Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
Politics
Andrew Sparrow, Matthew Weaver, Kate Lyons and Kevin Rawlinson

Brexit: 'Not surprising' people are angry with MPs, says Dominic Cummings – as it happened

Dominic Cummings at the launch of a book by the Vote Leave supporter and businessman Stuart Wheeler
Dominic Cummings at the launch of a book by the Vote Leave supporter and businessman Stuart Wheeler Photograph: Yui Mok/PA

Closing summary

We’re going to close down this live blog now. Here’s a summary of the day’s events:

And you can read yet more from my colleague, Rowena Mason, who has the full story:

Cummings has also said serious threats of violence have been seen on both sides, adding that the “situation can only be resolved by parliament honouring its promise to respect the result” of the 2016 referendum.

People on all sides have said things that veered between unwise and very unpleasant, and sometimes criminal. That is true of people of the leave side and that’s true of people on the remain side.

People have been running around during the referendum campaign saying I was a Nazi, they run around for three years afterwards saying I am a criminal, and now a criminal Nazi.

And there are also a bunch of people on the Leave side who have said terrible things about remainers.

I also think there is a very important distinction between, on the one hand, a robust political discussion and debate, and threats of violence. Threats of violence are a completely different matter. They should be treated in a completely different matter; everyone should take those extremely seriously.

I know people on both sides of leave and remain who have had serious threats like that and it is obviously bad. In the end, the situation can only be resolved by parliament honouring its promise to respect the result.

According to the Press Association, Cummings added:

I don’t think anyone is going to listen to reason because a lot of people (MPs) become really badly disconnected from what people in the real world and England outside central London thinks.

Dominic Cummings has been addressing the language used in the Brexit debate and the threats sent to some MPs this evening. The Press Association reports that he has said it is “not surprising” people are angry with parliamentarians.

He’s appearing at an event marking the launch of a new book by the Vote Leave supporter and businessman, Stuart Wheeler. Asked if he blamed MPs for the abuse they were getting, he has said:

The MPs said we will have a referendum, we will respect the result and then they spent three years swerving all over the shop.

It is not surprising some people are angry about it. I find it very odd that these characters are complaining that people are unhappy about their behaviour now and they also say they want a referendum. How does that compute for them?

To me, it says that, fundamentally, a lot of people in parliament are more out of touch with the country now than they were in summer 2016.

If you are a bunch of politicians and say that we swear we are going to respect the result of a democratic vote, and then after you lose you say, we don’t want to respect that vote, what do you expect to happen?

Asked directly if he believed MPs have themselves to blame for the abuse they are receiving, Cummings said: “That’s the way you’re putting it. I am using my language.”

Major also offers some pretty strong criticism of Johnson and his cabinet over their approach to Brexit and their use of language:

Like many in my party, who have been expelled for voting with their conscience, I am a lifelong Conservative.

I hope our millions of traditional, moderate, middle-of-the-road supporters understand that this Conservative government’s present position is an aberration.

Most Conservatives are not a Brexit party tribute band, nor have we abandoned our core values to find compromise, seek allies and strive for unity, rather than division and disarray.

We do not believe we have the right to ignore the voices of millions of others, whose opinions differ from our own.

And we abhor the language of division and hate – and words such as “saboteur”, “traitor”, “enemy”, “surrender”, “betrayal” have no place in our party, our politics, nor in our society.

It is emphatically not who we are as a people. And must never be seen as so.

I hope that the Conservative parliamentary party will regain its sense of balance, and rein in the faction of a faction that now prevails in cabinet.

Boris Johnson may use the privy council to bypass the legal requirement on him to seek a three-month Brexit delay if he cannot get a deal, the former prime minister John Major has suggested.

In a speech to the Centre for European Reform thinktank this evening, Major plans to say:

My fear is that the government will seek to bypass statute law, by passing an order of council to suspend the [Benn] Act until after 31 October.

It is important to note that an order of council can be passed by privy councillors – that is government ministers – without involving HM the Queen.

I should warn the prime minister that – if this route is taken – it will be in flagrant defiance of parliament and utterly disrespectful to the supreme court.

It would be a piece of political chicanery that no one should ever forgive or forget.

Major is referring to the difference between an order in council, which needs the approval of the monarch, and an order of council, which does not.

Johnson has repeatedly made the apparently contradictory claims that he will, at once, abide by the law and refuse to ask for a delay.

Updated

The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has criticised the prime minister over his inflammatory language, making reference as he did so to the arrest at the constituency offices of his party colleague, Jess Phillips:

Updated

Dominic Cummings shrugs off MP's death threat concerns

Footage has emerged of the senior No 10 aide responding to an MP’s concerns about death threats with the words: “Get Brexit done”.

Karl Turner, the Labour MP for Hull East and a shadow minister, confronted Dominic Cummings in Westminster today. Footage of the incident, posted online by the BBC, showed Turner criticising the prime minister’s inflammatory tone and telling Cummings: “I’ve had death threats overnight; ‘should be dead’.”

Cummings responds: “Get Brexit done.”

Speaking to the Press Association about the exchange later, Turner said:

My wife is in Hull with my three-year-old daughter while I’m in Westminster – I take threats seriously.

I saw Dominic Cummings in Portcullis House and I raised with him that the language adopted by the prime minister and others yesterday is inflammatory and causing MPs to receive death threats.

Mr Cummings responded to me: ‘Back a deal, then’.

I then approached him and said, how is it possible for me to be criticised for not backing a deal? I’ve tried three times to back the former prime minister’s deal but it wasn’t good enough for me to support.

The PM should be in Brussels negotiating a deal to bring back to parliament so people like me can support it. I’m desperate to support a deal but it must protect jobs and workers’ rights.

Turner has said he’s “truly worried” about his family’s safety, having previously had a person arrive at his house in Hull to confront him.

The reason I was provoked into making an impassioned plea for him to stop allowing the tone of the debate to be as it is, is because I am truly worried about my family,” he said.

I’ve had previous experiences of attacks on the house and the family and you can’t decide when you see these threats whether it is a serious death threat or whether it is just someone firing off at the keyboard when they’ve had too much to drink. I don’t know and it worries me.

Updated

Boris Johnson declines to apologise to Jo Cox's family for provocative comments and defends 'surrender' bill rhetoric

Boris Johnson has recorded a series of regional TV interviews today, and the BBC has released some of the transcripts. At least two of his claims were seriously misleading. Here are the key points

  • Johnson declined to apologise to the family of Jo Cox for his comments about her last night. His own sister, Rachel, said that what he said about Cox was “particularly tasteless”. (See 1.56pm.) But, when he was asked by BBC’s Look North if he had a message for the Cox family, he replied:

Look, I want to make a very, very important point. There’s a big big difference between a problem that I think is growing and that we need to deal with, which is the threat that MPs are facing, particularly female MPs [and it being important for MPs to be able to use words like surrender.]

Asked again if he was sorry for his language in any way, Johnson said he was “deeply sorry for the threats that MPs face”. But that was an expression of regret about something happening, not an apology for something for which he accepted some responsibility.

  • He rejected the suggestion that some of the language he had used last night might have contributed to MPs facing threats. When this was put to him, he said: “I dispute that.”
  • He defended his right to call the Benn Act the “surrender bill”. In one interview he said:

If you look at the language I was using, it’s important to be able to use a simple English word like surrender in a parliamentary context to describe a bill that gives the power to the rest of the EU to keep us locked in the EU by their own decision and to decide how long we should be there.

  • He falsely claimed that the Benn Act would give the EU the power to decide how long the UK stayed in the EU. In another interview he said:

[The act] would take away the power of this government, and the power of this country to decide how long it would remain in the EU and give that power to the EU and that’s really quite an extraordinary thing.

This is a claim that Johnson has made frequently, but it is not true. The act says, if the PM fails to pass a Brexit deal by 19 October, and if MPs have not voted for no deal, he must request a three-month extension. But it does not say the UK has to accept any length of extension it is offered by the EU. If the EU did offer a longer or shorter extension, under the legislation the PM could either accept it, or refer it to the Commons for MPs to decide. So the UK would have a choice.

  • He claimed that he had not talked about “betrayal” in the Commons - even though he said in his opening statement: “We will not betray the people who sent us here; we will not.” When it was put to him that he had used words like betrayal, he said:

I don’t think I did say anything about a betrayal. What I worry about is if we don’t get Brexit done, then people will feel very badly let down.

  • He claimed that some of the things opposition MPs were shouting at him in the Commons last night were “far harsher” than what he said.
  • He said there was a need for “tempers ... to come down” in the Commons. In response to another question about his language, he said:

You’re right, tempers need to come down, and people need to come together because it’s only by getting Brexit done that you’ll lance the boil, as it were, of the current anxiety and we will be able to get on with the domestic agenda.

  • He said he accepted the need to “reach out across the House of Commons” to get Brexit done.

That’s all from me for tonight.

My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is taking over now.

Boris Johnson.
Boris Johnson. Photograph: Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP

Updated

Opposition parties to meet again on Monday to consider 'all parliamentary mechanisms to stop no deal'

The opposition parties are going to meet again on Monday to consider “all parliamentary mechanisms to stop a no-deal [Brexit]”, the Labour party has said. In a statement about this afternoon’s talks, Labour said the parties agreed that stopping a no-deal Brexit was a priority and that the language used by the PM was unacceptable.

The parties agreed that “any election without a lock preventing no deal would not get through parliament”. And Labour made it clear that “it wants an election as soon there’s a lock against no deal”.

The meeting was attended by Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Valerie Vaz and Shami Chakrabarti from Labour, Ian Blackford from the SNP, Jo Swinson from the Lib Dems, Anna Soubry from the Independent Group for Change, Caroline Lucas from the Green and Liz Saville Roberts from Plaid Cymru.

UPDATE: I’ve corrected the final paragraph. It was Liz Saville Roberts representing Plaid Cymru, not Leanne Wood (the former Plaid leader). The original mistake was in the Labour briefing.

Updated

Opposition parties to explore ways of trying to censure Boris Johnson in Commons, Plaid Cymru says

Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader, also told Sky News that at the meeting with other opposition party leaders it was agreed that she would investigate what might be done to impeach or censure Boris Johnson in the Commons. She said:

How do we bring it back to the chamber here in this place that the truth matters and conduct matters and the sort of words that you use in politics, those matter too. So I hope that we will find a way of censuring the prime minister. That’s what I raised with the leaders of the opposition parties today. And we will be looking together at how to take that forward.

Opposition party leaders have finished their meeting where they discussed what more might be done to stop a no-deal Brexit on 31 October. Jeremy Corbyn spoke with the SNP’s Ian Blackford, the Lib Dems’ Jo Swinson, the Independent Group for Change’s Anna Soubry and Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville Roberts. According to the Press Association, Swinson left the talks early to speak to police about a threat made against one of her young children.

After the meeting Saville Roberts said they had spoken about how to ensure that Boris Johnson complied with the Benn Act, which will require the PM to request a Brexit extension if no deal has been agreed by 19 October. She said:

We have got to get the Benn Act extension and we have to make sure that actually happens. There are a lot of pressures on, but that overrides everything.

Updated

Here is the Labour MP Jess Phillips talking about the man who tried to break into her constituency office.

How the 21 Tories who lost whip over Brexit voted on conference recess

The government motion saying the conference recess should go ahead next week was backed by 275 Conservative MPs, nine DUP MPs and five independents. Three of them were Tories who lost the whip after rebelling over Brexit earlier this month (Steve Brine, Greg Clark and Caroline Nokes), another was the Tory Charlie Elphicke, who is suspended over a court case, and the other was the former Labour MP Ian Austin.

Fifteen independent MPs joined the opposition parties and voted against the government. They included seven of the 21 Tories who had the whip withdrawn over Brexit earlier this month: Guto Bebb, Ken Clarke, David Gauke, Justine Greening, Dominic Grieve, Anne Milton and Antoinette Sandbach. Another was Amber Rudd, who resigned the whip herself in solidarity with the 21.

Another 10 of the 21 who lost the whip did not vote. They were Richard Benyon, Alistair Burt, Philip Hammond, Stephen Hammond, Richard Harrington, Margot James, Sir Oliver Letwin, Sir Nicholas Soames, Rory Stewart and Ed Vaizey.

The other member the group of 21 rebels was Sam Gyimah. He is now a Liberal Democrat, and voted against the motion with his new party.

Updated

A Brexit supporter outside the Houses of Parliament today.
A Brexit supporter outside the Houses of Parliament today. Photograph: Matt Dunham/AP

Jess Phillips says man arrested after trying to smash windows at her constituency office

The Labour MP Jess Phillips, who represents Birmingham Yardley, has revealed that a man has been arrested after trying to “kick the door” of her constituency office while reportedly shouting that she was a fascist. She told LBC Radio:

I’ve only just heard about it myself but my staff had to be locked into my office while the man tried to smash the windows and kick the door, I believe. I don’t know what I can say because the man has been arrested.

Updated

According to HuffPost’s Paul Waugh, Boris Johnson is planning to go ahead with his speech to the Tory conference on Wednesday – even though PMQs is scheduled.

If Johnson does skip PMQs, that would be seen as a gross discourtesy to the Commons. Earlier I speculated that he might send Dominic Raab in his place (see 3.13pm), but given the state of relations between No 10 and the Commons he might even palm MPs off with Kevin Foster, the junior Welsh Office minister and interim Cabinet Office minister who responded to the UQ about Johnson’s language today.

Updated

From the BBC’s Chris Mason

Jess Phillips denies shouting at Boris Johnson as they passed during Commons vote

Here are various accounts of an incident in the voting lobbies this afternoon.

From Sky’s Beth Rigby

From the Tory MP Nadine Dorries, a Boris Johnson supporter

From Labour’s Jess Phillips

UPDATE: Here is another witness, the Tory MP Claire Perry

Updated

What will happen to Tory conference now Commons is sitting next week?

The Conservative party is expected to clarify later what impact the decision not to have a mini-recess next week will have on its party conference.

James Cleverly, the chairman, has already said it is not going to be cancelled. Political parties make a huge amount of money from their party conferences, because members and lobbyists have to pay to attend (you can see the Tory charges here - pdf) and so it was always going to go ahead, regardless of what the supreme court decided on prorogation.

But the timetable may have to be rearranged. Boris Johnson was due to speak around lunchtime on Wednesday. Now he will be due in the Commons at that point, for PMQs, and so his speech is likely to be moved. For him to boycott the Commons and send, say, Dominic Raab in his place as a PMQs stand-in would be grossly disrespectful to parliament - although, on those grounds, the idea might appeal to Dominic Cummings. Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the Commons, has told MPs he expects Boris Johnson to be in the house on Wednesday (see 2.45pm), but in the current circumstances, that could easily change.

What is also not clear is whether or not the opposition, aka the “rebel alliance”, will try to seize control of the Commons timetable next week to pass more anti-no-deal Brexit legislation.

Yesterday Labour whips offered the government a non-aggression pact, saying that as long as the Commons sat on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, they would be happy to debate non-contentious business (meaning there would be not need for a three-line whip, and most MPs would be able to go to Manchester). The conference is said to be worth £30m to the Manchester economy, and Labour did not want to take the blame for the city losing out. The government whips did not take up the offer, pushed for a recess instead, and lost the vote.

The business now tabled for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday (see 2.13pm) is non-contentious and in normal circumstances there would be no need for a three-line whip. But does the non-aggression offer still hold? Probably not. That offer was made before Boris Johnson spent three hours in the Commons disrespecting the memory of Jo Cox and using language seen as “inciting hatred towards MPs”. (See 10.50am.) As my colleague Rowena Mason reports, opposition parties are meeting now to discuss what they will do next week. There is no reason to think they won’t want to do all they can disrupt next week for the government.

If the opposition does try to use next week to pass emergency legislation to firm up the Benn Act, then the government will want its MPs in London on a three-line whip. If that is the case, the Tory conference can still go ahead, but a lot of fringe events might look a bit empty.

Updated

Jacob Rees-Mogg has told MPs that he expects Sajid Javid to be in the Commons on Tuesday for Treasury questions, and Boris Johnson to be there on Wednesday, for PMQs, the Independent’s John Rentoul reports.

Valerie Vaz, the shadow leader of the Commons, asks whether Rees-Mogg can arrange for Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, to apologise to the Commons for calling it “dead”.

She says Rees-Mogg himself should also apologise to the doctor he criticised, David Nicholl.

She asks Rees-Mogg to explain why he reportedly called the supreme court judgment at cabinet a “constitutional coup”.

And she asks how long a prorogation would need to be before a Queen’s speech.

Rees-Mogg says he would not describe parliament as dead himself. He would describe it as addled, like the 1614 parliament.

He says he is happy to repeat the apology to Nicholl he has already given.

On the “constitutional coup” comment, Rees-Mogg says cabinet minutes are revealed after 30 years. He tells Vaz: “Just because newspapers print gossip from cabinet meetings does not make it fact.”

(Actually, the 30-year rule is becoming a 20-year rule.)

On prorogation, he says it does not take much time at all to get the Commons ready for the state opening of parliament. But quite a lot of changes have to be made in the Lords, he says. And he says before the ceremony the “unsightly barriers” outside the Houses of Parliament which are there for security purposes have to be removed.

Updated

Jacob Rees-Mogg's business statement to MPs

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the Commons, delivers a business statement for next week.

On Monday MPs will hold debates on Northern Ireland under the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act. On Tuesday they will vote on various statutory instruments. On Wednesday MPs will debate the second reading of the domestic abuse bill. And on Thursday there will be a general debate on women’s mental health, and on MoJ spending.

Updated

Richard Burgon, the shadow justice secretary, is making a point of order.

He says the Commons library has confirmed to him today that the soonest an election could take place would be Tuesday 5 November.

This would be after the 31 October deadline for Brexit, he says.

He asks the Speaker, John Bercow, to confirm this. Burgon says he think it is important for the public to understand that, even if Labour backed an election now, it could not take place before the PM’s deadline for Brexit.

Bercow confirms that this is his understanding of the rules.

MPs vote down government motion for mini-recess next week during Tory conference

Boris Johnson has suffered another Commons defeat. MPs have voted down the government motion for a mini-recess next week during the Tory conference by 306 votes to 289 – a majority of 17.

Updated

The BBC’s Europe editor, Katya Adler, has posted a good thread on Twitter about the latest thinking within the EU as to what will happen with Brexit. She says EU sources think the chances of a deal at the October summit are now “pretty much nil”. Here are the first two tweets, but it is worth reading the whole thing (which you can do by clicking on the first post).

Updated

MPs are now voting on whether to have a mini-recess for the Tory conference.

There has been no debate. After a statement on climate change, they went straight into a vote on a government business motion saying the house should rise today and return next Thursday.

The Tory conference in Manchester starts on Sunday, and is due to finish on Wednesday.

Updated

Rachel Johnson condemns her brother's language as 'very tasteless' and 'highly reprehensible'

Dismissing concerns that incendiary language can contribute to the culture leading to MPs getting death threats and Jo Cox being murdered as “humbug” (see 1.15pm) was probably the most provocative thing that Boris Johnson said last night. But another jaw-dropping moment came when he said: “The best way to honour the memory of Jo Cox, and indeed to bring this country together, would be, I think, to get Brexit done.”

Cox, of course, was passionately anti-Brexit. She was killed by a far-right terrorist motivated by hatred for people he referred to as “collaborators” and “traitors”.

Rachel Johnson, the prime minister’s sister, has joined those condemning the PM for his language, and on Sky she singled out this comment for particular criticism. She said:

I do think it was particularly tasteless for those grieving a mother, MP and friend to say the best way to honour her memory is to deliver the thing she and her family campaigned against. I think it was a very tasteless way of referring to the memory of a murdered MP, murdered by someone who said “Britain first”, of the far right tendency, which you could argue is being whipped up by this sort of language.

In an interview with Sky, Rachel Johnson also criticised her brother’s language generally.

My brother is using words like surrender and capitulation as if the people standing in the way of the blessed will of the people as defined by 17.4m votes in 2016 should be hung, drawn, quartered, tarred and feathered. I think that is highly reprehensible language to use.

Although close to her brother, Rachel Johnson has never agreed with him on Brexit. She voted remain, joined the Lib Dems after the referendum, and then switched to Change UK, who adopted her as a candidate during the European elections. Like all the Change UK candidates, she failed to get elected.

Updated

What Jess Phillips said about Boris Johnson's language

Here is a fuller version of what the Labour MP Jess Phillips said when she asked her urgent question about Boris Johnson’s language. (See 12.11pm.) She said:

The use of language yesterday and over the past few weeks such as the surrender bill, such as invoking the war, such as betrayal and treachery, it has clearly been tested, and workshopped and worked up and entirely designed to inflame hatred and division.

I get it, it works, it is working.

It is not sincere, it is totally planned, it is completely and utterly a strategy designed by somebody to harm and cause hatred in our country.

When I hear of my friend Jo Cox’s murder and the way that it has made me and my colleagues feel, and feel scared, described as humbug (see 1.15pm), I actually don’t feel anger towards the prime minister, I feel pity for those of you who have to toe his line.

The people opposite me know how appalling it was to describe the murder of my friend as mere humbug.

I want to ask the prime minister to apologise and to tell him that the bravest, strongest thing to say is sorry - it will make him look good, it will not upset the people who want Brexit in this country if he acts for once like a statesman.

Calling me names, putting words in my mouth and in the mouth of my dead friend makes me cross and angry, it makes me scared even, but I will not react, the prime minister wants me to react so I join in the chaos that keeps this hatred and fear on our streets.

I simply ask the minister to request the prime minister, who’s notable by his bravery today, I ask him to ask the prime minister to meet with me in private with his advisers and some of his colleagues, and my friends from Jo’s family so we can explain our grief and try to make him understand why it is so abhorrent that he has chosen a strategy to divide rather than to lead.

Jess Phillips.
Jess Phillips. Photograph: UK Parliament TV

Updated

What Boris Johnson told Paula Sherriff last night

Boris Johnson said many provocative things during his long statement to the Commons last night, but his most incendiary answer was probably the one he gave in response to a question from Labour’s Paula Sherriff. Jeremy Corbyn referred to it directly in his statement. (See 12.59pm.) For the record, here is Sherriff’s question, and Johnson’s answer, in full.

Sherriff asked:

I genuinely do not seek to stifle robust debate, but this evening the prime minister has continually used pejorative language to describe an act of parliament that was passed by this house. I am sure you would agree, Mr Speaker, that we should not resort to the use of offensive, dangerous or inflammatory language about legislation that we do not like.

We stand here, Mr Speaker, under the shield of our departed friend [Jo Cox]. Many of us in this place are subject to death threats and abuse every single day. Let me tell the prime minister that they often quote his words – surrender act, betrayal, traitor – and I, for one, am sick of it. We must moderate our language, and that has to come from the prime minister first, so I should be interested in hearing his opinion. He should be absolutely ashamed of himself.

Johnson replied:

I have to say that I have never heard such humbug in all my life. The reality is that this is a bill ...

At that point there was so much uproar that the Speaker had to intervene. When Johnson got to speak again, he continued:

Mr Speaker, let me just explain why I call it the surrender act. That is because it would oblige us to stay in the EU for month after month, at a cost of a billion pounds per month. It would take away from this country the ability to decide how long that extension would be, and it would give that power to the EU. It would absolutely undermine our ability to continue to negotiate properly in Brussels; it takes away the fundamental ability of a country to walk away from the negotiations, and I am afraid that is exactly what it does. If I may say so respectfully to opposition members who are getting very agitated about this, the best way to get rid of the surrender act is not to have voted for it in the first place, to repeal it, and to vote for the deal that we are going to do. That is the way forward.

If you want to read the all the exchanges, the Hansard is available here. But it is a long read; the exchanges lasted for more than three hours.

Updated

David Gauke, the former Tory justice secretary, who now sits as an independent having had the whip removed over a Brexit rebellion, says at best what Boris Johnson said last night could be described as “deeply insensitive”. But Gauke says what he is concerned about is that the government is deliberately pursuing a strategy intended to entrench division. He asks the minister to confirm that this is not government policy.

Foster says the Tories will go into the next election committed to uniting the country.

Updated

What Jeremy Corbyn said about Boris Johnson's language

Here is an extract from Jeremy Corbyn’s statement at the start of this UQ. (See 12.24pm.) Corbyn said:

It’s extremely disappointing that the prime minister has not respected this house by attending here today.

The prime minister’s language and demeanour yesterday was frankly nothing short of disgraceful.

Three years ago our colleague, our member, Jo Cox, was murdered by a far-right activist shouting: ‘Britain First, this is for Britain.’ The language that politicians use matters and has real consequences.

To dismiss concerns from members about the death threats they receive and to dismiss concerns that the language by the prime minister is being repeated in those death threats is reprehensible.

To dismiss those concerns in an abusive way as he did is completely unacceptable ...

I’ve written to all members of the parliamentary Labour party expressing my solidarity to my friends and set out the conduct expected of all colleagues.

No side of this house, as you’ve said Mr Speaker, has a monopoly of virtue.

Inappropriate language has been used by all sides. But we all have a duty to keep our debates political and not to descend into personal abuse.

Updated

Labour’s Paula Sherriff says she asked Boris Johnson to moderate his language last night. She says she accepts that in the past she has heckled ministers loudly.

She says she was horrified to see this tweet from the Tory MP Simon Clarke after her intervention last night.

She says she would not refer to Clarke as honourable.

She asks the Cabinet Office minster Kevin Foster if the government supports this.

Foster says that the government wants MPs to moderate their language, but he does not comment on Clarke’s tweet.

The Labour MP Dame Margaret Hodge tells MPs that, when she came into the Commons last night, she felt as if she was attending a meeting of the Bullingdon Club.

Updated

The Lib Dem MP Luciana Berger says, as someone who has seen six people convicted for hate crimes directed at her, she wants Boris Johnson to tone down his inflammatory language.

Kevin Foster tells Berger that her party campaigned on the slogan “bollocks to Brexit”.

Updated

More on the 1922 Committee meeting. This is from the FT’s Jim Pickard.

Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader, tells the Commons that he never saw David Cameron use the sort of language Boris Johnson did yesterday.

He says talking about “surrender” implies we are at war with Europe. But we are not at war with Europe and we are not at war with each other, he says. He says this language is intended to cause division.

Some people say this strategy will work. I say this strategy will not work because the British people are better than this.

Boris Johnson leaving Number 10 earlier.
Boris Johnson leaving No 10 earlier. Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images

Updated

Justine Greening, a former Tory cabinet minister who now sits as an independent, having had the whip removed, tells the Commons she was shocked by the language Boris Johnson used yesterday.

She says she thinks there is a “deliberate race to the bottom” in British politics now, that disadvantages MPs who are not prepared to go along with it.

Updated

Boris Johnson tells Tories he will carry on denouncing 'surrender bill' despite uproar about his provocative language

Here is more from what Boris Johnson told Conservative backbenchers at his private meeting with the 1922 Committee.

From my colleague Rowena Mason

From HuffPost’s Paul Waugh

From Mail Online’s David Wilcock

Updated

Corbyn says Boris Johnson should apologise for his 'reprehensible' comments about threats to MPs yesterday

Jeremy Corbyn is speaking on this topic for Labour.

He says it is “extremely disappointing” that Boris Johnson is not here himself to answer the UQ.

Johnson’s language last night was “nothing short of disgraceful”, Corbyn says. He says the way Johnson dismissed concerns about the murder of Jo Cox and the role language can play in inciting attacks like that was “reprehensible” and “completely unacceptable”.

Corbyn says Johnson was trying to “entrench divisions”.

He urges the PM to apologise. Johnson’s language “fell well below the standards expected by the people of this country”, Corbyn says.

  • Corbyn says Boris Johnson should apologise for his “reprehensible” comments about threats to MPs yesterday.
Jeremy Corbyn
Jeremy Corbyn Photograph: HoC

Updated

The Tory MP Maria Miller questions the appropriateness of Jess Phillips raising this point. She says that during last night’s statement Phillips herself was one of the Labour MPs shouting the loudest at Johnson.

Updated

Foster is responding to Phillips.

He says he does not consider anyone in the Commons as a traitor.

He says, as the minister responsible for the government’s “defending democracy” programme, he would be happy to meet Phillips.

He repeats the points he made earlier about how the government is trying to increase security for election candidates.

Ultimately it is for everyone to think about the language they use, he says.

He says the government wants to respond with “calm dignity” and to create a safe environment for all.

He does not say whether the PM himself will be willing to meet Phillips, and he does not comment on Johnson’s language.

Kevin Foster, Cabinet Office minister
Kevin Foster, Cabinet Office minister Photograph: HoC

Updated

Labour's Jess Phillips accuses Boris Johnson of using language 'designed to inflate hatred'

Jess Phillips is speaking now.

She says the language used by Boris Johnson last night was “clearly designed to inflate hatred”.

She says she was appalled to hear him describe a reference to the murder of Jo Cox as “humbug”.

Johnson should apologise, she says.

She asks the minister Kevin Foster whether the PM will be willing to meet her, and some of Cox’s friends and families, so that they can tell him how hurt they were by his language.

Updated

Commons urgent question on language used by Boris Johnson yesterday

John Bercow, the Speaker, is making a statement in the Commons.

He says in light of the “appalling atmosphere in the chamber yesterday and the toxicity that it can spawn or exacerbate in the country at large” he has granted an urgent question.

The Labour MP Jess Phillips wants a statement on whether the PM will reflect on the language used by MPs.

She wanted Boris Johnson to answer, but instead the junior Cabinet Office minister Kevin Foster is replying.

Foster says the government understands the importance of language. He says it is going to make intimidating election candidates an offence. And he says the police have been reviewing security for MPs.

He does not say anything about the language used by Boris Johnson yesterday.

Updated

No 10 says 'significant obstacles' remain to Brexit deal

The Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, will travel to Brussels on Friday for a meeting with Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Downing Street has said. But the PM’s spokesman has also said that although progress has been made in negotiations with Brussels, “there are significant obstacles remaining to concluding a deal”.

Updated

From my colleague Matthew Weaver

From the Spectator’s James Forsyth

European commission urges Boris Johnson to show more respect to his opponents

The European commission has joined those reprimanding Boris Johnson for the language he used in the Commons last night about his opponent. This is what the commission’s spokeswoman, Mina Andreeva, said on the subject.

We would remind everybody that respect is a fundamental value in all democracies. It is the responsibility of each and every politician to uphold our values. History has shown us what happens when they are not respected.

Boris Johnson addresses Conservative 1922 Committee

Boris Johnson is addressing the backbench Conservative 1922 Committee. These are from some of the journalists doorstepping the meeting.

In the Commons, in response to an urgent question, Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, has admitted that the government has made further breaches of the court ruling banning arms sales to Saudia Arabia that could be used in Yemen, my colleague Dan Sabbagh reports.

Jo Cox’s sister, Kim Leadbeater, has joined Cox’s husband (see 7.45am) in expressing alarm about the language used by Boris Johnson in the Commons last night. Leadbeater told Sky News:

I watched parliament TV for four hours last night and I was mesmerised and dumbstruck by the scenes that I saw before me.

I think the prime minister needs to think very carefully about the language he uses.

I think everybody has to think really carefully about the language they use.

Updated

Farage defends Boris Johnson's use of terms such as 'surrender' and 'betrayal' in Brexit debate

Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, has defended Boris Johnson’s decision to use terms such as surrender and betrayal in the Brexit context.

The argument against such language is that it is inflammatory because it frames Brexit, an issue that is supposed to be about a trading relationships with friendly countries, in terms of warfare, with the EU depicted as an enemy power.

Updated

The Tory MP Simon Hoare has called for a change of tone from Boris Johnson. Hoare, who voted remain in 2016, told the Commons:

There needs to a change in the mood music emanating from No 10 because as a Tory party we obey the rule of law and the fact that is in question in this place should bring shame on all of us.

Updated

Johnson warned his provocative language will make it 'much, much more difficult' for Labour MPs to back any Brexit deal

Good morning. I’m Andrew Sparrow, picking up from Matthew Weaver.

One consequence of Boris Johnson’s extraordinary provocative and divisive performance in the Commons last night is that it has made it much, much harder to see how any opposition MPs could vote with him for a Brexit deal in the next few weeks. It is hard to know whether he is even at all serious about trying to get an agreement through the Commons.

This has just been confirmed in the chamber by Labour’s Lisa Nandy, one of the opposition MPs who has been trying to drum up support for a cross-party deal. Condemning Johnson’s “horrendous, divisive language”, she said:

For those of us who do want to work cross-party to achieve a deal, this is making it much, much more difficult.

Updated

Johnson accused of 'inciting hatred towards MPs' by Labour's Paula Sherriff

The Labour MP Paula Sherriff has accused the prime minister of inciting hatred against MPs.

Speaking to the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme she said she was horrified by Boris Johnson’s dismissal of her concerns about threats to MPs as “humbug”. Sherriff said:

We talk about it in the tearooms. People are really frightened and for him to treat it almost like a joke, was absolutely horrific and demeans the office of prime minister.

I believe the prime minister is inciting hatred towards MPs. I understand the importance of saying that, but I know that feeling is shared by many of us.

She said one MP had contacted her since last night saying the rhetoric used meant she would not stand at the next election. But Sherriff said she herself was determined to continue as an MP. She said: “I will not let these bullies win and I include the prime minister in that.”

She said she feared that another MP could be killed and insisted she was “not scaremongering”.

She also called on MPs from all sides of the house to tone down their rhetoric: “We all need to reflect on our language and our behaviour. The bad behaviour is not exclusive to Conservative MPs.”

But she singled out the Treasury minister Simon Clarke for accusing her of making a “toxic” intervention in her angry question to the prime minister.

Sherriff described Clarke’s tweet as abhorrent. “It makes me sick,” she said.

She said she had had threats of rape, murder and mutilation earlier this year.

The abuse comes every day, thankfully the death threats don’t. Last night the overwhelming majority of the communications I received were supportive, including from many Conservative supporters. But equally I received some horrific abuse last night much of it misogynistic. We urgently need to dial down the rhetoric.

Updated

Labour MPs remain furious about Johnson’s comments about Jo Cox, but many are now citing her memory to try to mend divisions.

Duddridge refuses to be drawn on what circumstances the government would seek an extension to the 31 October Brexit deadline. He again repeats that the government will obey the law.

Updated

Hilary Benn says the government’s claims about obeying the law and not seeking an extension are not compatible. How can those things be reconciled, Benn asks.

Duddridge says the PM really doesn’t want an extension. The government is breaking every sinew to get a deal. The government will obey the law, he says again.

Updated

Brexit minister says government will use 'every bit of wriggle room' to get deal

The Brexit minister James Duddridge insists the government “will obey the law”.

But asked how the prime minister can avoid asking for an extension under the Benn Act – or European Union (Withdrawal) (No 2) Act 2019 – he says: “That is a hypothetical question I don’t want to be drawn into ...”

Duddridge says the government will use “every bit of wriggle room” to get a deal.

Updated

Four urgent questions have been granted today covering: the Benn Act, Hong Kong, arms exports to Saudi Arabia and the prime minister’s language and role.

Updated

Bercow calls for end to 'toxic culture'

The Speaker, John Bercow, has appealed to MPs to stop using toxic language.

Opening today’s session in the Commons, Bercow says:

There is a widespread sense across the house, and beyond, that yesterday the house did itself no credit. There was an atmosphere in the chamber worse than any I’ve known in my 22 years in the house. On both sides passions were inflamed, angry words were uttered. The culture was toxic.

He says he has been approached by two senior MPs from either side of the house for a formal consideration of political conduct.

Pending consideration of that, he has granted a urgent question about the language used across the house. Bercow says it is not a partisan issue. It is about something bigger than party affiliation, he says.

Bercow says: “Please lower the decibel level and treat each other as opponents rather than enemies.”

UPDATE: Here is the Labour MP Harriet Harman welcoming Bercow’s comments. Harman and Ken Clarke have been calling for a Speaker’s conference on threats to MP. They are the mother and father of the house respectively (ie, the longest-serving female and male MPs).

Updated

The former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith has claimed it is parliament’s refusal to deliver Brexit that is fuelling anger in the country.

Speaking to Sky News, he said opposition MPs were equally to blame for intemperate language in the Commons.

I think this is the pot calling the kettle black. Last night I watched when Labour MPs lined up, they were shouting that he was a liar, he was a cheat. It wasn’t about Boris Johnson, it was about the issue. The issue which they want to dance away from which is causing this is that when you promise the British people you will act on the result of the vote that they were given in 2016 and parliament goes on saying no, this is the fuel that feeds the anger and therefore it has to be resolved.

Updated

Siân Berry
Siân Berry Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

Siân Berry, the co-leader of the Green party, and a member of the London assembly’s oversight committee condemned Cleverly’s suggestion that Johnson would ignore any summons over the Arcuri questions.

Speaking to the Guardian she said: “I don’t think anyone can really predict which laws the prime minister is going to obey. He has left himself basically in contempt of parliament. But we would expect him to comply with the law.

“Seeing the prime minister last night suggesting that he won’t behave in a way that is appropriate is really disturbing. The prime minister’s one job is to effectively uphold the law and the fact that we have got one who is not doing that on a regular basis is very very disturbing. And that people are prepared to justify that is even more disturbing.”

Berry challenged Cleverly’s assertion that ministers could ignore the assembly. She pointed out that it did have the legal power to compel the prime minister to appear.

We very rarely use our powers of summons. On the Garden Bridge we informally invited Boris Johnson, first in a letter, and then we sent a proper summons because we needed to hear from him.

We had to get advice on whether we could do that to a former mayor, but we could, so we did. And we would again.

Updated

Earlier this week the London assembly wrote to Johnson giving him 14 days to respond to the allegations about Jennifer Arcuri.

The letter from Len Duvall chair of the assembly’s oversight committee, said:

I read with concern the allegations set out in the Sunday Times yesterday that, when you held the office of mayor of London, you failed to declare a potential conflict of interest in relation to the awarding of public funds to Jennifer Arcuri.

As you will know, the London assembly is responsible for holding to account the office of the mayor of London.

Accordingly, I now write to ask that you provide, within 14 days of receipt of this letter:

– Details and a timeline of all contact with Jennifer Arcuri during your period of office as mayor of London, including personal, social and professional.

– And an explanation of how that alleged personal relationship was disclosed and taken into account in any and all dealings with the GLA and other parts of the GLA family.

Updated

Cleverly: PM could ignore London assembly summons over Jennifer Arcuri

James Cleverly suggested Johnson would ignore any request by the London assembly to appear before it to answer questions about his conduct as mayor of London over the tech businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri.

The assembly has given him 14 days to explain why sponsorship and favours were granted to Arcuri, a close friend of Johnson, without any declaration of interest being made.

Members of the assembly have suggested they could also summons Johnson to answer questions about Arcuri, as they did over the failed Garden Bridge project.

Asked whether Johnson would appear before the London assembly, the Tory chairman told Today: “The London assembly’s job is to scrutinise the mayor of London. When I was on the London assembly it was quite common for government ministers to refuse to appear.”

When it was put to him that the assembly had the legal power to summons members of the government, Cleverly said: “That is not my understanding.”

Boris Johnson, with Jennifer Arcuri, guest speaking at the Innotech Summit in July 2013
Boris Johnson, with Jennifer Arcuri, guest speaking at the Innotech Summit in July 2013 Photograph: Innotech Network/YouTube

Updated

The Tory party chairman, James Cleverly, has defended the prime minister’s language in the Commons.

Speaking on Today he said he couldn’t see how the “highly charged” atmosphere in the house would calm down until Brexit was resolved.

Cleverly tried to claim the prime minister had not used the language of “betrayal” before being corrected.

He also claimed language on all sides had been intemperate and violent.

When Johnson accused the Labour MP Paula Sherriff of talking “humbug”, Cleverly claimed Johnson was responding to accusations that were untrue.

The rhetoric could be de-escalated if both sides calmed down and compromised, Cleverly said.

Asked whether Johnson would seek an extension to avoid a no-deal Brexit as set out in the Benn Act, Cleverly insisted that Johnson would obey the law. We will obey the law, Cleverly said, but he refused to say whether the PM would abide by the Benn Act. We will leave by 31 October, Cleverly said.

Updated

Luciana Berger
Luciana Berger Photograph: Amer Ghazzal/Barcroft Media

Luciana Berger, who joined the Liberal Democrats after leaving Labour, will give up her Liverpool constituency to fight for a London seat once held by Margaret Thatcher, PA reports.

The campaigner against antisemitism will contest the seat of Finchley and Golders Green in north London, a constituency with a sizeable Jewish community, at the next election.

The Lib Dems came third in 2017, 21,000 off the Conservative victor, Mike Freer, in a seat formerly held by ex-prime minister Mrs Thatcher for more than 30 years, albeit under a slightly different make-up.

Berger quit the Labour party in February, walking out with six other colleagues, and went on to form Change UK.

The constituency voted 70% to remain and Berger will be hoping her party’s recently approved policy of revoking article 50 if it wins a majority at the next election will make her a serious contender.

Her Jewish background could also play a factor in attracting voters who rejected Labour over concerns of growing antisemitism in the party.

Golders Green is home to one of the largest Jewish communities in the capital, with kosher bakeries and a visible Hasidic presence on its high streets and in the adjacent Temple Fortune.

Updated

Nicholas Soames, one of the 21 rebels to have lost the Tory whip, said he was “appalled” by the language of the prime minister and said it made the prospect of getting a Brexit deal through the Commons more difficult.

But the grandson of Winston Churchill stopped short of calling on Johnson to resign. He said:

It sounds rather pathetic, the one won’t stand and call for his resignation after his behaviour. I just don’t think it’s helpful. It is just going to further destabilise an already a very febrile and very fragile situation.

Soames accused the prime minister of launching a “rant” against the Labour party and Jeremy Corbyn. He said:

I have never felt such a poisonous atmosphere. I deeply regret it and I apologise for it ...

I was absolutely appalled by the whole language and tone of the House yesterday starting off for the attorney general’s, in my view, disrespect to the supreme court, and not a word of contrition, or humility from the prime minister.

He urged Johnson to calm tempers and try to build a compromise.

I have grown up in a House where I believe the job of the prime minister, even under very difficult circumstances, is to try to bring the country together. And what the prime minister did yesterday, was to drive it further apart.

I want Boris Johnson to start behaving like a prime minister and what he did yesterday makes what he has to do so much harder, which is to reach out across the House of Commons to build a compromise to get a deal. He needs to calm the thing down.

I’m afraid the country is being set up for a general election, which will be ‘parliament and the judges against the people’.

Nicholas Soames
Nicholas Soames Photograph: Simon Dawson/Reuters

Updated

Brendan Cox criticises PM's 'sloppy' language

Brendan Cox
Brendan Cox Photograph: Daniel Leal-Olivas/PA

Brendan Cox, the husband of the murdered MP Jo, has condemned the “sloppy language” of Boris Johnson and the “growing inferno of rhetoric” in the House of Commons.

The prime minister was widely condemned last night when he said the best way to honour the memory of Jo Cox was to get Brexit done.

In a notably restrained reaction on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Cox, said he was “shocked” by the language Johnson used, but noted that the prime minister’s remarks were said “in the on heat the moment”. Cox said:

I’m sure on reflection, it’s something that he would probably wish he hadn’t said. I think it was sloppy language and the wrong thing to say, but I but I don’t think that he is an evil man.

What isn’t legitimate is to co-opt her memory or her beliefs for things that she didn’t believe in or didn’t say. I was thinking about how Jo would respond to it last night. She would have tried to take a generosity of spirit to it. And thought about how in this moment, you can step back from this growing inferno of rhetoric.

Cox urged politicians of both sides of the Brexit debate to tone down the rhetoric used and stop portraying each other as good or evil. “We just have to have a more nuanced understanding to remember our common our common humanity,” Cox said.

He added:

“I was genuinely shocked by the the willingness to descend to vitriol, because I think it does long lasting harm. To have this debate descend into this bear pit of polarisation, I think it’s dangerous for our country.”

There is a willingness to jump out and decry the other side when they use language like ‘surrender’ or ‘traitor’ or ‘betrayal’. And I think that is inflammatory language. But as inflammatory are those people who have used the language of it being a ‘coup’ and ‘dictatorship’ and ‘fascism’.

I think both of those approaches are unacceptable. It is not just bad behaviour by one side of the debate. This is something which is infected our politics, and it’s this vicious cycle where language gets more extreme, response gets more extreme, it all gets hyped up ... It creates an atmosphere where I think violence and attacks are more likely.

You can disagree passionately with people. But you don’t have to impugn their motives, whether you are a hard Brexiteer or a hard remainer, actually, what you have in common is a desire to do what you think is best for the country.

What isn’t acceptable is to demonize each other to build a culture of hatred to the other to create this tribal identity. Whatever happens with Brexit, the country is going to have to come together again. And we have to remember that, otherwise, we’ll be building a toxic legacy.

Updated

How the papers covered it

The furious and dramatic scenes in Westminster dominate the front pages on Thursday as papers report on Boris Johnson’s return to the House of Commons after his decision to suspend parliament was found to be unlawful.

A few moments from last night’s political television...

And of course, Robert Peston’s interview with Boris Johnson.

A lot of senior political journalists tweeting their shock at the tone of debate in parliament yesterday.

This is from Julian King, the European commissioner for security.

Luciana Berger to fight Finchley and Golders Green for Lib Dems at next election

Luciana Berger has issued a letter to her constituents on Twitter telling them she would be stepping down as MP for Liverpool Wavertree, where she has served for almost 10 years, due to the challenges of “balancing personal and professional responsibilities”, particularly with young children.

She will be relocating to London after the next election and be standing as the Liberal Democrat Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Finchley and Golders Green.

Updated

The Conservatives have also tabled a motion to be voted on this morning, to support shutting down parliament for three days next week to accommodate their party conference, despite the supreme court verdict.

Outrage as Boris Johnson dismisses dangers of inflammatory language as ‘humbug’

Here is the moment that has so many people so furious.

Yesterday Labour MP Paula Sherriff attacked the prime minister for repeatedly calling the act put through parliament by Hilary Benn to take no-deal Brexit off the table the “surrender bill” and asked him not to use “offensive, dangerous, inflammatory language for legislation we do not like.”

Recalling the memory of her friend Cox, she said many MPs had received death threats.

“And let me tell the prime minister – they often quote his words, ‘surrender act’, ‘betrayal,’ ‘traitor’: we must moderate our language and it has to come from the prime minister first.”

Johnson replied that he had never heard such “humbug” in all his life. He caused further outrage when telling Labour’s Tracy Brabin, who was elected to Cox’s seat following the MP’s murder by a far-right extremist a week before the EU referendum, that “the best way to honour the memory of Jo Cox and to bring this country together is, I think, to get Brexit done”.

MPs (and it should be noted, mostly female MPs) responded by sharing death threats they have received, some of which directly quote Johnson. Some did so in the chamber yesterday, others on Twitter overnight.

Good morning and welcome to our live coverage of the day’s political news.

We return to the political fray after a day in which an unrepentant Boris Johnson sparked a furious backlash for repeating criticism of the supreme court judgment, and rejecting MPs’ pleas to moderate his “inflammatory” language.

As you’ll no doubt recall, Johnson faced parliament yesterday after flying back early from New York when the Supreme Court ruled his suspension unlawful.

But Johnson was unrepentant as he addressed MPs and went on the attack, accusing Jeremy Corbyn of trying to thwart Brexit and running scared of an election. He also caused outrage by claiming the best way to honour the memory of the murdered MP Jo Cox was to “get Brexit done”.

There was much criticism of Johnson’s language, yesterday, with MPs, particularly female MPs, imploring Johnson to be stop using words like “surrender”, “traitor” and “betrayal” in relation to Brexit, with the MPs saying these words had been used in death threats issued to them and their families. Johnson caused outrage by dismissing these concerns as “humbug”.

Yesterday and overnight, MPs were tweeting out some of the threats, including death threats, they have received, which directly quoted Boris Johnson.

So, what happens now?

Parliament will sit again today where there will be a “general debate on the principles of democracy and the rights of the electorate”. And Jacob Rees-Mogg said he would be making an “exciting announcement” in the Commons. So, we’ll all be on the edge of our seats for that – or lazily reclined across three seats, as the case may be.

As always, you can get in touch with me as I steer us through the early hours: I’m here on Twitter and my email is kate.lyons@theguardian.com

Let’s go.

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
Say my name: For newcomer and racialized children, belonging begins with classroom greetings
The first time I understood that names could hold two worlds was not by changing mine, but by hearing it differently. As a Pakistani child growing up in Canada, I learned early that my name could sound different depending on who was saying it. My name is simple and deeply…
The Conversation
The Conversation
‘Death hunted him since he was a kid’: how Lamar Odom survived to become a villain in his own tale
A new documentary charts the tragic events that led to the former NBA star overdosing in a Nevada brothel – and what came next
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
Manhattan taco spot defeats German tourist who filed $100k lawsuit after their ‘dangerous’ hot salsa gave him ‘diarrhea for days’
It was his first time ever eating tacos!
We Got This Covered
We Got This Covered
We analyzed Philly street scenes and identified signs of gentrification using machine learning trained on longtime residents’ observations
What does gentrification in Philadelphia look like?
The Conversation
The Conversation
Daredevil Creator Explains Why The Netflix Show Happened Despite Being Pitched As Two Movies
Drew Goddard goes way back with the Man Without Fear.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Zendaya to 'go into hiding' over fears fans will be 'sick of her' in 2026
Zendaya is to appear in movies Spider-Man: Brand New Day, Dune: Part Three, The Odyssey, and The Drama this year, and she is planning to "go into hiding" over fears fans will get "sick" of seeing her.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play