Afternoon summary
- Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, has played down the revelation that the permanent secretary at the Department for Transport questioned the need for some of the department’s no-deal spending. (See 5.29pm.) Responding to an urgent question on Brexit, Barclay also refused to categorically rule out seeking an extension of article 50; instead, he just said it was the government’s “firm intention” not to do that. (See 6.03pm.) He also refused to rule out a no-deal Brexit. Asked to do so by the Labour MP Hilary Benn, Barclay said MPs could not just oppose a no-deal Brexit without agreeing an alternative. He said:
The core point with ruling out no deal is that the House has to be for something rather than simply to agree what it is against. And, if you look at the signatories on the letter suggesting that no deal should be ruled out, what is clear is the whole spectrum of issues that those members support. The House has to decide what it is for, not simply what it is against.
UPDATE: Here is the response from the Department for Transport.
DFT explains what happened. This was about the legality of spending not whether it was value for money. Odd perhaps that @SteveBarclay did not explain pic.twitter.com/25aOWbXIEW
— Robert Peston (@Peston) January 7, 2019
- Jeremy Corbyn has described the government’s no-deal Brexit planning as “Project Fear” and “hot air”. They were a waste of money because there was no support in parliament for a no-deal Brexit, he told MPs. (See 4.34pm.)
- Health leaders have been accused of delaying a flagship target to reduce the number of people with learning disabilities “locked away in mental health hospitals”. As the Press Association reports, NHS England set out plans in 2015 to close 35 to 50% of inpatient beds for people with learning difficulties and autism and provide alternative care in the community by March 2019. But its long-term plan for the NHS, published on Monday, said it was going to reduce inpatient provision by half by 2023-24.
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
Jonathan Lis, the deputy director of the pro-EU thinktank British Influence, thinks the government will have to request an extension of article 50.
This is why we will extend Article 50, no matter what happens. Too much needs to happen, not enough will go to plan. Even if May gets her deal approved next week (which she won’t), we are not, under any circumstances, leaving the EU on 29 March. https://t.co/B2AmLzTtER
— Jonathan Lis (@jonlis1) January 7, 2019
Barclay says it is government's 'firm intention not to extend article 50'
It is also worth noting that, during the Brexit UQ, Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, did not categorically rule out extending article 50. Responding to the SNP leader at Westminster, Ian Blackford, Barclay said:
It is not a unilateral decision as to whether we extend article 50. That would require the consent of the other 27 member states. That would also raise all sorts of practical issues, not least the timing of the European parliamentary elections at the end of May. It is this government’s firm intention not to extend article 50 and to leave the European Union as the prime minister has set out.
Later the Tory MP Julian Lewis said Theresa May has told MPs on 74 occasions that the UK will leave the EU on 29 March. He asked Barclay to confirm that “under no circumstances” would that date be postponed. In reply, Barclay just endorsed what May has already said.
There does seem to be a slight softening in the government’s stance on this. In the past Theresa May was happy to say that the UK would be leaving the EU on 29 March this year come what may. But she did not repeat that deadline in her New Year’s message, and in her Andrew Marr interview yesterday (pdf), although she gave a firm no when asked if she would be willing to extend article 50, she gave a curious answer when asked right at the end if she was “absolutely sure” that the UK would leave at the end of March. She replied:
I’ve been clear that we leave the European Union on the 29th March this year.
Note the use of the perfect tense. She has been clear in the past. But would she need to put it quite like that if she was still 100% clear about it now?
Earlier a caption of a picture showing Chris Patten wrongly said he was speaking at a Vote Leave event. (See 3.29pm.) It was, of course, a People’s Vote event. Sorry.
Transport department permanent secretary questioned need for no-deal spending, MPs told
The Brexit UQ is now over, but before it finished Labour’s Helen Goodman came out with an interesting revelation. She told MPs that the permanent secretary at the Department for Transport demanded a written ministerial instruction before approving some no-deal Brexit spending. This is a relatively unusual procedure; it is what happens when civil servants doubt whether an item of spending can be justified, and as a result insist on ministers taking responsibility in writing. (“Arse covering”, as they would call in a normal workplace, but the civil service being the civil service, there’s a whole protocol for this, framed in more refined language.)
Goodman told MPs:
When a permanent secretary is not happy about being asked to spend money, they seek a written ministerial instruction to make it proper. I have today had, in writing from the Department for Transport, confirmation that the permanent secretary at the Department for Transport sought such a ministerial direction. Doesn’t this prove that no deal is a bluff?
In response, Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, did not challenge what was saying. Instead he said civil servants used to require ministerial directions when Labour was in power too.
(I’m sorry I have not been posting as regularly as normal today. I’ve had a few technical problems. But everything seems to be working fine now.)
Corbyn claims no-deal planning amounts to 'Project Fear'
Here is one of the most striking quotes from Jeremy Corbyn’s response to Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary. Corbyn said:
[Theresa May] is not here because she is busy promoting “Project Fear”. It’s all hot air.
“Project Fear” is the term used by the SNP to attack the no campaign during the Scottish referendum campaign. The SNP used it to delegitimise claims about the supposed dire economic effects of independence, and the term was widely adopted because it seemed a fair assessment of what was a largely negative campaign (although a negative campaign that worked - the no camp won decisively.)
Since 2016 Brexiters have been using the same term to discredit claims made about the negative consequences of Brexit. It was striking to hear Corbyn use the term because for a moment it made him sound like Jacob Rees-Mogg, as some journalists have highlighted.
From the Mail on Sunday’s Dan Hodges
So Jeremy Corbyn is now echoing Farage, the ERG and the other hard-core Brexiteers by describing No Deal Brexit planning as "Project Fear". Why doesn't he just put £350 Million for the NHS on the side of his own bus, and be done with it.
— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) January 7, 2019
From PoliticsHome’s Kevin Schofield
Jeremy Corbyn describing Theresa May’s no-deal warnings as “project fear” is quite something, isn’t it?
— Kevin Schofield (@PolhomeEditor) January 7, 2019
But Tom Hamilton, a former Labour party staffer (although not a Corbynite), has what strikes me as a more convincing account of what Corbyn was saying.
If I’ve understood correctly, when Jeremy Corbyn talks about no deal preparations as “project fear” he means no deal isn’t going to be allowed to happen because it’s so obviously bad, and when Brexiteers use the term they mean no deal will be fine and is nothing to worry about.
— Tom Hamilton (@thhamilton) January 7, 2019
This is backed up by something Corbyn said a bit later in his response to Barclay. He said:
The government is trying to run down the clock in an attempt to blackmail this House, and the country, into supporting a botched deal. [May] has refused to work with the majority in the last few months in a desperate attempt to spark life into what is actually a Frankenstein’s monster of a deal. We are now told, if we don’t support it, the government is prepared to push our whole economy off a cliff edge. And, to prove this, no-deal preparations are underway ...
Even today, we see the farce of lorries being lined up to stage a fake traffic jam in Kent to pretend to the EU that the government is ready for a no deal ...
The government is fooling nobody. These shambolic preparations are too little, too late. The reality is there is no majority in this House to support no deal. Why won’t the government face up to this truth and stop wasting our time and our money?
Updated
Labour’s Chris Leslie asks Barclay to guarantee that the vote will take place next week. He says Barclay ducked this question earlier. He asks again: can Barclay guarantee the vote will take place next week?
Barclay replies: “Yes.”
Updated
Anne Main, a Conservative, asks if Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, will come to the Commons to give legal advice on the significance of any new assurances offered by the EU.
Barclay says it is not normal for governments to publish their legal advice. But he says it is up to the Commons to decide its own business.
Barclay says MPs cannot just oppose no-deal Brexit without agreeing alternative
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, asks Barclay to rule out a no-deal Brexit.
Barclay says it is not enough to MPs to be against something. They have to decide what they want. Referring to the letter, signed by more than 200 MPs, urging the government to rule out a no-deal Brexit, he says those MPs favour a variety of alternative options.
- Barclay says MPs cannot just oppose a no-deal Brexit without agreeing an alternative.
Sir John Redwood, the Tory Brexiter, says it is not just the backstop that makes the withdrawal agreement unacceptable. He says it would involve paying billions to the EU.
Barclay says the UK would need the unanimous agreement of the EU 27 to extend article 50. It is not the government’s intention to ask for that, he says.
Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader at Westminster, urges Labour to get off the fence and oppose Brexit. And, echoing Nicola Sturgeon earlier (see 1.22pm), he says Brexit has strengthened the case for Scottish independence.
Ken Clarke, the Conservative pro-European, urges the government to delay Brexit.
Barclay says the UK would not be able to revoke article 50 purely as a delaying tactic. There is a difference between extending article 50 and revoking it, he says. He says the European court of justice ruling suggested that, if the UK wants to revoke article 50, that should be a final decision.
Barclay is responding to Corbyn.
He says Corbyn’s statement was devoid of content. And Labour’s Brexit policy is contradictory, he says.
He says Labour has to clarify whether it accepts the EU referendum result, as Corbyn says, or whether it wants a second referendum so it can overturn it, as Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, suggests.
UPDATE:
Corbyn shouts at Stephen Barclay twice "why don't you answer the question" after the Brexit secretary devotes his reply to criticising Labour without offering any update on the progress of the negotiations
— Dan Sabbagh (@dansabbagh) January 7, 2019
Updated
Here is CityAM’s Owen Bennett on Corbyn’s statement.
I can't work out if Corbyn is annoyed that not enough No Deal preparation has taken place, or too much has.
— Owen Bennett (@owenjbennett) January 7, 2019
Corbyn is responding to Barclay now.
He says, with less than three months to go, “there can be no more hiding and no more running away”.
This issue should not be determined by machinations with the Conservative party, he says.
He says delaying the vote was “shameful”.
May should be here herself to answer questions, he says.
He says May is not here because she is promoting “Project Fear”. He goes on: “It’s all hot air.”
He says this morning, on the Today programme, the Brexit minister Kwasi Kwarteng admitted he did not know what assurances May had been offered by EU leaders.
He asks Barclay to say when the vote will be held.
The government is threatening to push the whole economy over a cliff edge in the event of a no deal, he says.
He says Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, has a PhD in incompetence. And today his department has staged a traffic jam. It is a stunt, he says.
He says Labour will hold the government to account.
Updated
Jeremy Corbyn asks his UQ. (See 3.36pm.)
Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, is resonding. He says Theresa May is not responding because today she launched the long-term NHS plan.
He says on Wednesday MPs will debate a business motion relating to the Brexit debate. The debate will then run on Wednesday and Thursday, and on Friday if MPs vote for the business motion.
He says it was clear from the three days of debate held in December that the government’s motion would not passed.
He says at their summit in December EU leaders went further than before in giving assurances that the backstop would be temporary.
He says May has had further conversations with EU leaders on this over the holiday period.
The government will set out what assurances have been received before the debate starts on Wednesday, he says.
Corbyn's urgent question on Brexit and possible assurances from EU
Jeremy Corbyn is about to ask his Brexit urgent question (UQ). He has asked Theresa May to make a statement “on progress made in achieving legal changes to the EU withdrawal agreement and the timetable in this House for the meaningful vote”, but May will not be replying. It will be Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, instead.
Tory pro-European Anna Soubry criticises police for 'doing nothing' to stop protesters abusing her
The pro-Remain Conservative MP Anna Soubry has accused the police of “doing nothing” to prevent pro-Brexit protesters repeatedly accused her of being a Nazi during a broadcast interview.
The unseen protesters could be heard repeatedly chanting “Soubry is a Nazi” during the interview on BBC News. Two police officer in the background appeared not to react to the chants.
Soubry broke off the interview to say “I do object to being called a Nazi ... I just think this is astonishing.”
As protesters continued to chant the abuse she added: “This is what has happened to our country”.
Later in a tweet about the incident she criticised the lack of police response. She wrote:
Apparently MPs & politicians are meant to accept it as part of the democratic process. I fail to see why journalists and technicians should be subjected to the same abuse & intimidation as the police stand by and do nothing. They tried to stop me getting into Parliament. https://t.co/mh4SWbiGfx
— Anna Soubry MP (@Anna_Soubry) January 7, 2019
The Metropolitan Police has been contacted, but has not yet responded to the incident or Soubry’s comments.
Thatcher would have been 'horrified' by May's Brexit deal, says Chris Patten
Chris Patten, who first joined the cabinet when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister, has said that she would be “horrified” by Theresa May’s Brexit deal. Speaking to the Press Association about his speech earlier today, backing a second referendum on Brexit, the former Tory chairman said Thatcher would have opposed May’s Brexit deal because it gives too much power to the remaining 27 EU states. He said:
I think Margaret Thatcher would have been horrified at the idea that we should negotiate things that are really going to matter to our future in circumstances in which 27 EU member states each have a right to veto what we want to do.
Because from the end of March onwards, if we go out on Mrs May’s terms every member state has a veto on what we want.
At the moment, things have to be decided by a qualified majority, but after the end of March it’s a vote for everybody.
Patten was referring to the fact that, under May’s proposals, the UK would leave the EU on 29 March and then negotiate a future trade deal. That deal will have to be approved unanimously by the remaining EU states.
(By contrast, the EU only needed to agree the withdrawal agreement by a “super” qualified majority - 72% of states, comprising at least 65% of the population of those states in total - although in practice the withdrawal deal was agreed unanimously.)
Updated
My colleague Peter Walker has been watching work and pensions questions in the Commons. He has posted these on Twitter.
At work and pensions questions, Amber Rudd is keen to play down how much of a slowdown she is making to universal credit migration. Vote on this will still happen – she won't say when – and in the interim, the test of 10,000 people being migrated to UC will "inform" the process.
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) January 7, 2019
In the meantime, ultra-loyal Tory MP and party vice-chair Helen Whately - she would probably remain glass-half-full if Theresa May unilaterally decided to invade Russia – says the UC rollout in her constituency is "going well" and is welcomed by benefits staff.
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) January 7, 2019
Lunchtime summary
- Theresa May is likely to be offered an “exchange of letters” confirming the EU’s intention to conclude trade talks with the UK by 2021, as Brussels seeks to help the prime minister in the run-up to next week’s Commons vote on her deal. As my colleagues Daniel Boffey and Dan Sabbagh report, the correspondence under discussion would flesh out language already included in the withdrawal agreement but it is hoped its clarity could persuade some MPs of the EU’s intention to avoid triggering the Irish backstop. Should talks on a sufficiently comprehensive and deep future trade deal be agreed and ratified by the the start of 2021, it is hoped there would be no need for the whole of the UK to fall into the customs union envisaged by that ‘all-weather’ solution for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland. On a visit to a hospital in Liverpool, May said this about the assurances that she hopes to offer MPs before the vote on her Brexit deal, planned for Tuesday next week. She said:
In the coming days, what we will set out is not just about the EU but also about what we can do domestically.
So we will be setting out measures which will be specific to Northern Ireland, we will be setting out proposals for a greater role for Parliament as we move into the next stage of the negotiation and we are continuing to work on further assurances on further undertakings from the European Union in relation to the concern that has been expressed by parliamentarians.
At the Number 10 lobby briefing the prime minister’s spokesman said further details of the debate would be revealed in due course. It is not yet clear whether MPs will resume the debate they were having in December, or whether they will start a new debate on a revised motion; whether or not May will open it on Wednesday; and whether or not MPs will sit on Friday.
- Jeremy Corbyn has been granted a Commons urgent question about the Brexit deal. (See 12.23pm.) He wants May to reply in person, but it has not yet been confirmed whether she will, or whether she will send another minister to reply on her behalf.
- May is to chair a powerful new Cabinet committee overseeing the government’s Brexit preparations, Downing Street has said. As the Press Association reports, the EU exit and trade (preparedness) committee will replace the existing EU XT committee while taking on the Brexit functions of the national security council under Operation Yellowhammer. It will also take over the work of the inter-ministerial groups (IMGs) on EU exit and borders, the prime minister’s official spokesman said. He told the lobby briefing:
The intention is to streamline the process to oversee the delivery of plans for an orderly exit from the EU. The IMGs were not previously decision-making bodies so this brings this together in an orderly and coherent manner.
The 21-member committee will include secretaries of state for the Whitehall departments directly involved in Brexit planning as well as the chief whip Julian Smith and the attorney general Geoffrey Cox. Its remit will include contingency planning for a no-deal Brexit, engagement with Brussels and EU member states on no-deal readiness and the provision of “clear direction and co-ordination across HMG”.
- May has been criticised for saying that Brexit will help to pay for the planned extra £20.5bn being allocated to the NHS. In her speech at the Alder Hey hospital in Liverpool, she said:
Over the next five years – the NHS England budget will increase by £20.5bn in real terms compared to today. This commitment is possible because of our strong public finances, and because as we leave the EU and take back control of our money, we will no longer be sending vast annual sums to Brussels.
This claim is contentious because, even though Brexit will generate a direct saving for the government, because it will not have to pay contributions to the EU, allowing money to go to the NHS instead, most economists think this will not compensate for the indirect losses that Brexit will generate, because tax revenues will be lower. As a recent Commons library briefing paper (pdf) puts it:
In summary, the overall net impact on the public finances from Brexit will likely be determined by the wider impact on the economy rather than the direct savings from EU budget contributions.
But May refused to accept this point when challenged at her Q&A. When the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg questioned the validity of her claim, May replied:
On that claim it’s very simple: we currently spend significant sums of money to the EU every year, in future that money will be available for us to spend on our priorities and clearly, as I have set out, the NHS is our key spending priority.
The People’s Vote campaign said the claim that Brexit would help the NHS was a fib. (See 12.37pm.)
- Downing Street has dismissed Boris Johnson’s claim that a no-deal Brexit is “closest to what people actually voted for” in 2016. (See 9.24am.) Asked about this, the prime minister’s spokesman said that Johnson himself said that the UK should have relationship with the EU “based on trade and cooperation” during the referendum campaign.
Updated
Two of the main anti-Brexit groups have put out press notices claiming there was something inappropriate about Theresa May defending her Brexit plans on a visit to Alder Hey children’s hospital in Liverpool this morning.
Best for Britain says 13% of the hospital’s doctors are EU nationals (or non-British EU nationals, to be precise). It has released this comment from the Labour MP Alison McGovern.
As May parades her NHS 10-year plan at Alder Hey hospital, our health service is facing the greatest threat to its existence. World-class children’s hospitals like Alder Hey are held together by the dedication and expertise of EU staff, who we cannot afford to lose due to Brexit.
And the People’s Vote campaign says the hospital was built with £56m in funding from the European Investment Bank. It released this comment from the Labour MP Luciana Berger.
It is beyond parody that the prime minister has the audacity to claim that Brexit benefits our NHS [see 12.13pm], standing in a hospital that was built using over £50m of financing available to the UK because of our EU membership.
Access to this funding is vital. NHS trusts across the country rely on European investment in order to build the health facilities we need. The government willingly cutting off access to this – especially with absolutely no plan for how to replicate it – amounts to a dereliction of duty.
This is further proof that Brexit means less money for our NHS, not more. The fibs people were told during the referendum in 2016 are proven wrong every day. This is why we need a People’s Vote.
Updated
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has said that Brexit has “materially strengthened” the case for Scottish independence. Speaking on the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland, she said:
Everything that has happened over the past couple of years, from Scotland facing exit from the EU against our will to every reasonable attempt at compromise to protect Scotland’s interests by the Scottish government being spurned, to the powers of the Scottish parliament being eroded, to the UK government even taking the Scottish government to court, all of that has strengthened and reinforced the case for Scotland to be independent, because these are not just academic arguments, all of this will have a material impact on Scotland’s economy and well-being for decades to come ...
The case for independence is materially strengthened from an already strong base in 2014 ...
We were told in 2014 that it was voting for independence that would put in peril our membership of the European Union. Because we didn’t vote for independence, we now not just find ourselves facing exit, the voice and the interests of Scotland are being completely ignored and sidelined.
At a briefing in Brussels earlier Margaritis Schinas, the spokesman for the European commission, said Theresa May will speak again with European commission president Jean-Claude Juncker later this week. He said the pair had a “friendly conversation” by telephone on Friday and “will be talking again this week”.
But Schinas said that there are no negotiation meetings scheduled this week because the negotiations are over. He explained:
There is no negotiation because everything on the table has been established as approved, established, achieved.
The priority now is to await events, monitor what is happening [with] the ratification procedure on the UK side and no, there will not be any meeting between the commission and our negotiator teams.
Schinas went on to say that the commission would continue with preparations for a no-deal Brexit and “monitor the need for additional action”.
Earlier I mentioned the “Common Market 2.0” report from Lucy Powell and Robert Halfon, advocating a Norway plus Brexit. (See 10.58am.) But the link I included was not correct. Here is the correct one.
Brompton Bicycle has built up a £1m stockpile of bike parts including wheel rims, spokes and steel, to guarantee supplies for its west London factory in case of a hard Brexit, my colleague Sarah Butler reports.
This is from my colleague Dan Sabbagh.
Downing Street indicating they hope to get *written* political and legal assurances over the Brexit deal from Brussels before the meaningful vote next week. But not before the debate starts Weds.
— Dan Sabbagh (@dansabbagh) January 7, 2019
There are three ministerial statements in the Commons this afternoon.
Three Oral Statements today from 330pm: 1. NHS (@MattHancock /@JonAshworth) 2. Migrant crossings (@sajidjavid / @HackneyAbbott) 3. Drones (Grayling /@AndyMcDonaldMP). Outrageous there is no statement from the PM updating the HoC on progress on legal changes to the Withdrawal Deal
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) January 7, 2019
And before they start, we’ve got two urgent questions.
Two UQs granted for 330pm: 1. @jeremycorbyn to ask @theresa_may to make a statement on progress made in achieving legal changes to the EU Withdrawal Agreement and the timetable in this House for the meaningful vote 1/2 https://t.co/Ak8SAvWb8q
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) January 7, 2019
2. @TulipSiddiq to ask @Jeremy_Hunt to make a statement on the case of Nazanin Zachary Ratcliffe following punitive actions taken against her in Iran.
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) January 7, 2019
Jeremy Corbyn has tabled an urgent question for Theresa May, but that does not mean that May will respond in person. Number 10 can send whoever they want. We are more likely to get David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, or Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, responding for the government.
Asked how she would like to see the NHS become more efficient, May says 30% of patients who are in hospital do not need to be in a hospital. Addressing this would save money, she says.
She also says she was impressed to learn that at Alder Hey they have a chef on every ward. That means patients are fed much more effectively, she says.
The Q&A is now over.
(I’m afraid I missed some of the answers, because the wifi crashed, but the answers were fairly routine.)
May is now taking questions.
Q: [From the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg] There are people protesting outside saying the NHS would suffer if you don’t get a Brexit deal. What evidence is there to suggest that you can get your deal through parliament? And isn’t it misleading to keep claiming that leaving the EU will free up money for the NHS?
May says it is clear that leaving the EU will free up funds for the NHS.
She says there was “further movement” from EU leaders at their December summit.
She has been speaking to them again over the holidays.
She wants to set out in the coming measures relating to Northern Ireland, to parliament and to the EU that could provide more assurance to MPs.
May says the NHS needs to exploit the opportunities offered by new technology.
She says the NHS budget will increase by £20.5bn in real terms, compared with today.
The NHS is the public’s priority. So she has made it her number one spending priority, she says.
She says she asked NHS England to draw up a plan for the future, focused on cutting waste. The five-year funding settlement, and 10-year plan for the NHS, set out a path for the future, she says.
Theresa May's speech and Q&A
Theresa May is speaking now at Alder Hey children’s hospital in Liverpool.
She is promoting the long-term plan for the NHS launched today.
Here is a summary of what is in it, from my colleague Denis Campbell, based on what was briefed about it yesterday.
May to chair new cabinet committee on Brexit planning, including for no deal
I’m just back from the Downing Street lobby briefing. And here is the top line.
- Theresa May is going to chair a new cabinet committee that has been set up to take charge of Brexit planning. It will be called the EU exit and trade (preparedness) committee and it will take over some Brexit planning responsibilities from another cabinet committee and from the national security council. Among other issues, it will cover planning for a no-deal Brexit. Most members of the cabinet will sit on it, and it will meet for the first time later this week.
I will post more from the briefing soon.
Updated
The Conservative MP Robert Halfon and the Labour MP Lucy Powell have published a report (pdf) making the case for what is normally called “Norway plus” - a Brexit that would involve staying in the single market and the customs union. But they call it “common market 2.0”. They say:
The report we are publishing together makes the case for a Brexit that delivers on the result of the 2016 referendum while protecting the economic interests of working people across the UK.
Common market 2.0 offers Theresa May a last chance at a Brexit deal that can command a cross-party majority.
Common market 2.0 is also the only deal that meets Labour’s six tests by delivering on Jeremy Corbyn’s call for a customs union and a strong single market deal.
Common market 2.0 is the only sensible, common sense Brexit deal that can work.
I’m off to the lobby briefing now. I will post again after 11.30am.
Updated
The Labour party is saying that Theresa May should come to the Commons to make a statement to MPs this afternoon about progress in the Brexit talks over Christmas.
The Times reports that the PM is not intending to update the HoC on progress made on achieving legal changes to her Withdrawal deal until Weds. This would mean MPs would have no advanced notice of what they are being asked to start debating or voting upon. She must come today.
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) January 7, 2019
Given that there has not really been very much progress, as May more or less admitted herself in her Andrew Marr interview yesterday (referring to the extra assurances she wants from the EU, she said “and we are still working on this”), Labour is being optimistic.
According to the Times, May is planning to update MPs on Wednesday. That may take the form of her opening the Brexit debate, although that has not yet been confirmed.
With Boris Johnson making the case for a no-deal Brexit (see 9.24am), the pro-Brexit thinktank Global Britain and Labour Leave have published a joint report (pdf) spelling out that they say are “30 truths” about this option. Rather than “no deal”, it should be called “WTO +++”, they say.
The report has been jointly written by Peter Lilley, the Conservative former trade secretary, and Brendan Chilton, general secretary of Labour Leave.
David Henig, the trade expert and former civil servant who now heads the UK Trade Policy Project, has been factchecking the claims. He reckons that only around a quarter are wholly true.
Meanwhile here are the "30 truths about leaving on WTO terms". https://t.co/6xOFIosKV5 I make it that 7 are true, 8 partly true.
— David Henig (@DavidHenigUK) January 7, 2019
Here's the fact checking for claims 1-13... pic.twitter.com/fRRokPrdV7
— David Henig (@DavidHenigUK) January 7, 2019
14-30. Statements about the future are inherently debatable, so you simply can't say "there will be no roaming charges" is a fact. It is a possibility. pic.twitter.com/rYbWTSLyTD
— David Henig (@DavidHenigUK) January 7, 2019
A “tougher and faster” set of waiting-time standards is needed for some patients attending accident and emergency departments, Simon Stevens, the NHS England chief executive, has said. My colleague Sarah Marsh has the full story here.
My colleague Lisa O’Carroll is covering the no-deal Brexit traffic congestion drill at Dover this morning. Here is her story.
And here is one of her tweets.
Lorries now taking up one lane on A256 on way to Dover . This is a fraction of what no deal traffic will look like. 79 lorries out of 6,000 that will be held in Manston Airport in event of no deal pic.twitter.com/b7P1ixWbq8
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) January 7, 2019
The Independent’s parliamentary sketchwriter, Tom Peck, has also been sent out to cover all the drama. His Twitter thread on his assignment is a joy to read. It starts here.
Right. First day back after Christmas in this perfectly normal country and I'm off to Ramsgate to sketch a Potemkin traffic jam up the A299 at dawn.
— Tom Peck (@tompeck) January 7, 2019
Boris Johnson claims no-deal Brexit is 'closest to what people voted for'
Good morning. And happy new year to everyone.
Or maybe not. We’ll see. On the Brexit front, we’re in much the same position that we were before Christmas, with Theresa May insisting that MPs should vote for her deal but all the evidence suggesting that the Commons will reject it by a huge margin.
But we have, this morning, got a firm date for the vote (assuming it does not get postponed for the second time). As the BBC’s Norman Smith reports, government sources are saying it will take place a week tomorrow.
And so it begins (again...). By the by, Govt sources confirm "meaningful" vote on Brexit deal will be on Tuesday Jan 15th. Definitely.
— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) January 7, 2019
And, if anything, opposition to May’s plan in Conservative circles is firming up. There is some evidence of this in the Daily Telegraph this morning, where Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, has used his regular column (paywall) to claim that a no-deal Brexit is “closest to what people actually voted for”.
Time and again the Brexit debate turns into a tribute to the wisdom of the British people – and their instinctive ability to sort fact from nonsense. Over the last few weeks, they have been bombarded with warnings of what could happen to this country in the event of a “no-deal Brexit” – otherwise known as coming out on World Trade terms. Whether prompted by No 10 or not, establishment figures have taken to the airwaves to warn of the perils of rejecting Theresa May’s lamentable Withdrawal Agreement; and we now have a cumulative forecast that is downright apocalyptic ...
For weeks the public have been regaled with this stuff – and yet an astonishing thing has happened: the grimmer the warnings, and the more systematic the efforts to make their flesh creep, the greater has been their indifference and their resolve. Of all the options suggested by pollsters – staying in the EU, coming out on Theresa May’s terms, or coming out on World Trade terms – it is the last, the so-called no-deal option, that is gaining in popularity. In spite of – or perhaps because of – everything they have been told, it is this future that is by some margin preferred by the British public.
What is going on? What is it that gives so many of the electorate the confidence to dismiss these prognostications? The most obvious answer, perhaps, is that this option is closest to what people actually voted for. When 17.4 million chose to leave the EU, they didn’t vote to stay locked in the customs union or the single market. There was no suggestion that we would pay £39 billion for nothing, without even a sniff of a trade deal with Brussels.
Like many of Johnson’s Brexit assertions, this is, even on the most generous of assessments, questionable. Trading with the EU on WTO terms would involve tariffs. But readers will remember Johnson and Vote Leave assuring the country in 2016 that Brexit would never come to that because trade barriers of that kind would be unacceptable to German BMW manufacturers and Italian prosecco producers.
It is also interesting to note that Johnson seems to be giving up on the “SuperCanada” Brexit plan he used to champion. Canada does not get a mention in his article today.
Here is the agenda for the day.
11am: Downing Street lobby briefing.
11.30am: Lord Patten, the former Conservative cabinet minister, and Sam Gyimah, the former universities minister, speak at a People’s Vote event. Patten will declare his support for a second referendum.
Late morning: Theresa May visits a hospital to publicise the government’s new long-term plan for the NHS.
2.30pm: Amber Rudd, the work and pensions secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
3.30pm: Urgent questions and ministerial statements. With MPs back today from their Christmas recess, we are likely to get several of these, on topics like no-deal Brexit planning and migrants crossing the Channel.
As usual, I will also 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 post a summary at lunchtime and another when I wrap up, at around 6pm.
Here is the Politico Europe round-up 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 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 questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply 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
