Afternoon summary
- Sir Ivan Rogers, the former British ambassador to the EU, has told MPs that he advised Theresa May in 2016 that her three Brexit priorities for Northern Ireland were incompatible. (See 3.39pm and 4.12pm.)
Ivan Rogers tells the Foreign Affairs Ctte that the PM wasn't too happy when he explained her Brexit Ireland policy consisted of three incompatible promises pic.twitter.com/3NvNJDeLM2
— JPCampbellBiz (@JP_Biz) July 16, 2019
In separate evidence to the foreign affairs committee, on leaks, he said he would never put anything interesting in a diplomatic telegram, a communication widely circulated at Westminster.
Sir Ivan Rogers says "I would never have put anything interesting in a telegram.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) July 16, 2019
[If asked for comment] I would produce a comment that was completely vacuous.
- The age limit for playing National Lottery scratchcards and online instant win games could be increased to 18, the government has said. Culture minister Mims Davies said she was launching a consultation on whether the existing age limit of 16 for all National Lottery games should be raised for some or all games and products.
- The House of Lords has been adjourned after a peer was taken ill. Doorkeepers went to the aid of Labour former Foreign Office minister Lord Judd as other peers looked anxiously on, the Press Association reports.
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Tom Watson and four members of Labour’s governing body have backed a new motion which would auto-exclude members accused of racism or other forms of discrimination, overseen by an independent appointee, in a radical overhaul of the party’s complaints process.
The proposed change, in the wake of the BBC Panorama documentary where eight whistleblowers alleged interference from the senior Labour officials in antisemitism complaints, will be debated at next week’s full meeting of the national executive committee.
The motion, signed by Watson, MP George Howarth, councillor Alice Perry and Nick Forbes and the societies representative James Asser, calls on the NEC to resolve to bring forward rule changes to annual conference to:
- establish an independent complaints process to deal with allegations of racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia or transphobia.
- automatically exclude a member from the party where there is irrefutable evidence of racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia or transphobia.
It is unclear whether the NEC, which has a pro-Jeremy Corbyn majority, would pass such a new rule. Currently complaints are subject to a quasi-judicial process which can take years to resolve complaints and members can only be expelled after a hearing by the party’s highest disciplinary body, the National Constitutional Committee, which has elected members from the party. High-profile cases including the former mayor of London Ken Livingstone took more than two years to resolve.
Would an autumn election automatically lead to Brexit being delayed?
And here is another interesting question from below the line.
In your question you talk about parliament legislating against no deal. Unless it passes a law requiring the PM to revoke article 50, it cannot absolutely legislate to stop no deal. One possible option might be to legislate to require the PM to either win a vote approving a no-deal Brexit or to request an article 50 extension. If that law had been passed by the time of an election, it would stand. But the EU has to agree an article 50 extension, and so the UK cannot determine that unilaterally.
On the main point, whether an election campaign ending after 31 October would oblige the new PM to request an article 50 extension, effectively halting Brexit to allow the electorate to express its views, opinion varies. At the Brexit committee last week David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister and Theresa May’s de facto deputy, implied that the proper thing to do would be to delay. He explained:
Certainly, the convention that has been established hitherto and is reflected in the cabinet manual is that if a general election is called, whether triggered by the Fixed-term Parliaments Act or because parliament gets to the end of its term, the government from that moment goes on to a caretaker basis and does not take any significant decisions that would prejudice the freedom of decision taking by whichever government the people elect.
But at the hearing the Tory Brexiter Peter Bone strongly objected to Lidington’s interpretation. If Boris Johnson were PM, he could argue that he was elected leader with a mandate to leave the EU by 31 October, and so he might ignore the cabinet manual. Bone argued that, because parliament voted to trigger article 50, leaving on 31 October was already the default, and that that is what a government in caretaker mode should implement.
As for whether the EU could unilaterally keep the UK in, the answer is no.
Updated
Here is a question from below the line which is pertinent.
Andrew – Most agree that a No Confidence vote on a Tory government set on a No Deal Brexit is inevitable.
So it will come down to how many anti-Brexit Tory rebels are prepared to vote against the government to how many Labour MPs who are pro-Brexit, either because of their own convictions or because they are representing a Leave-voting constituency, will vote to support the government to get Brexit through on 31st October.
Do we have a good guide to how many of each group there are?
Thank you.
It is not quite as simple as that, because there are now 20 independent MPs in the Commons - 15 independents, and five Independents Group for Change ones - and it is not obvious how they would all vote. Most would vote against the government on a confidence motion, but probably not all of them, and I have not seen an up-to-date count. If there were an early election, almost all of them would probably lose their seats.
Trying to work out how many Tory MPs would, in practice, resign the whip and vote against their own government to stop a no-deal Brexit is not easy. Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke say they would. Others who said they would, like Anna Soubry, have already left. There are a lot more who are saying they would vote to stop no-deal, but who won’t at this stage commit to voting to bring down a government committed to no-deal. A few of these might be willing to sacrifice their careers in Tory politics to stop no-deal, but perhaps only a handful more than those who have already declared.
I was surprised to hear the Labour MP Sarah Champion suggest she might not vote with her own party on a no confidence motion. (See 12.39pm.) Any Labour MP who rebelled like this would not be allowed to stand for the party at a general election, and so it does not seem a sensible move for anyone keen to keep their seat. Perhaps one or two of the Labour Brexiters planning to retire anyway might be willing to abstain to help Brexit over the line, but, with the possible exception of Kate Hoey, they all hate the Tories and Boris Johnson even more than they like Brexit, so I would not put money on that either.
How Theresa May was warned her three Brexit priorities for Ireland were incompatible
This is what Sir Ivan Rogers, the former ambassador to Brussels, said in the hearing about how Theresa May was making incompatible promises on Ireland. (See 3.39pm.) Speaking about his time in Brussels, before he resigned in January 2017, he said:
You could see, if you were me, the Irish question was being underplayed. We were not focusing enough on it. It was obviously going to be the core of the problem ...
One of the most unpopular things I think I said to the prime minister in the autumn of 2016 is ‘You’ve made three commitments in good faith to different audiences, but they are not really compatible with each other. You have said to the Irish under no circumstances will a hard border be erected across the island of Ireland. You’ve said to the Democratic Unionist community under no circumstances will there be divergence from the rest of Great Britain. And you’ve said to the right of your own party that you’re heading out of the customs union. Well, you can’t do all three. You’ve got to choose two of the three.’ And I had the same conversation with then foreign secretary [Boris Johnson].
Ivan Rogers has now finished giving evidence to the foreign affairs committee about Brexit.
He and two other former ambassadors are now giving evidence about the leaking of classified information. I will be keeping an eye on this hearing, but I won’t be covering it in detail.
You can watch a live feed here.
This is John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, commenting on the fall in the value of the pound today. (See 12.28pm.)
The instability and uncertainty caused by the Conservative party leadership contest has real world consequences. The commitment of both contenders to a no-deal Brexit makes it even more important the government put an end to playing games with people’s livelihoods and call a general election now.
Back in the foreign affairs committee Ivan Rogers says that, structurally, the way the Brexit department was operating was “bound to be a mess” because Olly Robbins, when he was its permanent secretary, was reporting both to the Brexit secretary, David Davis, who had a particular stance on Brexit, and to the prime minister, in his capacity as her adviser. That caused a tension because the Davis’s priorities and the PM’s were not always the same, he says.
And this is from Sky’s Stephen Murphy. @Paschald is Paschal Donohoe, the Irish finance minister.
“We will not be changing the backstop”, says Irish Finance Minister @Paschald in response to Messrs Johnson and Hunt.
— Stephen Murphy (@SMurphyTV) July 16, 2019
“The person who is taking over [as UK PM] will not change the key issues we are facing”#Brexit pic.twitter.com/dQqs70fmRf
Turning away from the foreign affairs committee hearing for a moment, Sky’s Sam Coates is reporting that Boris Johnson could send MPs home for up to two weeks in October under plans being considered by his campaign.
Ivan Rogers says he told May her three Brexit priorities for Northern Ireland were incompatible with each other.
Rogers says before he left the civil service he thought the Irish issue was being underplayed.
He says he recalls telling Theresa May that she had made three commitments on Northern Ireland that were not compatible. She had told the Irish that there would be no hard border, she had told the DUP that there would be no divergence between Britain and Northern Ireland, and she had told the right of her party that that UK would leave the customs union.
He says he told her that she could only have two of those three.
He says the same to the foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, he says.
- Ivan Rogers says he told May her three Brexit priorities for Northern Ireland were incompatible with each other.
Rogers is describing what John Springford from the Centre for European Reform called May’s Irish trilemma.
Introducing the Springford Trilemma. https://t.co/bVZKuYfRY8 pic.twitter.com/lyapWcuNaO
— Sam Lowe (@SamuelMarcLowe) March 7, 2018
Updated
Rogers says Theresa May had huge experience of justice and home affairs when she became PM. But she did not have experience of the economic side of the EU. In justice and home affairs the UK had a lot of opt-outs. But in relation to the single market, opt-outs weren’t available, he says. He says the UK had to choose between a range of options. He says this was not a popular message to give to the PM.
Rogers says, if Theresa May has played hardball in the final three months of 2016, he does not know if the EU would have agreed to open negotiations before the UK triggered article 50.
But when the UK did trigger article 50 at the end of March 2017, the EU was celebrating, he says.
Q: Do you think you should have seen the PM’s red lines speech in advance?
Rogers says he was “surprised” not to have read it. He says he was ever more surprised that Sir Jeremy Heywood, the cabinet secretary, had not read it.
He says the speech took EU leaders by surprise. He says he spoke to Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, and Donald Tusk, the European council president, afterwards. He says Juncker told him three times. Juncker said it led to only one conclusion.
Q: Which was?
That the UK was going much further out of the EU than Juncker had expected, says Rogers.
He says perhaps EU leaders should not have been surprised. At that point some EU leaders assumed a new PM would try to keep the UK in the EU. Rogers says he told them that would not be happening.
Rogers says he was told by Olly Robbins, the PM’s Brexit adviser, that Theresa May was going to announce a date for triggering article 50 in her speech to the Conservative party conference in the autumn of 2016.
Rogers says he said it would be a bad idea, but he recognised that it was probably too late to influence the process. He says his argument was that, by announcing a date, the UK would lose negotiating leverage.
Olly rang me up to say, ‘She’s going to announce the date set for triggering article 50 tomorrow. I don’t think that’s a very good idea. What do you think?’
I said no I don’t think it’s a very good idea because you lose a lot of leverage the moment you do that.
But presumably if they are telling you that they are going to announce it, we’re fighting a losing battle but I think it’s worth fighting just to at least register that I don’t think it’s very wise because that’s exactly what the opposition wants you to do.
Rogers says he was not shown in advance the May speech setting red lines for Brexit. It was a party conference speech. He would not expect to see it in advance, he says.
Updated
Tugendhat asks about a memo from Rogers that was leaked in 2016 saying trade talks with the EU could take up to 10 years and still fail.
Rogers says he wrote these memos to try to explain what would happen.
He says they were long intentionally. He says David Cameron told him that he read Rogers’ memos on the plane as he was on his way to EU meetings.
Tom Tugendhat, the Tory chair of the committee, is asking the question.
Q: Did the Foreign Office set guidelines for what the future relationship with the EU should be?
Rogers says by this time he had left the civil service. But he does not think the Foreign Office was centrally involved.
Turning away from the foreign affairs committee hearing for a moment, the Times’ Henry Zeffman has posted Jeremy Corbyn’s reply to the letter he received from Labour peers yesterday.
NEW: Here's Jeremy Corbyn's reply to yesterday's letter from Labour peers pic.twitter.com/jWOYf3HC0y
— Henry Zeffman (@hzeffman) July 16, 2019
Rogers says he recalls telling Sir Jeremy Heywood, the then cabinet secretary, that if the UK voted to leave the EU, Brexit would dominate Whitehall for a decade. Two successive parliaments would be dominated by the need to pass Brexit legislation, Rogers says he recalls saying.
Rogers says the UK has been “demonstrably on a different track” from the rest of the EU for much of its membership.
Rogers says when he left the civil service in 2006 to work in the private sector he told people the issue for the future was not whether or not the UK would join the euro, but whether or not it would leave the EU.
The Brexit crisis has been coming for a very long time, he says.
Rogers says he warned about the possibility of Brexit some time before the 2016 referendum.
After the 2015 civil servants considered the case for Brexit planning, he said. They might have looked at the models of Brexit available to ministers.
But ministers did not want the work done, he says. And he says it was not for the cabinet secretary to go ahead and order that work if ministers were not in favour.
He says the leave campaign avoided having a plan in the campaign, because having a plan would have made it harder to keep the leave coalition together.
But Rogers says he had read all the plans for Brexit that were around. He says he probably knew more about the options than anyone else.
Q: Did any civil servants object to the lack of planning?
Rogers says he does not think there is a record of any objections.
But he says he recalls Nick Clegg, in the coalition government, objecting to the idea of the work being done.
Rogers says he thinks Clegg would have objected to anything that might have made Brexit look more credible.
Ivan Rogers gives evidence to MPs on Brexit
Sir Ivan Rogers, the former British ambassador to the EU, is giving evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee about relations with the EU.
Rogers has been one of the most outspoken and perceptive critics of the government’s Brexit policy since he resigned in January 2017.
Lunchtime summary
- Jeremy Corbyn has criticised Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt for refusing to accept that President Trump’s tweets about how four non-white congresswomen should go back their own countries was racist. (See 9.45am.)
- Michael Gove, the environment secretary, has praised Boris Johnson as a “passionately green Tory”. Speaking in Kew Gardens, where he was giving a speech, he gave a warm endorsement to the runaway favourite in the Tory leadership contest who three years ago he declared unfit to be prime minister. Gove, who has not said whether he will be voting for Johnson or Jeremy Hunt, said:
I know Boris has been passionate about the environment for decades.
When I first met Boris Johnson he described himself to me without prompting as a passionately green Tory and in every role he has had he has championed the environment.
As foreign secretary he’s been a powerful and persuasive voice on safeguarding wildlife from exploitation, further protecting our oceans and fighting climate change.
I know they both would be great prime ministers and I want to affirm today that we can trust them both to do the right thing on every critical issue facing us and of course most critically on the environment.
Gove also said he expected the next PM to include an environment bill in the next Queen’s Speech. He said:
Later this year we plan to integrate and elevate our new environmental ambitions into law. It will be the new prime minister who will have the ultimate decision on the content of the environment bill. But the party has collectively agreed it will be the flagship measure of the next Queen’s speech. I’m greatly encouraged that both candidates to be our next prime minister have made clear they will not dilute our environmental ambitions, indeed they would seek to raise them.
- The rightwing philosopher Sir Roger Scruton has received an apology from the government minister who sacked him over comments in a magazine interview. As the Press Association reports, Scruton was dismissed from his role as a housing adviser in April but James Brokenshire, the housing secretary, has said he regretted the way the decision was made. Brokenshire is also expected to meet Scruton in the coming days to see what role he would be prepared to play on the building design agenda in future. In a letter published in the Spectator, Brokenshire apologised for sacking Scruton from his role in the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission.
As you know, I regret that the decision to remove you from your leadership role within the commission was taken in the way that it was. I am sorry - especially as it was based on a clearly partial report of your thoughts ...
If you would be willing, I would like to invite you to meet to discuss [the commission’s] and what part you might be prepared to play in advancing this important agenda which we both care about so much.
A Number 10 spokeswoman said: “The communities secretary has expressed regret over the circumstances of [Scruton’s] dismissal. I believe that they are meeting in the coming days to have a discussion.”
- Oversight of Britain’s railways should be in the hands of one individual or body which is independent of government, according to the head of a major review. As the Press Association reports, former British Airways chief executive Keith Williams, who is leading the government-commissioned Rail Review, said the appointment of a “Fat Controller” type figure would be “key for regaining public trust”. Williams told the BBC the influence of the Department for Transport (DfT) should be restricted to budgets and overall policy rather than day-to-day operations. He added: “Someone needs to be accountable to the public.” This suggests the possible return of a body similar to the Strategic Rail Authority, which existed from 2001 to 2005 and was tasked with raising standards through the awarding of franchises.
There is a real end-of-term feeling in the Commons at the moment. John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, gave Philip Hammond, the chancellor, what was effectively a leaving present in Treasury questions recently - a book of radical walks. Today Greg Clark, the business secretary, gave a model car to his Labour counterpart, Rebecca Long-Bailey. Clark handed over the gift after speaking about changes to the UK automotive industry and new electric vehicle projects.
Hammond and Clark are both expected to be sacked next week, largely because they are both firmly opposed to a no-deal Brexit. Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, the two candidates left in the Tory leadership contest, insist no-deal must remain an option, and their comments about the backstop last night have made it even more probable.
The Labour MP Sarah Champion has told the BBC’s Politics Live (not to be confused with the original) that if necessary she would accept no-deal and that she cannot be sure how she would vote on a no confidence motion, the BBC’s Andrew Alexander reports.
Labour's @SarahChampionMP answers the "awful question": "I want us to leave, the country wants us to leave, and for our democracy we have to leave so therefore if it came to it I would take no deal" #PoliticsLive
— Andrew Alexander (@andrew_alex) July 16, 2019
She also says she doesn't know if she would back a Labour no confidence motion in the government - "ask me closer to the time"
— Andrew Alexander (@andrew_alex) July 16, 2019
UPDATE: Here are the clips.
Labour MP Sarah Champion on #Brexit without a deal
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) July 16, 2019
“If it came to it, I would take no deal, if that meant we could leave, because we have to leave”#politicslive https://t.co/lIzhxIMUfH pic.twitter.com/CrONbiDele
“I don’t know, ask me closer to the time”
— Jo Coburn (@Jo_Coburn) July 16, 2019
I asked Labour MP Sarah Champion if she would back a Labour no-confidence motion in the Conservative government over #Brexit#politicslive https://t.co/fkI5DkiHWA pic.twitter.com/hifinZ3DsP
Updated
This is from my colleague Rowena Mason, who is covering Michael Gove’s speech this morning.
Michael Gove full of lavish praise for Boris Johnson claiming the leadership favourite has been “passionate about the environment for decades” in apparent bid to keep cabinet job (forgetting when BJ denied climate science not so long ago?)
— Rowena Mason (@rowenamason) July 16, 2019
And these are from the Sun’s Matt Dathan.
"Late as it may be, there is still time," warns @michaelgove.
— Matt Dathan (@matt_dathan) July 16, 2019
No - not to save Brexit, but to save the planet. pic.twitter.com/DgLNcekGgK
Michael Gove love-bombs Boris in his Environment speech. As well as saying he'd make a "great" PM & "trusts" him to do the job, he says Boris has been "passionate about the environment for decades" & says the 1st time they met, Boris described himself as a "passionate green Tory"
— Matt Dathan (@matt_dathan) July 16, 2019
From Bloomberg
The British pound falls to the lowest level since 2017 as the market once again reckons with a no-deal Brexit risk https://t.co/gPJxHIx3au pic.twitter.com/Ty2RhXWWU3
— Bloomberg Brexit (@Brexit) July 16, 2019
Pound hits 27-month low against dollar as no-deal Brexit fears grow
The pound has just hit its lowest level against the US dollar in over two years, after Boris Johnson raised fears of a no-deal Brexit with his comments about the Northern Ireland backstop last night (see 9.19am), my colleague Graeme Wearden reports. He has more on his business live blog.
The People’s Vote campaign has put out research showing that, if the pound were to fall to parity with the dollar in the event of a no-deal Brexit (a standard assumption, although of course no one can predict for certain what would happen), the cost of an average British holiday would rise by £225.
These are from Sky’s Lewis Goodall.
Chatting to Brussels source this am; says the chatter there is around Johnson "obviating" the backstop with an unlimited extension to the transition period, until such time as tech solutions can be found for border. With "overhauled PD" backstop never needs to come into force...
— Lewis Goodall (@lewis_goodall) July 16, 2019
Would involve "keyhole surgery" on WA. Would satisfy DUP that NI not being treated any differently from GB, potentially some Lab votes worried about cliffedge. But how can ERG sign up to a potentially indefinite closer relationship than backstop would entail?
— Lewis Goodall (@lewis_goodall) July 16, 2019
Simon Hoare, the Conservative MP who chairs the Commons Northern Ireland affairs committee, has described the decision by both Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt to rule out a Brexit deal involving the backstop as “a very, very dangerous step”, PoliticsHome reports. Hoare told Sky News that he hoped whoever won the leadership contest would reconsider once it was over. He said allowing a hard border to return in Ireland was “beyond contemplation”.
This is from the Tory Brexiter Steve Baker, who has expressed his opposition to President Trump’s go back home tweets by celebrating a pro-immigration speech given by Ronald Reagan.
If you have a few minutes, the speech is well worth watching. It’s compelling.
This is America at her greatest.
— Steve Baker MP (@SteveBakerHW) July 16, 2019
This is the America we want.
This is the America we miss, @realDonaldTrump. pic.twitter.com/4OGxSeOp5T
Pact with Brexit party would mark 'end of Conservative party as we know it', says Grieve
How will the Brexit crisis get resolved? The People’s Vote campaign has published a report (pdf) this morning looking at six possible outcomes, all of which it describes as dead ends. The other two it lists are a no-deal Brexit, which it describes as the cliff edge, and a second referendum, which is presents as the solution.
Speaking at the launch Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, said that Boris Johnson’s decision last night to rule out any deal including a Northern Ireland backstop meant the Brexit options were being radicalised. Grieve explained:
When challenged and confronted [Johnson] radicalised even further and excluded any possibility of trying to negotiate some way out of the backstop at all. It had to go in its totality.
The consequence of that is make it the choices starker and starker. It makes them starker for me as well, let’s be absolutely clear about this.
I’ve always been willing as a politician to listen to people willing to come up with credible compromises but what I’ve found so staggering about the Conservative leadership [contest] is it has been played to a tune of growing extremism.
In a statement issued in the People’s Vote’s press notice, Grieve also said that an electoral alliance with the Brexit party would mark “the end of the Conservative party as we know it”. He said:
Some talk about an alliance in such an election with Nigel Farage’s Brexit party as if it could deliver a landslide but, even if that was the case, it would not be for a party that Churchill, Macmillan, Thatcher or Major would recognise. It would be a victory for a virulent form of populism that is a threat to our most cherished values and our democracy. It would be the end of the Conservative party as we know it.
Updated
The far-right group Britain First has been fined £44,200 by the Electoral Commission for failing to comply with financial rules. As the Press Association reports, Britain First was fined by the watchdog for multiple offences committed while it was a registered political party in the period up to November 2017. Although it has since de-registered, Britain First remains responsible for its actions during that period, the commission said.
David Henig, the trade specialist and former civil servant who now runs the UK Trade Policy Project, has posted a good thread on Twitter about the Brexit stance of Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt. It starts here.
Rather than learning from the failures of the Theresa May's Brexit negotiation it seems that both candidates are intent on repeating them, only this time shouting rather than talking, as the joke about the English abroad goes.
— David Henig (@DavidHenigUK) July 16, 2019
Let's explain again (thread) all of those mistakes https://t.co/Nh4QerOSQX
Von der Leyen confirms she would back further Brexit delay 'for a good reason'
Tonight MEPs will vote on whether or not to approve Ursula von der Leyen as the new president of the European commission. In her speech at the start of the debate, Von der Leyen restated her willingness to agree to another article 50 extension provided the UK supplies “a good reason”. She said:
We cannot talk about Europe without talking about our friends from the UK.
For the very first time, in 2016 a member state decided to leave the EU.
This is a serious decision, we regret it but we respect it.
Since then, together with the current government of the UK, the EU has worked hard to organise the orderly departure of the UK.
Von der Leyen said the withdrawal agreement “provides certainty where Brexit created uncertainty”. She went on:
However, I stand ready for a further extension of the withdrawal date should more time be required for a good reason.
Speaking in the debate, the Brexit party leader and MEP Nigel Farage said the European parliament had been “humbled and humiliated” by the process which led to Von der Leyen being nominated by the European council instead of the candidates backed by the political groups in the parliament. Claiming that she was a “fanatic for building a European army”, he went on:
In some ways I’m really rather pleased, because you have just made Brexit a lot more popular in the UK, thank God we are leaving.
Von der Leyen hit back saying it was important to continue to work with the British “but I think, Mr Farage, we can probably do without what you have got to say here”.
Updated
Corbyn 'not cut out' to be leader, says leading Labour peer
Jeremy Corbyn is “not cut out” to be Labour leader, the Labour peer Toby Harris told the Today programme this morning. Harris, who chairs the Labour peers group, was speaking about the offer by Labour peers to help Corbyn address the antisemitism problem facing the party. Corbyn himself had “huge responsibility” for this, Harris said. He explained:
There’s no question that in any organisation the moral tone that it sets, the style that it operates in is set from the top – that’s what leadership is all about.
So obviously Jeremy Corbyn has got a huge responsibility in this. He could have reined back some of his more idiotic supporters and stopped them doing some of the things they are doing – the intimidation of members, the extraordinary discriminatory remark; he could have reined back the people in his office who have been apparently interfering in cases of discipline within the party.
The concern that I have – and I have known Jeremy Corbyn for 47 years – is that he is not cut out to be a party leader.
He is a brilliant campaigner and yet I suspect the details, the managerial responsibilities, the day-to-day management of the way in which the party operates are not necessarily his skills.
Updated
Corbyn criticises Johnson and Hunt for refusing to admit Trump's 'go back' comment was racist
Jeremy Corbyn has criticised the two Tory leadership candidates, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, for their refusal to describe President Trump’s go back home tweets to four congresswomen as racist in the Sun/talkRadio debate last night.
Telling four Congresswomen of colour to “go back” is racist. But the Tory leadership candidates can’t bring themselves to say so.
— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) July 16, 2019
We should stand up to Donald Trump, not pander to him for a sweetheart trade deal which would put our NHS at risk.
Here is our story about what Johnson and Hunt did say about Trump.
Unemployment fell by 51,000 to 1.29m in the three months to May, the Office for National Statistics has said. And average earnings increased by 3.4% compared with 3.2% in the previous month.
Boris Johnson will bring down government if he goes for no-deal Brexit, says Dominic Grieve
At the Sun/talkRadio Tory leadership debate last night, both Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt declared that the Northern Ireland backstop was “dead” and that, even if the EU were to agree to put a time limit on how long it would last, it would still be unacceptable. This is a significant development that means the next Tory leader will go into talks with the EU tied to a position more extreme than what was being advocated by hardish Brexiters only about six months ago (eg Dominic Raab, who would have stayed in cabinet if the backstop had been time-limited). In a blog responding to the debate, ITV’s political editor Robert Peston said EU leaders would see this as the moment when “the Tory party became the no-deal party”.
This morning Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general and one of the MPs doing most to find a way of allowing parliament to block no-deal, said the next Tory leader (almost certainly Johnson) would bring down his government if he tried to push for no-deal. Speaking on the Today programme, he also said the policy shift announced last night was “significant”. Here are the main points.
- Grieve warned that Johnson would bring down his own government if he tried to implement a no-deal Brexit. He said:
As I’ve said on many occasions in the house over the last 12 months, if a government persists in trying to carry out a no-deal Brexit, I think that administration is going to fall.
- Grieve said the appointment of a new cabinet, with ministers opposed to no-deal almost certainly being demoted to the back benches, would increase the number of Tory MPs willing to vote against no-deal. This could “make a difference” to voting numbers in the Commons, he said.
I think that by the end of next week there are going to be more Conservatives who have indicated very clearly that no-deal is unacceptable and many of them will no longer be on the front bench.
There were many MPs who thought a no-deal Brexit would be “catastrophic” for Britain, he said.
- He said that blocking a no-deal Brexit “technically ... may be quite difficult” for the Commons. That was why an attempt to go for no-deal could lead to a no confidence motion instead, he argued.
- He said MPs were increasingly realising that a second referendum might be the best solution. Grieve himself backs a second referendum. He told the programme:
Quite a lot of my colleagues know at the end of the day that it’s going to be a choice between a referendum or a general election, and a general election moreover which may well not deliver any conclusive outcome and help us out of the crisis.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: The Conservative MP Dominic Grieve and Labour MP Margaret Beckett speak at the launch of a People’s Vote report looking at possible Brexit outcomes.
9.30am: Theresa May chairs her penultimate cabinet.
9.30am: Unemployment figures are published.
10am: Peter Clarke, the chief inspector of prisons, and Robert Buckland, the justice minister, give evidence to the Commons justice committee.
11.30am: Michael Gove, the environment secretary, gives a speech on global warming.
2.45am: Sir Ivan Rogers, the former ambassador to the EU, gives evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee about Brexit and about the leaking of classified information.
As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to publish a summary at lunchtime and then another when I finish at about 5pm.
You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe roundup of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is 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 questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.
Updated
@Andrew - a quick question* if I may.
I'm curious about the idea that we could crash out of the EU during a 6 week GE period, especially if Parliament has somehow ruled 'no deal' out.
If Parliament has managed to legislate against no deal, would that prevent Parliament from agreeing to a GE if 1/11 fell within the campaign period? Or would Johnson be forced, by law, to request an extension? If the EU refused an extension (unlikely, but could Johnson then attempt to sabotage that request in order force a no deal scenario?).
Could the EU act unilaterally in this situation?
*turned out to be not so quick, sorry!