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

MPs vote for Trident renewal by majority of 355 – as it happened

Demonstrators at an anti-Trident CND rally in Parliament Square, London, taking place as MPs debate Trident renewal.
Demonstrators at an anti-Trident CND rally in Parliament Square, London, taking place as MPs debate Trident renewal. Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA

Summary

That’s all from me for tonight.

Thanks for the comments.

SNP demands removal of nuclear submarines from Scotland

The SNP is demanding the withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Scotland. This is from its leader at Westminster, Angus Robertson.

The UK government must respect Scotland’s clear decision against Trident renewal and remove these nuclear weapons of mass destruction from the Clyde.

As a nation Scotland has consistently shown itself to be opposed to the possession of nuclear weapons – a position taken by the Scottish government, the Scottish parliament, Scotland’s MPs, a majority of Scotland’s political parties, churches, trade unions and other civic organisations.

It would be democratically unacceptable if in the face of this clear opposition the UK government were to impose Trident nuclear weapons on the Clyde against Scotland’s wishes.

On becoming prime minister Theresa May claimed that she wanted to govern in the interests of all nations and people in the UK – if that is true she must now make clear she respects Scotland’s decision.

The UK government must work with the Scottish government to ensure the earliest safe withdrawal of nuclear warheads from Scotland, and to discuss the retention and diversification of HMNB Clyde as a conventional naval base.

The Lib Dem MP Tim Farron says he voted against Trident renewal.

Here is some more reaction to the vote from journalists.

From the New Statesman’s George Eaton.

From the Sunday Times’ James Lyons

From STV’s Stephen Daisley

This is from ITV’s Robert Peston.

Assuming those figures are correct, 60% of all Labour MPs voted with the government for Trident renewal. Another 21% voted against Trident renewal. And 19% abstained.

This is from Sky’s Faisal Islam.

MPs vote Trident renewal by 472 votes to 117 - a majority of 355

MPs have voted for Trident renewal by 472 votes to 117 - a majority of 355.

This is from the SNP’s John Nicolson.

See 6.20pm for why Crispin Blunt is voting against the government.

The Mirror has got a good guide to the seven most powerful moments from the debate.

For reference, here are the current figures for how many MPs each main party has (excluding the three deputy Speakers, who have a party allegiance but who normally don’t vote).

Conservatives - 330

Labour - 230

SNP - 54

DUP - 8

Lib Dems - 8

The tellers for the ayes are the Tory MPs Steve Barclay and Jackie Doyle-Price (both government whips).

The tellers for the noes are Owen Thompson and Marion Fellows (both SNP whips).

Here is the text of the Trident motion.

That this House supports the government’s assessment in the 2015 National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review that the UK’s independent minimum credible nuclear deterrent, based on a continuous at sea deterrence posture, will remain essential to the UK’s security today as it has for over 60 years, and for as long as the global security situation demands, to deter the most extreme threats to the UK’s national security and way of life and that of the UK’s allies; supports the decision to take the necessary steps required to maintain the current posture by replacing the current Vanguard Class submarines with four Successor submarines; recognises the importance of this programme to the UK’s defence industrial base and in supporting thousands of highly skilled engineering jobs; notes that the government will continue to provide annual reports to parliament on the programme; recognises that the UK remains committed to reducing its overall nuclear weapon stockpile by the mid-2020s; and supports the government’s commitment to continue work towards a safer and more stable world, pressing for key steps towards multilateral disarmament.

MPs vote on Trident

MPs are now voting on Trident.

Fallon says no other system is as capable and as cost-effective as Trident. A cheaper version would not be an effective deterrent, he says.

He rejects the claim that new technology will render submarines obsolete. It is hard to think of anything more immune to cyber attack than a submarine. And, if submarine technology was becoming obsolete, the Americans and Russians would not be investing so much in updating their fleets, he says.

Angust Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster, asks what the total inlife costs of Trident will be.

Fallon says he has already given the start-up costs and the running costs (6% of the MoD’s budget.)

He says the number of warheads on submarines has been cut from 48 to 40. And Britain’s stockpile of warheads is being reduced, he says.

He says Britain is continuing to press for disarmament.

He says Trident may be born of the Cold War, but it is no relic. It is still relevant. MPs should do the right thing, and vote to maintain Trident for as long as security conditions require it, he says.

Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, is winding up for the government.

There can be no more important decision for MPs than renewing the nuclear deterrent, he says.

He says all the speeches tonight have been passionate. He pays tribute in particular to the Labour MP Toby Perkins, saying he started opposed to nuclear weapons but listened to the evidence. (See 6.37pm.) And he praises Crispin Blunt’s speech, even though the Tory Blunt is not supporting the government. (See 6.20pm.)

The one party guilty of groupthink is the SNP, he says. (All its MPs oppose Trident.) And he accuses them of hypocrisy, on the grounds that they want an independent Scotland to enjoy the protection of Nato, a nuclear alliance.

Lewis says the last Labour government deserves great credit for the progress is made on disarmament around the world.

He says, as a former soldier, he knows what it is like to be under fire, and to request air support, and to be told none is available.

The MoD should be prioritising conventional weapons, he says.

To maintain nuclear capability at the expense of other capabilities would be a mistake, he says.

He says the implications for the defence budget from Trident renewal may be profound. But the prime minister has given no clarity on this, he says.

Clive Lewis, the shadow defence secretary, is summing up for Labour now.

He reads out the policy backed at Labour’s last conference. (Labour MPs were criticising Jeremy Corbyn earlier because he did not do that.) But, says Lewis, that policy is now under review.

He says he has concerns about the government’s policy. He does not think this should be seen as a split between those who are patriots and those who are not.

He says he applauds John Woodcock, the pro-Trident MP for Barrow and Furness, where the submarines are built, for standing up for his community.

Earlier I mentioned the protest by anti-Trident campaigners in the central lobby of the Houses of Parliament. (See 8.39am.) They sang peace songs.

Unauthorised filming in central lobby is not allowed by the Commons authorities. But the SNP MP Peter Grant has posted a video showing just the floor (to comply with the video ban) but which does allow you to hear the protesters’ singing.

The SNP’s Patricia Gibson says Trident cannot be justified morally or militarily or financially. She says that saying we need Trident to save jobs in the defence industry is like saying we should not seek a cure for cancer for fear of putting surgeons out of work.

I have beefed up some of the earlier posts with direct quotes from the speeches. To get the updates to appear, you may need to refresh the page.

The SNP’s Tommy Sheppard is speaking in the debate now. He says it is a disgrace that MPs are being asked to take such an important decision about the country’s future on the basis of a 13-line motion, with no costings and no plan explaining how Trident renewal will work.

And here is a blog by the Spectator’s James Forsyth on the opening of the Trident debate. He says that, although Jeremy Corbyn has been criticised by his own MPs, this may help him in the leadership contest. Here’s an extract.

The real action in this debate has been on the Labour side. John Woodcock, a regular Corbyn critic and an advocate of Trident as befits a Barrow MP, begun by saying that he—unlike the Labour front bench—was proud to speak for Labor party policy in the debate. He emphasised that he opposed unilateralism and accused Corbyn of not making an honest case, comparing him unfavourably to that other unilateralist Michael Foot. Woodcock wasn’t the only Labour MP to put the boot into Corbyn. Toby Perkins, who ran Liz Kendall’s leadership campaign, said that he’d been a member of CND as a teenager and that the front bench’s arguments were ones that his 13 year old self would have made.

This debate has highlighted the chasm between Corbyn and the parliamentary Labour party. But I suspect that those preparing Corbyn for the coming leadership election are not unhappy to be having an argument about nuclear weapons as the contest gets going.

Margaret Ritchie has just told MPs that she and her two SDLP colleagues will be voting against Trident renewal.

The Labour MP Stephen Kinnock says he was withdrawn from Russia when he worked for the British Council because of threats to his safety. He says he has no illusions about the nature of President Putin’s regime, and thinks Britain must be prepared to stand up to Russia. He will be voting for Trident renewal, he says.

The Labour MP Margaret Greenwood said that she was opposed to Trident renewal. She said new technology could make it possible to track Trident submarines, rendering them obsolete. And the cost was huge, she said. She said the money would be better spent on alternative defence strategies.

Jamie Reed, the pro-Trident Labour MP, spoke in the debate a few minutes ago. He represents Copeland, near Barrow-in-Furness, where Trident submarines are built, and he has frequently criticised Jeremy Corbyn for his stance on the nuclear deterrent. But even by his standards his speech tonight was quite strong, accusing Corbyn of “reckless, juvenile, narcissistic irresponsibility”. He said:

I will be supporting my party’s policy tonight. But for the first time I think ever we have witnessed the leader of the Labour party stand up at the despatch box of this House and argue against the policy of the party that he leads. This is unprecedented. Moreover this reckless, juvenile, narcissistic irresponsibility makes me fearful of the party that I love. The sheer stupidity of this approach should be dragged out into the light and seen for what it is, because no only is renewal Labour party policy, it is the settled will of the country, and every parliamentary decision relating to it will have been taken by 2020.

Anti-Trident campaigners staged a protest outside the Houses of Parliament, but some of them also took their protest into the House of Commons. The Press Association has filed this story.

Women who protested at Greenham Common came to the heart of government to call for a ban on nuclear weapons.

Wearing T-shirts which said Scrap Trident and No Trident, the women were among a group of peace campaigners who held a demonstration in the central lobby of the Houses of Parliament.

Sylvia Boyes, 72, a mother of four from Keighley, west Yorkshire, said she had travelled to Westminster, where MPs are debating Trident renewal, because “our government is paying lip service to disarmament and I felt I need to take a stand”.

She was among the Greenham Common Women’s Peace Camp demonstrators who protested, in the 1980s, at the announcement that nuclear weapons were to be sited at RAF Greenham Common in Berkshire.

Another Greenham Common protester, Margaret Bremner, 61, a retired district nurse from Edinburgh, was also part of Monday’s protest.

She said: “I came because I am not resigned (about this issue). I am not resigned about this, some 30 years on, otherwise I would not be trying to campaign on this. Those of us who think nuclear weapons are immoral need to have our say. I believe that people still can do the right thing.”

They are among a group of about 10 protesters who sang peace songs in the lobby.

Amid heavy security, the peaceful demonstrators removed their jackets to show their anti-Trident T-shirts and held up fabric banners - which read No Trident, Scotland Says Trident No More and Scrap Trident.

Protester Brian Larkin, 56, of Howgate in Scotland, said: “I take the long view that campaigns like this are part of things which are needed, along with the campaigns happening across the country to speak out about Trident.”

And here are some pictures from the protest in Parliament Square.

Mike Gapes dismisses claims that Corbyn like Michael Foot

The Labour MP Mike Gapes spoke in the debate a few minutes ago, and he delivered a ‘You’re no Michael Foot’ message to Jeremy Corbyn. He was making the point that, although Foot was a unilateralist, he was also a leader who tried to keep the Labour party together. Gapes said:

The leader of the Labour party, Michael Foot, has been compared in some debates with our current leader. I have to say, I worked for and with Michael Foot. He was a great, patriotic anti-fascist. He stood up to the generals, the Junta, that took over the Falkland Islands, and he spoke in this House on a Saturday morning and made the case why we had to liberate the Falklands from fascism. I believe that Michael Foot tried his very best to unite the Labour party, even though he had divisions in his shadow cabinet. And he would not have taken the position that is being taken today by the member for Islington North [Jeremy Corbyn]. Michael Foot strove to get international agreements and he worked for disarmament.

Gapes also claimed that unilateralism had become a “quasi-religious totem for leftwing atheists”.

In 1989 [EP Thomson] denounced the Labour party for going back on its unilateralist position. And I wrote in the CND magazine, what is this unilateralism? Is it a tactic to get something better? Or is it quasi-religious totem for leftwing atheists? And I stand by that description of some of the views that we have today. It has become a quasi-religious totem rather than a practical means to take measures to bring about real and profound international change, and that is why I will be voting with the government’s motion this evening.

Michael Foot.
Michael Foot. Photograph: Jane Bown/taken from The Newsroom

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, is speaking in the debate now. She says it is impossible to prove that nuclear weapons make us safer.

And if Trident so vital for defending us, why won’t the West allow all countries in the world to have nuclear weapons, she asks.

Earlier today CND presented an anti-Trident position to the Ministry of Defence.

From left to right: CND general secretary Kate Hudson, CND vice-president Bruce Kent and SNP MP Margaret Ferrier pose with an anti- Trident petition outside of the Ministry of Defence in London.
From left to right: CND general secretary Kate Hudson, CND vice-president Bruce Kent and SNP MP Margaret Ferrier pose with an anti- Trident petition outside of the Ministry of Defence in London.
 Photograph: Neil Hall/Reuters

And this evening it has been holding a rally outside the Commons.

Demonstrators at an anti-Trident CND rally in Parliament Square.
Demonstrators at an anti-Trident CND rally in Parliament Square. Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA
Shadow health secretary Diane Abbott speaks at an anti-Trident CND rally in Parliament Square.
Shadow health secretary Diane Abbott speaks at an anti-Trident CND rally in Parliament Square. Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA

Turning away from the Trident debate for a moment, my colleague Anushka Asthana says that it is now increasingly likely that Angela Eagle and Owen Smith will strike a deal that results in just one of them challenging Jeremy Corbyn for the Labour leadership.

The Labour MP David Lammy says he joined CND before he joined Labour. He says his views now are not exactly the same as they were when he was a teenager, but even senior military figures have questioned the usefulness of Trident, and so he will be voting against Trident renewal, he says.

UPDATE: Lammy has posted his speech on Facebook.

Updated

Here is the Spectator’s Isabel Hardman’s take on the opening of the Trident debate. And here’s an excerpt.

Even if you agree with the Labour leader that unilateral disarmament is the best way to rid the world of nuclear weapons, it is difficult to watch this afternoon’s debate and conclude that he can lead a united Labour party, or that he is trying to keep it united when he is reneging on recent agreements.

The SNP is leading the opposition to Trident renewal in the Commons tonight. But it is not the only party wholly opposed to Trident. Plaid Cymru is too, and earlier its MP Liz Saville Roberts put out this statement.

It is unthinkable that, while public services are being decimated in the name of ‘austerity’, the government considers spending up to £200bn on a status symbol a priority.

Parliament is being asked to forge ahead with defence spending policies based on the security threat of the Cold War. Even since the last strategic defence and security review eight months ago, our relationship with Europe has changed, the UK’s role in the world has changed, and even our prime minister and cabinet has changed. The security threats of today are far removed from those of the Cold War, yet we are being asked to vote for the continuation of the policies of that era, solely so that the Tories can play political endgames with the Labour party.

The SNP’s Ronnie Cowan says nuclear weapons do not act as a deterrent. He says it is impossible to imagine Russia or China launching a nuclear attack on the West, because to do so would not be in their interests. Arguing for nuclear weapons is like saying gun ownership reduces the chances of people being shot in America.

Eleanor Laing, the deputy Speaker, has cut the time limit for speeches by backbenchers to four minutes.

Labour’s Roger Godsiff says the UK does not own the Trident missiles. It rents them from the US, he says. He says he finds it hard to believe that they would ever be fired without US approval.

And he says all countries that rely upon Nato’s nuclear umbrella should contribute to its cost.

Britain should back Nato, he says. But he says he will not be voting for the motion because he does not think Trident renewal is value for money.

Sir Edward Leigh, a Conservative, is speaking now. He says he has reluctantly concluded that a nuclear deterrent is necessary. But he says it would be wrong to give a “blank cheque” to the military-industrial complex.

We have to constantly probe the Government, question them and ask whether we are getting good value for money. I accept the arguments, I have read the reports, I know that all the alternatives have problems with them, but we simply cannot give a blank cheque to the military industrial complex.

Updated

I have updated some of the earlier posts from the debate with direct quotes, taken from the Press Association reports. But you may need to refresh the page to get the updates to appear.

Bernard Jenkin, the Conservative MP, is speaking now. He acknowledges that the SNP are popular in Scotland. But he suggests that has nothing to do with the SNP’s policy on Trident. The SNP would still be popular even if it backed Trident, he suggests.

Labour’s Vernon Coaker, the former shadow defence secretary, is backing the motion. He criticises the SNP for wanting to get rid of nuclear weapons while wanting an independent Scotland to be a member of Nato. Nato has a nuclear planning committee, he says, and Nato members have to agree to the use of nuclear weapons in certain circumstances.

The Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat is speaking now. He says that it is easy to have a first-strike capability, but what is significant about Trident is that it gives a second-strike capability. That means a country cannot attack the UK without knowing it will also be attacked.

And he praises Theresa May for saying earlier she would be willing to use the nuclear bomb. May gave the “clarity” that deterrence requires, he says.

Updated

The SNP MP Brendan O’Hara has just finished speaking. He opposed Trident renewal. But the six MPs who spoke before him, the Labour MPs John Woodcock, Toby Perkins and Kevan Jones, and the Tory MPs Richard Benyon, Andrew Murrison and Johnny Mercer, all spoke in favour of Trident renewal.

Perkins said:

As with much discourse within the Labour Party right now, we are having a retro debate which we thought had been settled three decades ago. We have fought general election campaigns on a unilateralist platform before. Some people surrounding the Labour Party leader may think that winning elections is just a small bit that matters to political elites. But to most of us, and indeed to my constituents, it is pretty fundamental to delivering the change our society needs.

Woodcock said:

For the official opposition to have a free vote on a matter of such strategic national importance is a terrible indictment of how far this once great party has fallen. There has long been a principled tradition of unilateralism in the Labour party, I myself was born in to it. But what Labour’s front bench is currently doing is not principled. It shows contempt for the public, for party members and, often in what they say, for the truth.

Jones said:

Yes it is true that we face other threats such as Islamic terrorism and the uncertainty of global warming and economic uncertainty. Is there one silver bullet to face all these threats? No there isn’t. But I’m quite clear the retention of our nuclear deterrent is vital to resist the resurgent Russia which is developing its nuclear weapons.

Jones said Labour was conducting a policy review, but that after seven months nothing had been published.

It is a little bit like the mythical unicorn, people believe it exists but it has never actually been sighted.

Updated

And here is my colleague Rowena Mason’s story about the opening of the debate.

And here is how it starts.

Theresa May has said she would be willing to authorise a nuclear strike killing 100,000 people, ahead of a House of Commons vote on replacing Britain’s Trident submarines.

The prime minister answered with a decisive “yes” when challenged by the SNP’s George Kerevan about whether she would personally approve a nuclear hit causing mass loss of life.

Kerevan asked May: “Is she personally prepared to authorise a nuclear strike that can kill a hundred thousand innocent men, women and children?”

May responded: “I have to say to the honourable gentleman the whole point of a deterrent is that our enemies need to know that we would be prepared to use it, unlike some suggestions that we could have a deterrent but not actually be willing to use it, which seem to come from the Labour party frontbench.”

The weapons engineer officer’s tactical trigger, the one that would launch a nuclear missile strike, on Vanguard-class submarine HMS Vigilant.
The weapons engineer officer’s tactical trigger, the one that would launch a nuclear missile strike, on Vanguard-class submarine HMS Vigilant. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA

Updated

My colleagues Rajeev Syal and Rowena Mason can reveal that Labour’s defence review is considering at least five options for the future of Britain’s Trident nuclear deterrent, including fewer submarine patrols or the introduction of new missiles carried by aircraft.

Tory foreign affairs committee chair says he cannot support Trident renewal

Cripin Blunt, the Conservative chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee, spoke after Angus Robertson in the debate and he said he would not be voting for Trident renewal.

Earlier, in an intervention, he said that his current estimate was that Trident renewal would have a lifetime cost of £179bn.

Earlier Jeremy Corbyn quoted Blunt as saying the cost would be £167bn. (See 4.55pm.) But Blunt said he had updated his figures. The Ministry of Defence said the new submarines would cost £31bn, and that there would be a £10bn contingency. On top of that the running costs, which the MoD says will be 6% of its budget over 32 years, will take the total cost to £179bn, he said.

MPs are limited to five-minute speeches, but Blunt said he had set out his views at length in a new post on his blog. Here is a summary of the arguments he made there.

  • Blunt said Trident renewal would be “the most egregious act of self-harm to our conventional defence”.

I oppose the renewal of Trident because I care about the security of my country. I’m not prepared to be party to the most egregious act of self-harm to our conventional defence. This is a colossal investment in a weapons system that will become increasingly vulnerable and for whose security we will have to throw good money, after bad – in fact tens of billions of it more than already estimated – to try to keep it safe in the decades to come.

  • He said it was a threat to the future of the UK.

Then let us not forget the risks that this particular weapon system presents to the United Kingdom. Basing it in Scotland strengthens the nationalist narrative. Ironically for a system justified on the basis that it protects the UK, it could prove instrumental in the Union’s undoing.

  • He said that Tory MPs did not care about the cost of Trident and that this was irrational.

The costs of this project are enormous. I’ve asked a number of colleagues privately at what point do these costs become prohibitive? I can’t get an answer, short of those who say whatever it takes. Surely an answer of infinity is completely irrational. It’s not only damaging to our economic security, with a fixed share of our nation’s wealth being spent on defence, this comes at deeply injurious opportunity cost to our conventional defence. At what point do either of these prices cease to be worth paying?

  • He said future technology could render nuclear submarines obsolete.

There is a growing body of evidence that emerging technologies will render the seas increasingly transparent in the foreseeable future. Under development are distributed sensors detecting acoustic, magnetic, neutrino and electro-magnetic signatures, on board unmanned vehicles in communication with each other, using swarming algorithms and autonomous operations associated with artificial intelligence, able to patrol indefinitely and using the extraordinary processing capabilities now available and improving by the month. The geometric improvement in processing power means your smart phone is far superior to that of the latest US fighter aircraft. Furthermore, unmanned aircraft will detect the surface wake of deeply submerged submarines communicating with those underwater receiving active sonar. Marine biologists are already able to track shoals of fish in real time from several hundred miles away.

Ballistic missile submarines depend utterly upon their stealth by utilising the sheer size of the oceans. If we are today able to detect the gravitational waves first created by the big bang, how can we be so confident that a capable adversary would not be able to track our submarines 20 years from now?

  • He said Trident could be vulnerable to cyber attack.

What about the security of the Trident system from cyber attack? We will be spending several tens of billions on our nuclear weapon system in order to threaten our adversaries with nuclear attack. There is every incentive for them to invest in offensive cyber capabilities at a fraction of this price in order to neutralise them. The systems are vulnerable through the components that are supplied to BAE systems, through the period of assembly, when the submarines are in refit, or when they are being restocked between patrols. The air-gap with the internet provides only minimal protection, as the Stuxnet attack on the Iranian centrifuges demonstrated.

  • He said the government should consider cheaper nuclear alternatives.

We should be considering alternatives, such as deploying these modernised free-fall bombs on the new F35 jets we are buying from the Americans. Such a system would be a significant contribution to NATO’s nuclear posture, tailored to the type of threats NATO could face in the worst conceivable scenarios, at a fraction of the cost.

Crispin Blunt.
Crispin Blunt. Photograph: Parliament TV

Julian Lewis, the Conservative chair of the defence committee, is one of the strongest defenders of nuclear weapons in the Commons and he backed the motion when he spoke after Corbyn.

Lewis said Adolf Hitler had considered using nerve gas against Allied troops in 1943 but did not do so for fear that the Allies would use the same weapon against German troops even though the Allies had no such ability.

This is a classic example of a dictator being deterred from using a mass destruction weapon by the mistaken belief that we could retaliate in kind when actually we could not do so. Such examples show in concrete terms why the concept of deterrence is so important in constraining the military options available to dictators and aggressors.

He was followed by Angus Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster.

The people of Scotland have shown repeatedly, clearly and consistently that we are opposed to the renewal of nuclear weapons. There is cross-party support, not just from the SNP, but from the Greens, from Scottish Labour, almost every single one of Scotland’s MPs tonight will vote against Trident replacement.

Only a few short weeks ago Scotland voted to remain within the European Union. If Scotland is a nation, and Scotland is a nation, it is not a normal situation for the state to totally disregard the wishes of the people, and this government has a democratic deficit in Scotland, and with today’s vote on Trident it’s going to get worse, not better. It will be for the Scottish people to determine whether we are properly protected in Europe and better represented by a government that we actually elect - at this rate, that day is fast approaching.

SNP MPs stood and applauded Robertson after his speech.

And here is some comment on his speech.

From the Spectator’s James Forsyth

From STV’s Stephen Daisley

Updated

May v Corbyn - Verdict

For editing purposes I’ve billed this as “May v Corbyn” but in reality that was more like Corbyn v his backbenchers; May never really sought to personalise her attack on the Labour leader (which may turn out to be one of the biggest differences from David Cameron, who would have found it hard to resist some snide mockery) and one of the curiosities of today was that the manifesto she quoted approvingly in her first appearance at the despatch box as PM was the Labour one, and what it said about renewing the nuclear deterrent, and not the Conservative one.

Instead the withering attacks on Corbyn came from a string of Labour MPs who criticised him for not being willing to defend Labour party policy from the despatch box. Today’s debate seems to have been timetabled largely in the hope of exposing Labour divisions, and in that it has already served its purpose. In normal circumstances seeing a leader battered by his own side so consistently would be remarkable. But the Labour party waved goodbye to normality some time ago and in the event Corbyn seemed to get through this ordeal intact. What helped was that he was clearly speaking for a cause about which he feels passionately. And, although his speech was not especially memorable, he did made an effort to acknowledge the views of his opponents, and he made powerful arguments about the escalating costs and about the aggression that nuclear weapons don’t deter.

May’s first speech in the Commons as a prime minister will probably be judged a success - not least because the government will win the vote by a very large margin - but it was more professional than inspiring. The headline-grabber will be her declaration that she would be willing to press the nuclear button. Admittedly, it is hard to imagine her saying anything else, but she did reply “yes” with just enough relish to make people think (or worry) she meant it. (See 4.46pm.) Her willingness to take a large number of interventions was welcome, and she was less abusive than Cameron would have been, although her jibe about Caroline Lucas being willing to defend the UK’s enemies (see 4.25pm) seemed ill-judged.

Updated

Corbyn says he was pleased when the last government attended the humanitarian effective war conference in 2014.

Anyone who attended that could not be indifferent about nuclear weapons, he says.

He says many MPs will vote for the motion tonight because they think nuclear weapons work.

But the motion does not address the costs. And it would not allow Britain to move to a nuclear free world, he says.

Labour’s Jamie Reed raises a point of order. He says MPs are not voting on new nuclear weapons. They are voting on a motion about new submarines.

John Bercow, the Speaker, says it is up to MPs to interpret the motion as they see fit.

Labour’s Caroline Flint says the last Labour government was able to pressure countries into reducing their stock of nuclear weapons because it had them itself.

Can I ask you, in the last Labour government, because of our stand on supporting non-proliferation, as a nuclear deterrent country we were able to influence the reduction of many, many, many nuclear warheads around the world. Do you really think that by abandoning our position as one of those countries that hold nuclear weapons we would have as much influence without them as with?

Corbyn accepts that. But he says this motion represents a step change, because it would renew the deterrent.

Updated

This is from ITV’s Robert Peston.

The Labour MP Angela Smith says Corbyn should be defending Labour party policy from the despatch box.

You are very fond of telling us all that party conference is sovereign when it comes to party policy. Last year party conference voted overwhelmingly in favour of maintenance of the nuclear deterrent so why aren’t we hearing a defence of the government’s motion from the despatch box now?

Corbyn says Labour policy is under review.

Party policy is also to review our policies - that is why we have reviews.

Updated

Corbyn says there are questions about the effectiveness of Trident submarines.

What assessment has the government made of the impact of drones, he asks.

Alberto Costa, a Conservative, says MPs can agree that nuclear weapons are the most repugnant weapons invented by man. But this is about controlling them, he says.

Corbyn says the nuclear non-proliferation treaty says nuclear states like the UK must reduce their stock of nuclear weapons.

Angus MacNeil, the SNP MP, says the argument that you cannot disinvent nuclear weapons is not applied to chemical and biological weapons, that countries like Britain do not use.

Corbyn lists various countries that had disarmed unilaterally.

And he says Michael Portillo, the former defence secretary, has questioned the need for nuclear weapons.

Labour’s Kevan Jones says Corbyn, like Jones, stood for election on a manifesto backing Trident renewal. Will Corbyn defend that from the front bench? Or will it be argued from the Labour front bench in the winding up speech?

You, like me, stood in May 2015 on a party policy - agreed at our conference through our mechanisms in the party - for the renewal of continuous-at-sea deterrent. Now, you have a shadow frontbench and shadow cabinet in your own image which agreed last week, I understand, to put that policy from the frontbench. Are you going to do it or is it going to be done in the winding-up?

Corbyn says Jones is aware of “what the policy was”.

Corbyn receives a lot of heckling. Then Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, intervenes with a helpful question asking Corbyn if he agrees that the government is not serious about disarmament.

Updated

Labour’s Neil Coyle says at the shadow cabinet last week it was agreed that party policy would be defended from the front bench. When will we hear it?

Corbyn says Coyle is well aware of party policy. But it is being reviewed. And Coyle is also aware of Corbyn’s views, which were endorsed in the leadership election last year. That is why Labour MPs are having a free vote.

Corbyn asks if the government is still committed to a nuclear free world.

Corbyn says the motion proposes an open-ended commitment to Trident.

Labour has always been committed to a nuclear-free world, he says.

When Margaret Beckett was foreign secretary, she sought to build consensus for a disarmament process, he says.

He asks where the Trident submarines will be based.

Every warhead on a Trident missile is eight times as powerful as the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima, he says.

What is the threat we are facing this deters?

It is not Islamic State, he says.

It did not stop Saudi Arabia, our ally, committing atrocities in Yemen.

And it did not stop Saddam Hussein, he said.

Corbyn says there is nothing new in the motion.

He says the costs of Trident are ballooning.

And he says it is not even clear whether Trident is effective.

He says the Tory MP Crispin Blunt has acquired figures suggesting the lifetime cost of Trident renewal would be £167bn. Some estimates have put the figure at more than £200bn, he says.

The DUP MP Ian Paisley asks how Corbyn would secure peace.

Corbyn says he favours peace talks.

A MP asks what Corbyn would say to his Korean constituents worried about the threat posed by North Korea to South Korea.

Corbyn says the talks process offers a way forward.

Surely we should start from that basis that we want and are determined to bring about a nuclear-free world. There are six-party talks going on with North Korea. China is a major economic provider for North Korea. I’d have thought the relationship with China and North Korea is perhaps the key to a way forward in that respect.

Updated

Jeremy Corbyn's Trident speech

Jeremy Corbyn begins by welcoming Theresa May to her post.

He commends the fact that her election was quick, he jokes.

He backs what May said about Nice and about Turkey

Updated

May is winding up now.

She says nuclear weapons are an insurance policy the UK cannot do without.

Britain’s nuclear deterrent is an insurance policy we simply cannot do without. We cannot compromise on our national security, we cannot outsource the grave responsibility we shoulder for keeping our people safe, and we cannot abandon our ultimate safeguard out of misplaced idealism. That would be a reckless gamble; a gamble that would enfeeble our allies and embolden our enemies; a gamble with the safety and security of families in Britain that we must never be prepared to take.

We have waited long enough, she says. It is time to get on with building the Trident replacement.

Updated

May turns to the question of whether Britain has a duty to promote disarmament.

She says Britain has cut its stockpile of nuclear weapons, and cut the number of warheads carried on nuclear submarines.

But Britain only has 1% of the world’s nuclear weapons, she says.

May says she would be willing to authorise a nuclear strike

The Labour MP Barry Sheerman says he will be voting for the motion tonight. But do we have the capacity to maintain conventional forces too?

Yes, says May. The government is increasing the defence budget and has committed to spending 2% of GDP on defence.

The SNP’s George Kerevan asks if she is prepared to authorise a nuclear strike that would kill 100,000 people.

Can we cut to the chase? Is she personally prepared to authorise a nuclear strike that can kill a hundred thousand innocent men, women and children?

(It would probably kill many more than that.)

“Yes”, says May firmly.

Unlike some suggestions that we could have a nuclear deterrent but not actually be wiling to use it, which come from the Labour Party frontbench.

  • May says she would be willing to authorise a nuclear strike.

Labour’s Madeline Moon says keeping the deterrent is particularly important because Russia has said it would be willing to authorise a first-strike nuclear attack.

Updated

May says it would not be right to expect Britain’s nuclear allies, like the US and France, to put their citizens at risk to protect the UK.

Let me turn to the issue of whether we could simply rely on other nuclear armed allies like America and France to provide our deterrent. The first question is, how would America and France react if we suddenly announced that we were abandoning our nuclear capabilities but still expecting them to put their citizens at risk to protect us in a nuclear crisis? That is hardly standing shoulder to shoulder with our allies.

Updated

May turns to the issue of whether four submarines are required.

She says a government review in the last parliament backed the continuous at-sea deterrence.

She says she does not accept the argument that future technology will make them obsolete.

She says having three submarines would be a false economy. She will not sacrifice security for a false economy, she says.

I will not seek false economies with the security of the nation, and I’m not prepared to settle for something that does not do the job.

Updated

The Green MP Caroline Lucas says May’s response to her intervention was “outrageous”. (See 4.25pm.)

May says the Unite union has said defending Trident jobs is a priority.

May says this is also about jobs and skills.

And it will increase jobs in Scotland, she says.

The Lib Dem Tim Brake asks how Trident renewal complies with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

May says she will come on to this later in her speech.

May says, over 35 years, the cost of Trident replacement amounts to 0.2% of total government spending. That is 20p for every £100 spent, she says.

Angus Robertson says May is just quoting the cost of building the submarines. What are the running costs?

May says they would amount to 6% of the MoD’s budget. That is 13p for every £100 of government spending, she says.

Julian Knight, a Conservative, says Owen Smith, the Labour leadership challenger, was on Radio 5 Live this morning saying that he used to be a member of CND but that he then “grew up”.

(Knight’s intervention is probably not intended to help Smith.)

Angus Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster, asks about the through-life costs of the programme.

May says she will address that shortly.

May is tackling the first question: why is the deterrent essential?

She says the threat to the UK has not gone away. President Putin poses a threat, she says. And some countries, like North Korea, are acquiring nuclear weapons illegally. It is the only country that has tested nuclear weapons this century. It may have enough fissile material to produce a dozen weapons. And it has missiles that could reach America.

She says new weapons may develop too. We need to think, not just about the threats that apply today, but about the threats that might emerge in the future.

Once nuclear weapons have been given up it is almost impossible to get them back. The process of creating a new deterrent takes many decades. You could not redevelop a deterrent fast enough to respond to a new and unforeseen nuclear threat. The decision on whether to renew our nuclear deterrent hinges not just on the threats we face today but also on an assessment of what the world will be like in the coming decades.

It would be an act of “gross irresponsibility” to throw away the ability to respond to those threats, she says.

She says retaining the deterrent is essential not just for Britain’s security, but for the security of its allies.

Updated

May say she wants to tackle five questions about Trident.

First, is it essential?

Second, will the threat last?

Third, is it necessary to have four submarines?

Fourth, can’t the UK rely on its allies?

Fifth, doesn’t the UK have a moral responsibility to disarm?

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, says if nuclear weapons are such a good idea, the logic of May’s position would be that all countries should have them.

If keeping and renewing our nuclear weapons is so vital to our national security and our safety then do you accept that the logic of that position must be that every other single country must seek to acquire nuclear weapons? And do you really think that the world will be a safer place if it did? Our nuclear weapons are driving proliferation - not the opposite.

May does not accept this. She says she is disappointed that MPs like Lucas are the first to defend Britain’s enemies, and the last to accept their responsibilities.

No, no I don’t accept that at all. I have to say to you that sadly you and some members of the Labour Party seem to be the first to defend the country’s enemies and the last to actually accept the capabilities that we need.

A SNP MP says 58 out of Scotland’s 59 MPs will be voting against Trident.

May says in that case they will be voting against jobs in Scotland.

I have to say to you that that means that 58 of the 59 Scottish members of parliament will be voting against jobs in Scotland which are supported by the nuclear deterrent.

Updated

The Conservative MP Andrew Selous asks May if she thinks Ukraine would have been less likely to have been invaded by Russia if it had had nuclear weapons.

May says she agrees.

Labour’s John Woodcock says, whatever May hears from the Labour front bench, it is steadfastly the party’s policy to maintain the nuclear deterrent.

May thanks Woodcock. She reads from Labour’s 2015 manifesto and says the party went into the election committed to keeping the nuclear deterrent.

May says she will maintain spending at 2% of GDP.

Text of the Trident motion

Here is the text of the Trident motion MPs are debating.

That this House supports the government’s assessment in the 2015 National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review that the UK’s independent minimum credible nuclear deterrent, based on a continuous at sea deterrence posture, will remain essential to the UK’s security today as it has for over 60 years, and for as long as the global security situation demands, to deter the most extreme threats to the UK’s national security and way of life and that of the UK’s allies; supports the decision to take the necessary steps required to maintain the current posture by replacing the current Vanguard Class submarines with four Successor submarines; recognises the importance of this programme to the UK’s defence industrial base and in supporting thousands of highly skilled engineering jobs; notes that the government will continue to provide annual reports to parliament on the programme; recognises that the UK remains committed to reducing its overall nuclear weapon stockpile by the mid-2020s; and supports the government’s commitment to continue work towards a safer and more stable world, pressing for key steps towards multilateral disarmament.

May says there is no greater responsibility as prime minister than ensuring the nation’s security.

That is why she has made passing this motion her first act as prime minister.

Theresa May opens the Trident debate

Theresa May is now opening the Trident debate.

She starts by sending condolences to those killed in Nice. People were murdered by terrorists who resent the freedoms we treasure, she says.

She says she spoke to President Hollande on Friday and said Britain will stand “shoulder to shoulder” with the French people. The terrorists will be defeated, she says.

Here is more from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg on the fall-out from the PLP hustings.

According to the Financial Times’ Duncan Robinson, Boris Johnson’s first visit to Brussels as foreign secretary went reasonably well.

Low expectations proved to be an advantage. Upon arrival, an almost straight-faced Mr Johnson launched into a clear message on Turkey — demanding restraint from Ankara — and offered sympathies to Nice.

After ignoring an inquiry from his successor as the Daily Telegraph’s Brussels correspondent (“Are you going to apologise for your previous statements, sir?”), Mr Johnson strode into the building, marching in the wrong direction before correcting course.

In the meeting, Mr Johnson spoke a mixture of English and French, marking a pleasant change from the steady stream of monoglots sent by the British government to Brussels. Even his appearance was better than some diplomats expected. “But [he] cut his hair for today, no?” asked one EU diplomat.

From left to right: Spanish foreign minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo, Dutch foreign minister Bert Koenders, British foreign secretary Boris Johnson and Maltese foreign minister George Vella talk during an EU foreign affairs council meeting in Brussels.
From left to right: Spanish foreign minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo, Dutch foreign minister Bert Koenders, British foreign secretary Boris Johnson and Maltese foreign minister George Vella talk during an EU foreign affairs council meeting in Brussels. Photograph: Stephanie Lecocq/EPA

The Labour MP Naz Shah, who was suspended by the party before being readmitted earlier this month over antisemitic posts, told the World at One in an interview that she had been “ignorant”.

In a 2014 Facebook post before becoming an MP, Shah shared a graphic of Israel’s outline superimposed onto a map of the US under the headline “Solution for Israel-Palestine Conflict - Relocate Israel into United States”, with the comment: “Problem solved”. Other posts used the hashtag IsraelApartheid above a quote saying “Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal”. But she said the most clearly anti-Semitic comment she made came in a post in which she said that “the Jews are rallying” in relation to an online poll on Israel’s military action in Gaza.

Shah said her first instinct when the comments came to light was to issue an immediate apology and resign straight away as parliamentary aide to shadow chancellor John McDonnell. But that she was advised to wait and see whether the story was picked up by newspapers, she said.

I waited for it to be published the next day and I shouldn’t have done. One of the tough conversations I had to have with myself that same day was ‘God! Am I anti-Semitic?’ I had to really question my heart of hearts. Yes I have ignorance, yes everybody has prejudice and unconscious biases, but does that make me anti-Semitic? And the answer, I was really clear, was ‘No, I don’t have a hatred of Jewish people’.

Shah said the posts came about in the context of conversations she was having over Israel’s military action in Gaza and that she was “ignorant” of their wider significance.

I’ve had conversations with lots of people and they’ve talked to me and explained to me what I’ve got to understand and what the connotations were of what I’d done and how it’s hurt people. It was really really ignorant.

Asked whether she now accepted the comments were anti-Semitic, she said:

Absolutely. The language that I used was anti-Semitic, it was offensive. What I did hurt people ... Those people who say ‘Naz didn’t do anything anti-Semitic’, actually no, I did. I used that language. I didn’t get anti-Semitism as racism. I had never come across it.

Naz Shah.
Naz Shah. Photograph: Gary Calton for the Observer

In the Commons Michael Gove has made his first contribution from the back benches since being sacked as justice secretary last week. He urged Amber Rudd to remember that there was a distinction between Islamist extremism and “the great religion of Islam”.

Michael Gove.
Michael Gove. Photograph: BBC

Amber Rudd's statement on the Nice terror attack

Amber Rudd, the new home secretary, is making a statement to the Commons about the Nice terror attack. It is the first time she has addressed MPs since her promotion.

She says the attack”defies comprehension”.

She says the police in Britain have reviewed forthcoming events to ensure security measures are appropriate and proportionate.

And she says the police can use the national barrier asset to protect events from vehicle attacks.

She summarises the measures the government has been taking to protect the country from terrorism. And she insists Britain will support France in the fight against terrorism.

Amber Rudd.
Amber Rudd. Photograph: BBC/BBC News

Leaders from the north of England have written to the prime minister to demand a place at the Brexit negotiating table.

The leaders of five northern combined authorities (Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, the North -East and the Sheffield and Liverpool city regions) have joined forces to make clear that, with an economy stronger than that of Scotland’s and a population greater than London’s, the north of England will not be ignored during Theresa May’s administration or in the upcoming Brexit negotiations.

They invite May to meet them as soon as possible, noting that she has already met the Scottish first minister, Nichola Sturgeon:

The North of England has long had concerns that we are being ignored, caught between an economically and politically powerful London and an increasingly politically important Scotland.

As we negotiate our exit from the European Union, you have made clear that you believe in having an approach and negotiation objectives that include the whole of the United Kingdom. On that point we wholeheartedly agree. It is absolutely vital that the voice of the North of England is heard loud and clear during the Brexit negotiations. The North of England has a population greater than London and almost three times that of Scotland. Our economy is significantly larger than Wales’ or Scotland’s.

Naturally, it’s not just the Tories who are enjoying Labour disarray over Trident.

The SNP’s Westminster leader Angus Robertson has issued a “final call” to Labour MPs to vote with his party - alongside the Greens, Plaid Cymru, and the SDLP - against Trident renewal. He also has a side swipe at Labour abstainers:

The SNP called for this vote to be delayed so that proper scrutiny could take place, and while it has clearly been brought forward for party political reasons it would be utterly unacceptable and a dereliction of duty for MPs to abstain on such a crucial decision.

Voters expect their MPs to listen to the evidence and the arguments then take a decision in the interests of the country, not shirk our responsibilities in favour of party political games.

With hours to go until the vote, we call on Labour MPs to join the SNP and other progressive parties in voting against this multi-billion pound folly.

The PLP hustings are now over. Here are some tweets from journalists doorstepping the meeting.

From the New Statesman’s Stephen Bush

From Total Politics’ David Singleton

From PoliticsHome’s Kevin Schofield

From the New Statesman’s George Eaton

From the Daily Mirror’s Kevin Maguire

From Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh

From the Daily Mail’s Jason Groves

The Labour MP Graham Allen has posted a picture on Twitter from the PLP leadership hustings.

Lunchtime summary

I don’t think this vote is necessary, and I’ve said that. I said it before the referendum, that I predicted that David Cameron would bring this vote at this time, because we knew back then that he was attempting to reunite a very divided Conservative party. Theresa May has decided to honour his commitment to do that, and it has caused difficulty for us. But nevertheless, I just think you have to take a position if a vote of this magnitude is put in Westminster. To abstain is to not take responsibility and that is the situation that I strongly believe.

Corbyn, a lifelong unilateralist, will vote against Trident renewal and Labour MPs have been given a free vote, which is why the party is splitting three way. But Watson said Labour should be backing renewing the nuclear deterrent.

We might know that this is political skulduggery by the Tories, but the country expects us to know our position on strategic defence matters, particularly something so important as our independent nuclear deterrent. And I think we have to take a position on it ... I think the vast majority of Labour MPs will adhere to our manifesto commitment at the last election on national security.

He also said that, given that many Unite members work in the defence sector, Len McCluskey’s support for Corbyn could in time lead to him being voted out of office as the union’s general secretary. Watson said:

There are tens of thousands of members of Unite and the GMB who work in the defence sector, or in civil or military nuclear sector or in aerospace, whose jobs depend on this programme going through. And there you have Len McCluskey strongly supporting Jeremy Corbyn, who will be voting against the Trident programme tonight, which will put many defence workers in Unite out of their jobs if he gets his way. So I think there will be consequences for the unions in this as well.

Tim Roache, the GMB general secretary, told the same programme Corbyn should vote for Trident renewal.

Look, the Labour party have a clear policy: the clear policy is that Labour will uphold an at-sea deterrent. I would expect, therefore, all MPs including, in fact especially the leader of the Labour party to uphold that current policy.

Theresa May will be received with military honours when she meets the German chancellor Angela Merkel for a working dinner on Thursday afternoon and evening, the German government announced today

Merkel’s spokesperson Steffen Seibert said that the German leader was looking forward to hearing the new British prime minister’s views but ruled out any talks about bilateral trade deals until the UK had formally left the EU

“It’s up to Britain to think through how it wants to shape its relationship to the European Union”, Seibert said.

Boris Johnson has quit his lucrative newspaper column, and a commission to write a book on Shakespeare has been put on hold, the Press Association reports.

The foreign secretary has ended his £250,000 contract to write a weekly article for The Daily Telegraph following his appointment to the cabinet.

Hodder & Stoughton has postponed publication of Shakespeare: The Riddle of Genius - which had been due out in October, but it expects to release the work in the future.

Johnson received an advance of around £90,000 for the book.

Hodder & Stoughton said Johnson’s book on Shakespeare would not be published for the “foreseeable future”, but it is believed to be unlikely that the company will ask for the advance back as it still wants to release it at a later date.

In a statement, it said: “Hodder & Stoughton confirm that they are postponing publication of Boris Johnson’s Shakespeare: The Riddle of Genius. The book, which was scheduled for publication in October, will not be published for the foreseeable future.”

A spokesman for Johnson said: “Whilst Mr Johnson has enjoyed a close working relationship with The Daily Telegraph for over 20 years, it would not be appropriate for him to continue writing his long-standing column for the newspaper given his new role as foreign secretary. It is expected that he will continue to write occasional comment pieces for a range of publications in his role as foreign secretary.

Here is more from the PLP hustings.

From my colleague Anushka Asthana

From the New Statesman’s George Eaton

From Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh

Lilian Greenwood explains in detail why Corbyn's incompetence led her to resign from shadow cabinet

The Labour MP Lilian Greenwood has posted on her website a copy of a speech she gave to her local party explaining why she resigned as shadow transport secretary after the EU referendum. Dozens of other shadow ministers resigned at around the same time, but Greenwood’s account is the most detailed we’ve had yet explaining the factors that made her decide she could no longer go on serving Jeremy Corbyn.

Greenwood said Corbyn’s problem was incompetence. She did not quit because she disagreed with him over policy; she resigned because she concluded he was impossible to work with, because he would not operate as leader of a team.

I remain proud of our policies on transport, especially rail. And Jeremy is right to set out an alternative to the economics of austerity, to focus on affordable housing, to defending a public NHS and to tackling poverty and inequality.

But through my own personal direct experience I know that Jeremy operates in a way that means progress towards these goals is impossible. He is not a team player let alone a team leader.

Jeremy has a new shadow cabinet but it’s clear to me that he doesn’t understand collective responsibility and that he can’t lead a team, so I’m afraid the same problems will eventually emerge in the new front bench. This is not about policy or ideology, it is about competence.

In her speech, which is worth reading in full, Greenwood gave three examples of how she had spend time working on policy or campaign proposals, only to find her work being undermined by Corbyn. But she said that happened “time and time again”.

And she said she was particularly angry by how Corbyn and his office responded on the Friday morning after the Brexit vote.

And as we left at 5am, defeated and in despair, we finally got sent lines to take from the Leader’s office. Acknowledging Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart for their work in the Leave campaign. Their work in direct opposition to Labour party policy.

And shortly after we heard Jeremy calling for the immediate triggering of Article 50. Without any discussion with the shadow cabinet or the leader of the European parliamentary Labour party.

Think about that. The country had just voted to leave the EU after more than 40 years and Jeremy made a major announcement on the Party’s position without waiting to discuss it with the shadow cabinet, without even consulting the leader of our MEPs in Europe.

How can that be right?

Lilian Greenwood.
Lilian Greenwood. Photograph: Sky News

The PLP hustings are underway. They are taking place behind closed doors, but journalists are getting updates. Here are some details.

From the Guardian’s Anushka Asthana

From Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh

From BuzzFeed’s Jim Waterson

No 10 lobby briefing - Summary

Here are the main points from the Number 10 lobby briefing.

  • Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, David Davis, the Brexit secretary, and Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, will get joint use of Chevening, the grace and favour home traditionally used by the foreign secretary, the prime minister’s spokeswoman said. (See 12.09pm.) Johnson will also get use of the foreign secretary’s London residence, 1 Carlton Gardens. Philip Hammond, the chancellor, will get use of the chancellor’s grace and favour residence, Dorneywood.
  • The spokeswoman refused to comment on speculation that May will appoint a first secretary of state. Although all the cabinet appointments have been made, full details, including who attends cabinet without being a full member, will not be released until the official government list is published later today. This will also show the cabinet’s official order of seniority. The list published last week did not show the official seniority rankings, the spokeswoman said.
  • Downing Street said that May would be talking about Brexit with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and Francois Hollande, the French president, when she visits them later this week. (See 10.49am.) EU leaders have said they will not negotiate Brexit until the UK triggers article 50. But the spokeswoman said that these comments may just refer to “detailed negotiations” and that May did intend to talk about Brexit in broad terms in Berlin and Paris. She was not expecting “detailed discussions”, the spokeswoman said.
  • Jesse Norman has been made a junior minister at the department for business, energy and industrial strategy. Norman was chair of the Commons culture committee, and so his appointment will free up a slot there. The spokeswoman said that ministerial appointments have now all been made.
  • Amber Rudd, the new home secretary, will make a statement in the Commons at 3.30pm about that truck attack in Nice.
  • May and her husband have not yet moved into Downing Street, but will do so “shortly”, the spokeswoman said. She said the Mays would used the Number 11 flat as their residence and that the Hammonds would use the Number 10 flat, which is smaller. This has been the arrangement that has been in place ever since the Blairs decided to use the Number 11 flat because they decided the Number 10 one was too small for their family.
  • May has visited Wales this morning and will visit Northern Ireland “soon”, the spokeswoman said. She said the prime minister, who visited Scotland on Friday, wanted to show her commitment to all nations in the UK.
10 Downing Street.
10 Downing Street. Photograph: Oli Scarff/AFP/Getty Images

Johnson, Davis and Fox to get joint use of Chevening, the foreign secretary's mansion

I’m just back from the Number 10 lobby briefing. There were quite a few interesting lines, which I will summarise shortly, but the most eye-catching announcement came right at the end.

  • Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, David Davis, the Brexit secretary, and Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, will get joint use of Chevening, the grace and favour home traditionally used by the foreign secretary.

The three leading Brexit ministers are not great chums and quite how the Brexit house-share will work in practice remains to be seen although, given that Chevening has 115 rooms, it should be possible for them all to turn up at once without having them having to worry about one of them hogging the bathroom.

It is not the first time Chevening has been shared - under the coalition, Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, had joint use of it with the foreign secretary, first William Hague and then Philip Hammond - but a three-way split like this may be unprecedented.

Explaining the decision to give Johnson, Davis and Fox joint use of the property, the prime minister’s spokeswoman said this “reflects the fact that all of these secretaries of state will, as part of their work, be needing an opportunity to host foreign visitors and leaders”.

The move also reflects that fact that there is some ambiguity as to whether Davis is more important and influential than Johnson in the Brexit negotiations. Asked about a claim by Davis in the Mail on Sunday yesterday that he could pull rank on Johnson and Fox, the prime minister’s spokeswoman said that leaving the EU would be a “collective government effort”.

She also said that the list of cabinet appointments published last week was not a guide to seniority and that the proper cabinet seniority rankings would not become clear until the official government list is published, probably later this afternoon. She also refused to comment on speculation that this final list might include the appointment of a first secretary of state.

I’m off to the lobby briefing now. I’ll post again after 11.30am.

Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale has made her strongest statement yet on Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.

Writing in her regular column for the Daily Record, she says that - while she respects Corbyn personally - she does not believe that he can continue as leader without the support of the majority of Labour MPs.

I won 72% of the vote from when I was elected leader, but if the vast majority of my MSPs didn’t have confidence in me then I couldn’t do my job. I don’t see how Jeremy can do his. With Jeremy as leader the chances of a UK Labour government in the near future are slim at best and non-existent at worst.

The choice that Labour members and supporters have at this leadership election is whether we want to be a party of government with real policies that can change people’s lives, or a party purely of protest that can say what it is against but not what it is for.

Dugdale has also just announced that Labour’s only Scottish Mp, Ian Murray, who resigned from Corbyn’s cabinet as shadow Scottish Secretary, has been appointed to her cabinet as Scottish Labour’s Westminster spokesperson. Try to keep up ...

Kezia Dugdale.
Kezia Dugdale. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

May to visit Berlin and Paris this week

Downing Street has announced that Theresa May will travel to Berlin and Paris later this week for talks with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and Francois Hollande, the French president. A Number 10 spokesperson said:

On Wednesday, following prime minister’s questions, [Theresa May] will travel to Berlin for a bilateral meeting and a working dinner with Chancellor Merkel. This will be an opportunity to discuss the bilateral relationship, cooperation on a range of global challenges, and of course how the UK and Germany can work together as the UK prepares to leave the EU.

Then on Thursday, the prime minister will visit France for a bilateral meeting with President Hollande at the Elysee. The talks are likely to cover similar issues as those in Berlin, as well as Thursday’s attack in Nice and counter-terrorism co-operation.

BuzzFeed has more on the Vote Leave battlebus. (See 10.15am.) It says that after the EU referendum campaign it was used as Will Young’s Glastonbury tour bus, with the EU slogans removed. But now they have been re-instated for the Greenpeace stunt, BuzzFeed says.

Remember the Vote Leave battlebus, and its bogus claim about the UK sending £350m a week to the EU? Well, Greenpeace have got hold of the bus, and they have parked it outside the Houses of Parliament where they covering it with stickers containing questions for the new government. It is intended that they will spell out the words “Time for Truth”.

John Sauven, Greenpeace’s executive director, said:

The referendum campaign was marred by exaggerations and lies, but now we need the truth. That’s why we’re covering Boris Johnson’s battle bus with thousands of questions for the new government from Leave and Remain voters. People want to know what ministers will do to keep our rivers and beaches clean once EU environment laws no longer apply in Britain. They want to know what the government will do about air pollution and climate change after we Brexit. Some just want to know if their European friends will be allowed to stay here.

Jeremy Corbyn will attend the PLP leadership hustings today, Sky’s Tamara Cohen reports. It had been thought that just Angela Eagle and Owen Smith would be there.

Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, sidestepped questions this morning about whether it would be “awkward” dealing with Boris Johnson after he compared the EU’s ambitions to those of Hitler during the referendum campaign. But she said the two had had a “very positive exchange” on Sunday night.

She said that Johnson would be welcomed “as a new member of the family”.

But she also insisted that Brexit talks with the UK could not start until the government invoked article 50, starting the formal two-year withdrawal process. She said:

There are no negotiations before the notification of Article 50 is tabled. Until that negotiation comes to an end, the UK is a full member of the EU so our common work on foreign and security policy continues.

Federica Mogherini, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, speaking to the meda as she arrived for the EU foreign affairs council this morning.
Federica Mogherini, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, speaking to the meda as she arrived for the EU foreign affairs council this morning. Photograph: Thierry Charlier/AFP/Getty Images

French foreign minister says Brexit talks should start as soon as possible

Jean-Marc Ayrault, the French foreign minister, said today that he had already had “frank” exchanges with his new British counterpart, Boris Johnson. Ayrault, who responded to Johnson’s appointment last week by saying that he “lied” during the EU referendum campaign, also said that he hoped the UK would start Brexit negotiations as soon as possible. He said:

I had a telephone conversation with [Johnson] on Saturday. This exchange was frank, but useful. I think it is important that we, together, work for the future of relations between the EU and Britain.

Regarding France, we always have exceptional bilateral relations with Britain that we want to continue, especially in defence, immigration... economically and in particular the nuclear issue.

There is much to do with Britain. I always speak to Boris Johnson with the greatest sense of sincerity and frankness. This is how we must move forward, and in the case of France with a purpose: to prevent Europe moving into a situation of uncertainty as regards the future of relations with Britain. So the earlier negotiations begin, the better.

Jean-Marc Ayrault, the French foreign minister, talking to the media as he arrives for the EU foreign affairs council.
Jean-Marc Ayrault, the French foreign minister, talking to the media as he arrives for the EU foreign affairs council. Photograph: Thierry Charlier/AFP/Getty Images

Johnson says despite Brexit UK will not give up its 'leading role' in Europe

Boris Johnson, Britain’s new foreign secretary, has insisted the UK is not abandoning its “leading role” in Europe despite the Brexit vote. He is in Brussels for his first meeting with fellow EU foreign ministers, and on arrival he insisted that, although Britain might be leaving the EU, it was not leaving Europe.

Clearly the message I’ll be taking to our friends in the Council is that we have to give effect to the will of the people and leave the European Union but that in no sense means that we are leaving Europe, we not going to be in any way abandoning our leading role in European cooperation and participation of all kinds.

The tone is a marked change from campaigning mode when Johnson compared the European project to Adolf Hitler’s ambitions.

Johnson said he had had “a very good conversation” on Sunday night with the EU’s foreign affairs representative, Federica Mogherini. But a dinner with her was cancelled because a technical fault with his plane delayed his arrival.

The agenda will be dominated by the failed coup in Turkey and Europe’s response to the terrorist threat in the wake of the Nice attacks. US Secretary of State John Kerry is also attending the meeting. Johnson said:

On Nice, clearly we’ll be ensuring that we coordinate our response to terror. And on Turkey, I think it’s very important in view of the failed coup that we see restraint and moderation on all sides and that’s what I’ll be calling for.

This meeting will be the first time Europe’s foreign ministers have met Boris Johnson in his role as foreign secretary. Johnson will meet France’s foreign minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault, who has accused the UK’s new foreign secretary of lying to the British people.

Arriving this morning Johnson said:

I’m very much looking forward to meeting my colleagues from other European countries.

Boris Johnson arrives at an EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels.
Boris Johnson arrives at an EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels. Photograph: Francois Lenoir/Reuters

Good morning. Theresa May is going to make her first appearance in the Commons today as prime minister and she will be opening the debate on renewing Trident. There is no reason why the prime minister has to open this debate - it would have been perfectly acceptable to leave it up to the defence secretary - and arguably there is no reason why the debate is needed anyway, because the Commons has already voted in principle to renew the Trident nuclear deterrent. But David Cameron scheduled a vote in large part because he wanted to highlight Labour divisions on this subject and May is implementing this strategy with relish. In comments from her speech released overnight, she accuses Jeremy Corbyn of “misplaced idealism”. She says:

We cannot compromise on our national security. We cannot outsource the grave responsibility we shoulder for keeping our people safe. And we cannot abandon our ultimate safeguard out of misplaced idealism. That would be a reckless gamble: a gamble that would enfeeble our allies and embolden our enemies. A gamble with the safety and security of families in Britain that we must never be prepared to take.

Corbyn, of course, will vote against the renewal of the nuclear deterrent. But a majority of MPs are expected to vote in favour, in line with current party policy (or party policy as most recently agreed - Corbyn’s allies argue that, because policy on Trident is being reviewed, there currently is no party policy), and Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, and Clive Lewis, the shadow defence secretary are abstaining. That leaves the party facing a three-way split.

Here is the agenda for the day.

11am: Number 10 lobby briefing.

11.30am: Carolyn Fairbairn, the CBI general secretary, and Frances O’Grady, the TUC general secretary, speak at the launch of the Resolution Foundation’s “Stagnation Generation” report.

1pm: Angela Eagle and Owen Smith address Labour MPs at a private parliamentary Labour party hustings event.

2.30pm: Sajid Javid, the new communities secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

3.30pm: Theresa May opens the Commons debate on renewing the Trident nuclear deterrent.

As usual, I will be covering the breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m @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. Alternatively you could post a question to me on Twitter.

If you think there are any voices that I’m leaving out, particularly political figures or organisations giving alternative views of the stories I’m covering, do please flag them up below the line (include “Andrew” in the post). I can’t promise to include everything, but I do try to be open to as wide a range of perspectives as possible.

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
William, Prince of Wales, is a 'big fan' of American Pie
William, Prince of Wales, told American Pie star Eugene Levy in an episode of the actor's Apple TV+ The Reluctant Traveler series that he is a "big fan" of the raunchy sex comedy films.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Priscilla Presley: 'I felt that Michael Jackson was using Lisa Marie'
Priscilla Presley feared Michael Jackson was “using” her daughter Lisa Marie Presley when they got married in 1994.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Why do I use LOL so much in my texts?
My personal texts and work chats were littered with LOLs. I asked experts for advice on avoiding its ‘more insidious’ uses
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
There's one detail on coffee bags that tells you if it's worth buying — and most shoppers miss it
Discover how to identify fresh coffee and understand the optimal window for brewing quality coffee at home.
Tom’s Guide
Tom’s Guide
‘Porch light will be off this year’: Parents are giving up as Trump tariffs just made Halloween unbelievably expensive
Halloween became so expensive.
We Got This Covered
We Got This Covered
I Only Wear Abercrombie & Fitch Jeans—These Are My Absolute Favorites
The six pairs I will never stop buying.
Marie Claire
Marie Claire
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play