Mary Sue
Kylie Jenner shares the surprising date night activity she and Timothée Chalamet love
The reality star and Oscar-nominated actor have been dating for three years
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Jimmy Kimmel on Pentagon splurging on doughnuts: ‘Is this My 600lb Defense Department?’
Late-night hosts discussed Trump’s mixed messaging on Iran, the Melania documentary and a ‘cult’ of Maga footwear
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
'How Are We Here': Candace Cameron Bure Recalls Accidentally Walking Into 'Demonic' S&M Party
Candace Cameron Bure says she and husband Valeri once walked into an underground S&M party by mistake, recalling the "dark" and shocking experience.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play