Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
Politics
Kate Lyons (now); Mattha Busby, Andrew Sparrow, Patrick Greenfield and Martin Farrer (earlier)

Chaotic scenes in the Commons as parliament is suspended – as it happened

We’re going to wrap up the blog now. Thank you to all of you absolute troopers who have stuck with us throughout this wild and prorogued night.

We’ll be back tomorrow as we report on the fallout of the crazy scenes we witnessed tonight. Until then!

‘An act of executive fiat’: Chaotic scenes as UK parliament suspended – video

Updated

Closing summary

  • Parliament has been suspended until 14 October after a day and night of high drama that ended at about 2am.

  • There were chaotic scenes as the prorogation formalities began in the early hours of Tuesday. Speaker of the House, John Bercow, expressed his anger at the suspension of proceedings, saying it was “not a normal prorogation. It is not typical. It is not standard. It’s one of the longest for decades and it represents... an act of executive fiat”.
  • A group of opposition MPs, carrying signs saying “silenced” tried to prevent the Speaker John Bercow from exiting his chair to go to the House of Lords to complete prorogation proceedings. As Conservatives left the chamber with the Speaker to attend the House of Lords, Labour MPs chanted “Shame on you!” at them, while they remained in parliament singing Red Flag, Calon Lân (in Welsh), and Scots Wha Hae.

  • A thunderous Bercow returned to the House of Commons to confirm the prorogation of parliament, but only a handful of Conservative MPs returned, painting a striking visual of empty government and packed opposition benches.
  • Earlier in the day, Boris Johnson once again failed in his attempt to force an early general election after opposition MPs abstained and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said he would not let his party walk into “traps laid by this prime minister”. This was the sixth parliamentary defeat for the prime minister in a week, more defeats than Thatcher, Major, Blair or Brown had in their entire tenures as PM.

  • Despite royal assent being given to legislation requiring a delay to Brexit beyond October 31 unless a divorce deal is approved or parliament agrees to leave the EU without one by 19 October , Johnson insisted he would not ask for another Brexit delay.

  • Speaker John Bercow announced his intention to stand down next month, leading to both tributes and criticism in the House.
  • MPs voted narrowly to demand the government publish all written and electronic contact connected to prorogation and no-deal Brexit planning. While the government agreed it would share “appropriate information with parliament” but argued the “scope of the information requested disproportionate and unprecedented”.
  • The Liberal Democrats announced they are set to officially back revoking article 50 in an attempt to position themselves as the most pro-EU political party, effectively severing the chances of an alliance with Labour at a forthcoming general election.

• This summary was amended on 10 September 2019 because Plaid Cymru MPs sang Calon Lân, not Bread of Heaven as an earlier version said.

Updated

More reaction coming in from MPs to the extraordinary night we’ve just witnessed.

They are all furious and disgusted, though the reason for their anger is pretty much split down party lines, with Conservatives MPs appalled at the opposition MPs who tried to stop John Bercow from leaving his seat in parliament, whereas Labour and other opposition MPs are angry at the proroguing of parliament. Both sides claim their opponents actions show them acting against the will of the people.

Doesn’t this feel like a long time ago now? But it was only about four hours ago that there was this heated exchange between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn about the calling of an election. A sign of just how long and how dramatic they day has been.

Here’s more from Alex Sobel, Labour MP, about what MPs were trying to do during that moment of altercation at the Speaker’s chair during the prorogation proceedings. From what I witnessed, though a few MPs laid hands on John Bercow’s arm and put their bodies between his chair and the floor, no one sat on him.

Conservative MPs have condemned the opposition MPs who were involved in attempting to block the Speaker from leaving the chamber, including Assistant Government Whip Nigel Huddleston and Bob Seely, Conservative MP for the Isle of Wight, who condemned the Speaker for his behaviour today. With Trumpian syntax, Seely wrote:

“Speaker loses plot at the end of parliament. Openly takes sides. Insults colleagues. Very sad.”

Here’s some video of Scottish and Welsh MPs singing in the House as they waited for John Bercow to return from the House of Lords, where the prorogation formalities were taking place.

While Conservative MPs left the House to go with Bercow and witness the suspension of parliament, opposition MPs remained in the Commons in protest at the prorogation. They filled their time with singing and from the feedback of MPs on Twitter, it appears the Welsh MPs, singing Bread of Heaven in Welsh, complete with harmonies, was judged the best of the bunch.

Opposition MPs tried to physically stop the Speaker from going to Lords to prorogue parliament

In case you missed it before, there were extraordinary scenes in the House after Black Rod came to address the Speaker, in which opposition MPs tried to physically stop the Speaker from leaving his chair to go out to the House of Lords to finish the prorogation formalities.

Labour MP Rachael Maskell who was part of the group trying to stop Bercow’s exit from the chamber posted this photograph of the moment as she reassured her followers: “Tonight I did everything I could to stop the Parliament being prorogued.”

Greens MP Caroline Lucas said the move was “echoing the action of members to try to prevent the Speaker proroguing at the request of Charles I”.

Richard Wheeler, PA’s parliamentary editor, calls tonight “arguably the most surreal time I’ve spent in the Commons chamber in six-and-a-half years” as Labour and opposition MPs remained in the chamber as the Speaker and Conservative MPs left to go to the House of Lords to watch the ceremony required for prorogation.

Opposition MPs, holding up signs saying “silenced”, who chanted “Shame on you!” as Conservative MPs left the chamber, started singing – Red Flag, Jerusalem, Flower of Scotland and Bread of Heaven.

Parliament has been suspended until 14 October.

Jeremy Corbyn is now shaking hands with John Bercow and Labour MPs are queued up to shake Bercow’s hand. The Speaker is taking his time with each handshake, giving Ian Blackford a big pat of the back and a rub of the arm. Bercow now hugging John McDonell. This might take a while.

The camera has just panned back and we can see nine Conservative MPs.

The Conservative benches are almost empty, whereas the Labour benches are packed with MPs holding up signs saying “silenced”. These are quite extraordinary scenes.

John Bercow is reading out what happened. He sounds incredibly bored. He is saying that the leader of the House of Lords addressed the group and gave assent to the proroguing of parliament.

John Bercow has returned to the House of Commons, where he was given a huge round of applause by Labour MPs.

“I feel much more at home here,” he says.

The group – including Bercow and Black Rod – are now returning back to the House of Commons where opposition MPs have been singing.

Parliament is prorogued

Lords have addressed the Speaker and ordered that parliament has been prorogued. There was a lot of hat-tipping and now the Speaker, Black Rod and other key MPs have left the Lords.

There are some serious scenes going on right now, as opposition MPs band together in protest at the prorogation by singing.

Opposition MPs were holding up signs in parliament saying “silenced”.

And one of these signs has been left on the Speaker’s chair. Labour MP Clive Lewis has posted a photograph of it alongside a quote suggesting what has happened today equates to “tyranny”.

Bercow was loudly applauded by opposition MPs as he left the chamber. Labour MPs then chanted “shame on you!” to Conservatives as they exited.

Some classic Bercow in that last speech, which he interrupted to address an MP who was heckling him (I missed the original comment), to which Bercow responded:

“I require no response from you Mr Stephenson! You wouldn’t have the foggiest idea where to start in counselling me. I require no response from you, I require no response to you! Get out, man!”

The heckling continues, someone yells: “Anti-deomocratic”.

Someone heckles the Speaker to “do your job for which you’re handsomely paid”. And he has walked out of the parliament, followed by MPs.

MPs are chanting “Shame on you!” as the Conservative benches empty.

Speaker John Bercow calls prorogation 'an act of executive fiat'

The Speaker says he treats Black Rod with respect and he understands that the Lords are doing what “they believe to be right”.

He says he is happy to play he part. But wants to point out: “this is not a standard or normal prorogation” and that it “represents an act of executive fiat”.

Black Rod has entered and is addressing the Speaker.

And we’re back. The door has been ordered to be closed.

Parliament was meant to be back five minutes ago, but is still not back. Maybe someone lost their ermine robe.

A reminder that progroguing parliament does not just have implications for Brexit.

Parliament will not sit again until 15 October and a host of bills will not be heard because of the break, including, as Jon Featonby from the British Red Cross points out, a bill about reuniting refugees in the UK with their family members.

We are about two minutes away from parliament being prorogued. So, what is actually going to happen? My colleagues Martin Belam and Jessica Elgot have written this helpful guide including this information about the ceremony that is about to take place:

You cannot do anything in Westminster without a bit of pomp and circumstance. A ceremony of prorogation involves a message from the Queen being read in the House of Lords, and then Black Rod summoning MPs from the Commons to the Lords. A list of all the bills passed by the parliament is read, followed by a speech on behalf of the Queen announcing what has been achieved by the government before MPs are sent home. Given what is on the order paper in parliament on Monday, this is likely to happen very late this evening.

Good evening/early hours of the morning everyone. This is Kate Lyons taking over from Mattha Busby.

Parliament has been suspended for 10 minutes to prepare for the prorogation formalities. Or as David Linden (SNP MP) put it “so folk can get their ermine robes and funny hats on”.

Updated

Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville Roberts says all the checks and balances of parlimentary democracy have been “deliberately stormed”.

When the government teeters between avoiding and evading the law, this is neither normal nor honourable. We desperately need a new politics of citizens conventions in every nation, of truth and conciliation in an informed referendum, with article 50 revoked if necessary for this to happen.

The Green Party’s Caroline Lucas says that events tonight have clearly shown that the political system is broken.

It is wrong that a prime minister can suspend parliament as a mere inconvenience simply to avoid scrutiny. It is wrong that he can cynically try to use the proposals for a general election as a way of getting us to crash out of the EU while we’re in the middle of a general election campaign. We can no longer continue with an uncodified constitution that depends on people playing by the rules when we have a feral government.

Updated

Liberal Democrat MP Sir Ed Davey says his party is offering the prime minister a way out: “Put it to the people in a People’s Vote”.

The SNP’s Ian Blackford says Johnson has lost every vote in the House of Commons since he became prime minister and predicted that he will be “swept from government” in the next election.

The party’s leader in Westminster declares he is looking forward to Scotland securing independence “away from the clutches of a Tory Brexit Britain and an isolationist Britain taking us away from our partners and friends in the European Union”.

Updated

Government fails in attempt to hold early election

Amid mass abstentions, 293 MPs vote for the prime minister’s motion, while 46 vote against it. The course of action required the support of two-thirds of MPs.

“The majority does not satisfy the requirements of the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act,” the Speaker, John Bercow, confirms.

“I earlier urged the house to trust the people but once again, the opposition think they know better,” says Boris Johnson, after his second attempt to trigger an early general election fails.

“They want the British prime minister to go to a vital negotiation without the power to walk away. They want to delay Brexit yet again, without further reference to those who voted for it … And so now the house will move to adjourn and resume the state opening and the Queen’s speech on October 14, and I hope the opposition will use that time to reflect. Meanwhile, this government will press on with negotiating a deal.”

Responding, Jeremy Corbyn says: “The one thing the prime minister didn’t say was that he was going to obey the law of this country. He did not say, acknowledge or accept three votes that have taken place in this parliament, and under his request, the House is now due – apparently this evening – to be prorogued for one of the longest prorogations in history, simply in order to avoid any questioning of what he is doing or not doing … This government is a disgrace.”

Updated

Independent MP Ivan Lewis says parliament’s handling of Brexit has reduced the UK to a “laughing stock around the world” and warns of the economic consequences of the further insecurity – urging Brexit to be delivered.

“Whatever the deal is put to this house, there are many, many people who will vote against it because they want to thwart the terms of the referendum result,” he says. “It is many of the so-called progressives in this house who are fuelling rightwing extremism by showing contempt for the result. One can’t be a selective democrat.”

Tory MP Tom Tugenghat says the only answer to solving the current impasse is a general election.

Shortly after, John Bercow calls for a division.

Updated

Tory MP Kevin Hollinrake attacks Corbyn for “campaigning for decades to leave the EU on any terms possible” and criticises Labour MPs for opposing Theresa May’s “sensible deal” for the purposes of “party politics”.

He says it is reasonable for people to expect the UK to leave the EU with a deal, but calls for the people to have a vote to decide the best way forward.

Updated

In response, Tory MP Andrew Selous says parliament is very good at saying no, but “bereft of ideas to come up with anything better” and calls on the result of the referendum to be respected by a new parliament that will “actually vote for something for a change”.

Labour MP Sir George Howarth then asks why the prime minister is putting his own ambitions above the national interest. “Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Well, the hour has come, but certainly not the man,” he says.

Updated

Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson commends Amber Rudd’s brave decision in resigning from the cabinet – in what could be interpreted as the extension of an olive branch to the former work and pensions secretary.

She goes on to tell Boris Johnson that people across the UK are afraid of a no-deal Brexit.

Labour & Co-operative MP Geraint Davies says that rather than spend millions on propaganda, the government should disclose Yellowhammer and use the money to help educate people about the horrors of the report.

Questioned about her party’s earlier announcement, Swinson says: “If people really want an end to this Brexit mire, the way to do that is to stop Brexit … A Liberal Democrat government would revoke article 50.”

She says elections should not be held at moments of national crisis.

Although I believe that a People’s Vote is the best way to resolve this, I say to the prime minister, he can have his general election as soon as he secures an extension, because otherwise we risk the scenario where there is a general election where we crash out of the European Union either during or in the immediate aftermath of such an election, and with parliament not sitting at those crucial moments, it would be the height of irresponsibility to dissolve parliament at that time.

Updated

Former Foreign Office minister Sir Alan Duncan says the government has been “trammelled into a Kafkaesque trap” by the Fixed Term Parliaments Act and that he hopes the next government will act swiftly to abolish it.

He says that leaving the EU has been the most “poisonous, difficult decision of our life” and predicts that a general election – called with Brexit unresolved – would not resolve the problems the government faces either.

Updated

Blackford says Johnson has lost the support of Scottish Tories, referencing the resignation of former leader Ruth Davidson.

“We want an election,” he declares. “But we don’t want it on the prime minister’s terms. This is a prime minister who cannot be trusted, who is seeking to trap parliament tonight so he can drive us off the cliff edge.”

Bill Grant, one of 13 Tory MP’s in Scotland intervenes to say that in 2016 more people in Scotland voted to leave the EU than voted for the SNP in 2017.

Blackford says the SNP has won the last three elections, before going on to warn that the prime minister is set to demonstrate that the law “doesn’t matter”.

The prime minister is saying with those words that he’s going to ignore an act of parliament. That he is going to ignore the law. I would simply say to the Prime Minister: be careful.

You occupy the highest office in the land and what you’re demonstrating to the people of the United Kingdom is that the law doesn’t matter. That’s a very serious situation to be in.

I ask the prime minister to think again, to think very carefully or be prepared to pay the consequences of ignoring the law of this land.

Updated

SNP leader in Westminster Ian Blackford says he is ashamed at what he has seen in parliament this evening and calls on MPs to behave in a dignified manner.

However, DUP MP Ian Paisley claims that an SNP MP shouted “You’re a liar” when Boris Johnson was speaking, and also alleges that a Labour member shouted “You’re a thug” at the prime minister.

Blackford says he is condemning all such behaviour, and fellow SNP MP Stewart McDonald intervenes to compare the prorogation of parliament to events typical of a “failed state” that Tory MPs would denounce.

Updated

Johnson tells Corbyn to go to Brussels and negotiate a deal for himself, as the back and forth goes on, and the Labour leader retorts that his party is responsible and accuses the government of suspending parliament to avoid scrutiny.

In particularly fraught proceedings – with Tory MP Robert Goodwill at one point standing up and flapping his arms like a chicken as some of his colleagues shouted chicken – Corbyn declares that the prime minister is talking up no-deal to one wing of his party and talking up getting a deal to the other.

“The sad reality is that he is not preparing adequately for the first and not negotiating at all for the other,” he says. “This government is only interesting in shutting down parliament to avoid scrutiny. His obfuscations and evasions are being rumbled, both at home and abroad.”

“We are not going to walk into traps set by this government.”

Updated

Corbyn says he wants to “turf out this government”, sparking jovial scenes on Tory benches, before claiming the government is “scapegoating migrants” and deepening divisions.

He criticises Boris Johnson’s social media output and then asks why, if the PM seeks a no deal, he does not argue for one and seek a mandate for it.

Updated

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas has an apology for anyone watching proceedings in parliament.

Updated

No election until no-deal taken off the table, says Corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn is called to address the question of whether there should be an early general election.

“The only point of any importance the prime minister’s just included in his speech is his clear indication that he does not intend to follow the law that has just been passed that requires him to ask for an extension in certain circumstances,” he says.

Corbyn declares he will not vote to support the dissolution of parliament until no-deal is taken off the table.

“I am not prepared to risk the disaster of inflicting no deal on us, our communities, our jobs, our services, or indeed, our rights,” he exclaims. “No deal would not be a clear break … It would start a whole new period of confusion and delay. But this time, set against a backdrop of rising unemployment, further deindustrialisation and deepening poverty all across this country.”

Updated

The Speaker dismisses “political” interventions from several MP’s, including Sarah Wollaston, who asks whether the prime minister will appear in committee as scheduled on Wednesday.

Boris Johnson warns MPs that they are “thwarting the will of the people” and calls again for a general election.

Updated

Johnson throws down the gauntlet to opposition MPs and reasserts that he would leave the EU without a deal.

If you really want to delay Brexit beyond October the 31st, which is what you seem to want to do, then vote for an election and let the people decide if they want a delay or not. And if you refuse to do that tonight, I will go to Brussels and negotiate our departure, hopefully with a deal, but without one if necessary. I will not ask for another delay.

The Tory benches are raucous as Johnson moves the microphone closer to himself, until Anna Soubry brings a point of order and urges him to confirm whether he will respect the wishes of parliament.

Johnson thanks Bercow for his “characteristically impartial judgements” and goes on to obfuscate by criticising Corbyn for receiving a salary and highlighting inconsistencies in Labour’s Brexit policy positions.

Johnson criticises the Liberal Democrats over their plans to cancel Brexit.

“The Liberal Democrats also called for a referendum on our membership to the EU and once they got it - and by the way they lost it, of course - they did nothing but try to overturn the result,” he says.

“Arrogating to themselves to decide which democratic decisions they respect and those they reject. They want a second referendum and they are already planning to campaign against the result. When asked if she would implement Brexit if the people voted for it the party’s new leader replied ‘No’.”

However, he describes the party as a model of “coherence by comparison with the leader of the opposition” and claims that Labour do not want an election because they fear they will lose.

But he says there are a small minority of Labour MPs who also don’t want a general election because they think the party might win.

Updated

In front of a packed front bench, Johnson says “Dither, delay and procrastination” have become “the hallmark of the opposition” and proclaims he would win an election.

He gives way to Labour MP Marsha de Cordova who says nine years of austerity has led to the degradation of the education system and the NHS, as well as four million children living in poverty.

Johnson suggests, in more colourful terms, that the money spent on EU membership would help fund public services.

Updated

Boris Johnson puts forward motion to force an early election

Enter the prime minister, Boris Johnson, who thanks for the Speaker for his long and distinguished service, and puts forward the motion to bring an early election.

He then mockingly praises Jeremy Corbyn for declining the “opportunity” to remove the government.

“Last Wednesday [Jeremy Corbyn] became the first leader of the opposition in the history of our country to show his confidence in Her Majesty’s Government by declining the opportunity to have an election with a view to removing the Government.”

He says Corbyn previously said he would back an election if legislation to prevent the Government from forcing through a no-deal Brexit on October 31 became law.

The surrender act has now passed, it’s gained royal assent, he’s done his level best to wreck this country’s chances of a successful negotiation. By his own logic, he must now back an election.

Throughout the weekend [Corbyn’s] cronies, together with those of other opposition parties, have been trying to disguise their preposterous cowardice by coming up with ever more outrageous excuses for delaying an election until the end of October or perhaps November or when hell freezes over.

Updated

The parliamentary buildings bill motion passes without a division, and Labour MP Stephen Doughty says he has been made aware that the government is “seeking to circumvent the terms of the resolution that the house passed earlier about the release of documents relating to prorogation and Operation Yellowhammer”.

He asks whether the Speaker can advise on the method through which the papers can be disclosed.

John Bercow criticises an MP who he says shouted “Yawn” as Doughty was speaking and says the government must comply with the wishes of the house.

Its not ‘Yawn’, its serious politics. The simple answer is that the government must comply with the Humble Address passed by the House. That is the reality of the matter. A debate has happened, a decision has been made, and it is incumbent upon the government to comply manifestly with what’s been decided, the spirit, purposes and content of which are entirely clear. This not about game-playing and machination, it’s about doing what parliament wants, which is what most people would expect their elected parliament to do.

Updated

Today’s sketch from the Guardian’s John Crace, as we await the early election debate while MPs discuss Lords amendments to the parliamentary renovation plans.

Updated

Lib Dems would support the cancellation of Brexit

The Liberal Democrats are set to officially back revoking article 50 in an attempt to position themselves as the most pro-EU political party.

Guardian political correspondent Kate Proctor reports that the move would effectively sever the chances of an alliance with Labour at a forthcoming general election.

“I relish the chance to take the fight to Boris Johnson in an election and I’m confident we’d make significant gains,” says party leader Jo Swinson.

“Whenever the election comes, our position is clear and unequivocal. A majority Liberal Democrat government would not renegotiate Brexit, we would cancel it by revoking article 50 and remaining in the European Union.”

Updated

In the Commons, DUP Westminster leader Nigel Dodds says that his party is “fully committed” to restoring devolved powers in Stormont.

He alludes to a number of the party’s controversial positions, including on keeping abortion illegal, and says the DUP would deal with the important issues Northern Ireland faces “without prejudice to the issues that Sinn Féin have elevated”.

Dodds claims that Sinn Féin is “preventing the restoration of Stormont” upon the basis of these issues.

Updated

Former Brexit negotiator Olly Robbins is to join investment bank Goldman Sachs, according to the FT.

The paper reports that he will not earn an elite-rank wage, but will receive a six-figure sum just below the managing director level, where salaries start at £770,000.

Updated

The BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg tweets that the government is expected to disclose the Brexit documents tomorrow.

Updated

There are reports that Phil Hogan, Ireland’s European commission nominee, is to be confirmed as the EU’s chief trade negotiator.

The Irish politician has been critical of Boris Johnson and warned last month of the ramifications of a no-deal Brexit on the relationship between the UK and EU states.

“If the UK fails to prevent a crash-out Brexit they should be under no illusion regarding the foul atmosphere they will create with their EU partners and the serious consequences this will have for negotiating any future trade agreement,” he said, according to the Irish Times.

Updated

The BBC has posted this remarkable video of opposition MPs arguing earlier. A number of other MP’s, including the chancellor Sajid Javid, has since reposted the exchange.

Updated

In the Commons, MPs are now debating the motion relating to the executive in Northern Ireland moved by Northern Ireland secretary Julian Smith in Theresa May’s former chief whip’s first appearance at the dispatch box.

However, he says that there is not enough time to debate all the motions on the order paper. Northern Ireland has been without a devolved government for more than two years but Smith says he believes the parties could swiftly agree a programme for government despite fundamental disagreements.

Political parties across the spectrum must now realise that the lack of political leadership has left public servants bearing the load for far too long .. There can be no more excuses. We just have to get this assembly and executive up and running .. The government will now intensify its efforts to put forward compromise solutions to the parties.

The Guardian’s Brexit correspondent Lisa O’Carroll reported earlier (see 4.26pm) that there were rumours Boris Johnson was considering putting forward a Northern Ireland-only backstop to get a Brexit deal through parliament in the second half of October.

As Daniel Boffey reported on Friday, it is understood the UK has suggested there is a need for Stormont to be able to vote on the continuation of the proposed common regulatory area, which has been described by EU officials as a “backstop-lite”.

Updated

BBC political editor Nick Robinson sums up how the government has fared of late.

The Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee writes that MPs should do away with “Corbynphobia” to prevent a no deal.

It’s no use wishing for another leader of the opposition; this is the one Labour has, and in this crisis he is now stepping up to the plate. His leadership of the alliance has been “collegiate”; he is the grownup, while Johnson breaks things. Theresa May lost her 20-point lead in the 2017 election; Johnson’s lead in the polls is about half that. Corbyn’s manifesto back then was highly popular and you can bet it will sell well again. He’s a good campaigner; Johnson may disappoint.

Updated

Motion urging government to comply with no-deal prevention law passes without a vote

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn closes the debate and says his party would support an early general election once “the government had made clear they will carry out the law”, asking it to extend the Brexit deadline to prevent no deal.

“Surely, Mr Speaker, the very least we deserve from the prime minister is a clear undertaking that a requirement that we ask for an extension until January to prevent crashing out must be made at the appropriate time,” he says. “Why can’t the foreign secretary or the prime minister say that?”

After the government has made it clear that it will respect the law, Labour would be happy to debate any of the government’s policies in a general election, Corbyn declares.

And the motion passes without a division.

Updated

Raab says the country wants “this mess sorted out” by the end of October but that the House of Commons is seeking to further delay Brexit.

“In those circumstances, the proper way to proceed is for this House to allow voters to decide in an election who goes over to negotiate at the European Council on the 17th of October, the prime minister, or the right honourable gentleman,” he says, pointing at Jeremy Corbyn. “But what is [he] afraid of?”

In the absence of an election, Johnson will go to Brussels on that day to negotiate a departure from the EU “with or without a deal”.

“I urge this house to vote today not for more deadlock and delay but the only course of action that will break this deadlock, restore public confidence in our democracy, and allow this country to move forwards,” Raab says.

Updated

Taking a sterner line as he goes on, Raab says Johnson is working on securing a deal but claims the country is appalled by repeated attempts in parliament “to frustrate Brexit”.

Respecting the referendum must also mean that this house allows us to leave without a deal if Brussels leave no other credible choice. Taking that option off the table severely weakened our negotiating position.

'This government will always respect the rule of law,' says Raab

Winding up the debate, the foreign secretary – who first mooted the idea of proroguing parliament during the Tory election contest – pays tribute to what he describes as interesting points that have been made “by all sides of the house” and provides a careful account of the government’s position.

This government will always respect the rule of law. That’s been our clear position consistently, and frankly it is outrageous that it is even in doubt. Of course, how the rule of law will be respected is normally straightforward. But sometimes it can be more complex because there are conflicting laws or competing legal advice. The government usually gets its interpretation right, but there have been many judicial reviews over the years by many governments of different complexions.

When on occasion the government has lost a case … then of course it must correct its position accordingly and expeditiously.

Updated

A number of backbench Tory MPs have been offering defences of the government position, and longtime Eurosceptic Peter Bone says the legislation designed to prevent no deal was “rushed through” without “proper scrutiny” and that this debate is being held for “political purposes”. “This is a general debate which is being held for political purposes,” he asserts.

Tory MP for the Cotswolds Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown says it would be “inconceivable” that the prime minister would break the law and claims the longer uncertainty over Brexit goes on, the more the public will hold parliament in contempt.

“This parliament has passed a rotten law, it has asked the prime minister to seek an extension on terms that we know not what they were, are, might be,” he says. “We could face all sorts of terms in that extension … Yet this parliament has mandated the prime minister to accept those terms whatever they are.”

Moments earlier, former Labour MP Ian Austin called into question the opposition party’s credentials for government. “These people are a million miles away from the traditional, mainstream politics of the Labour party,” he says. “They have poisoned what was once a great party with extremism. They cannot be trusted with the institutions that underpin our democracy.”

Updated

Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson says it is “astonishing” that a debate over whether the prime minister will respect the rule of law is taking place.

“The prime minister is on a power trip, but the truth is he does not have unfettered power much as he would like to,” she says. “There is a sense of arrogance and entitlement about this action. He acts like rules and conventions simply do not apply to him.”

She concedes the law preventing no-deal is not perfect. “Its a good step, but not a guarantee .. frankly I for one, will not put anything past our prime minister in terms of what he will try to engineer.”

Updated

Extremely strong words from the SNP’s Ian Blackford who says freedoms, rights and democracy are under threat and under attack by a prime minister “threatening to ignore the rule of law”.

Mr Speaker, today is indeed a historic day, a dark day, it will be remembered as the day the UK government obstructed the people and plunged the United Kingdom into an unprecedented constitutional crisis.

The prime minister says he would rather die in a ditch than write to seek an extension to protect our economy from falling off the cliff edge, if that is the course he chooses then he must resign. Undermining democracy at every turn, [Johnson] simply cannot be trusted.

The rule book has been well and truly ripped up, and with it democracy and decency shredded by a cult of Brexit fanboys in No 10 unfit and unwilling to govern. Mr Speaker, what a despicable state of affairs, that an unelected bureaucrat - the prime minister’s lead advisor, is sitting in No 10 devising and directing an assault on democracy, preventing parliamentary scrutiny and transparency

And should we be surprised, these are the men behind the biggest con in modern times.

Updated

‘Scope of the information requested disproportionate and unprecedented’, says government

The government has responded to the passage of the vote earlier compelling the release of the government’s Operation Yellowhammer document and No 10’s private prorogation correspondence.

Meanwhile, on Radio 4, Tory MP Andrew Bridgen says he believes that a Northern Ireland only backstop would only be acceptable if put to a vote in the nation.

The most senior government minister currently in the chamber Dominic Raab, and former Tory MP Anna Soubry says that given the motion concerns the rule of law it would be surprising if the foreign secretary were to answer those questions.

In fairness, Raab was a lawyer before becoming an MP. But the point still stands, and further questions are likely to be raised if a government law officer such as the secretary of state for justice, or the attorney general, do not address Corbyn’s motion.

Updated

Winding up his speech, Corbyn calls on Johnson to come to the dispatch box to set out “his detailed plan for Brexit” and confirm he will abide by the law.

I hope the prime minister will live up to the office that he holds, accept the decisions made of the parliament and carry out the wishes of that Act to ensure that an application is made to prevent this country crashing out on the 31st of October with all the damage that will do to food supplies, medicine supplies, industrial supplies, and his longer term ambitions of heading this country in a totally different direction which many, many people are truly frightened of.

Prominent Brexiteer and Tory backbencher Peter Bone asks whether Corbyn would support a no-deal if one of the other EU countries blocked the UK from extending article 50.

The Labour leader dismisses the question as hypothetical and calls on the government to accept the decision of parliament to pass the act preventing no-deal into law – before predicting the vote calling for a general election later this evening will not pass.

“No 10 has briefed that the PM will defy the law, so until the government has abided by that law, I don’t believe there will be a majority in this house for what the PM is proposing later today under the Fixed-term Parliament Act.

Asked again what would happen if an EU country did not grant an extension, Corbyn says: “We’ve always wanted to get a deal but what we don’t want is a no deal exit with all the dangers for jobs, living standards, supplies and the prime minister and his chums taking us down the road into the arms of Donald Trump and the trade arrangements he’ll make with the US.”

He goes on to reference Amber Rudd’s claims over the weekend that there was “not one shred of evidence” that the government had made any new proposals during the Brexit negotiations.

Updated

Former minister Angela Eagle intervenes to highlight the apparent contradiction between Boris Johnson saying he would obey the bill preventing a no-deal if it was passed, but the next day announcing he would rather be dead in a ditch.

Corbyn says he does not wish anyone dead in the ditch, but that the PM should accept the democratic will of parliament. “We don’t have an executive president who can rule over us .. We will expect the prime minister to abide by the details of the law.”

The SNP’s leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford, then says the government has a responsibility to recognise the impact of its abusive language and actions outside of parliament.

Corbyn agrees that language has consequences: “Surely we can have an intelligent debate in our society without resorting to that kind of behaviour, language or violence threatened against some individuals.”

Updated

Here is the text of Jeremy Corbyn’s motion, which is now being debated and may go through without a division.

That this house welcomes the completion of all parliamentary stages of the European Union (withdrawal) (No 6) bill and has considered the matter of the importance of the rule of law and ministers obligation to comply with the law.

Earlier (see 5.12pm), the Labour leader said MPs would be concerned by suggestions from No 10 that the prime minister may not obey this law.

Opening his speech, Corbyn thanked the Speaker and welcomed the decision the house had just reached and said he looked forward to the government abiding by it.

The fact that parliament is compelled to pass a law to ensure the will of parliament is upheld shows what extraordinary times we now live in. The house has rejected no deal, businesses and trade unions are united in rejecting no deal, and there is no majority for it across the country.

The Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster [Michael Gove], the co-convenor of the vote leave campaign, said in March this year ‘we didn’t vote to leave without a deal. It is clear there is no mandate for no deal.

In trying to diminish the act, the government’s spin doctors have branded it the surrender bill and ministers dutifully trotted out this phrase in the media and the minister who’s going to reply has already replied like Pavlov’s dogs always do.

We are not at war. The prime minister is obsessed with this hyperbole and aggressive language. ‘surrender bill’, ‘do or die’, or ‘I’d rather be dead in a ditch’, the list goes on. Mr Speaker, we’re supposed to be having negotiations with our European partners. The lives at stake as a result of all of this, are not those of the prime minister or his cabinet.

He went on to criticise Boris Johnson’s absence from the House of Commons, amid cries of “where is he”.

Following the conclusion of this 90-minute debate, MP’s will debate a motion under the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act and Lords amendments to the parliamentary buildings (restoration and renewal) bill.

Then, at around 10pm, MPs will debate Boris Johnson’s motion calling for an early election over the course of an hour and a half, before a vote which will take 15 minutes. Parliament will then prorogue.

Updated

What will government defeat on Grieve motion mean in practice?

That was Boris Johnson’s fourth main defeat in a Commons vote since he became prime minister. The other defeats were: on the Oliver Letwin motion allowing time for the Benn bill, on the Benn bill at second and third reading and on holding an early election. The final vote counted as a defeat, because Johnson did not get the required two-thirds majority, although technically he won, because more MPs voted in favour than against.

But what does this defeat mean?

Humble addresses are considered binding on the government. The passing of this motion (see 7.24pm) means the government is now obliged to release to the Commons:

1) all private messages sent between nine advisers, including Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s de facto chief of staff, including text and WhatsApp messages and private emails, sent from 23 July relating to the prorogation of parliament.

2) all the documents prepared within government since 23 July 2019 relating to operation Yellowhammer and submitted to the cabinet or a cabinet committee.

The motion mentions 23 July because that is the day Boris Johnson became Tory leader. He become prime minister the following day.

The material is meant to be handed over by 11 September.

However, it does not seem likely that the government will comply. The Commons will not even be sitting on Wednesday. Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, told MPs that he wanted to publish some version of the Operation Yellowhammer document anyway. But during the debate Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, suggested that the government would not have the legal power to enforce the release of the internal prorogation messages, even if it wanted to comply. (See 5.51pm.)

Last year Labour used the humble address mechanism to require the publication of the attorney general’s legal advice about the withdrawal agreement. The government initially ignored the request, and it only complied a month later when MPs passed another motion finding the government in contempt of parliament.

In this case no such contempt motion will be passed any time soon, because after tonight the Commons will not be sitting until 14 October.

And even if it were passed, a contempt motion on its own would not necessarily force Boris Johnson’s government to comply. Theresa May’s government did, but May respected the authority of parliament. Johnson’s administration seems much more contemptuous of it.

On other issues MPs and campaigners have threatened legal action, or gone to court, to ensure that Johnson complies with their wishes. But this vote is not a matter of legislation, and it does not relate to the exercise of prerogative powers. It is a Commons procedural matter, and so it is hard to see on what basis the courts could intervene.

That’s all from me for the night. My colleague Mattha Busby is now taking over.

Updated

MPs vote to force government to publish no-deal plans and advisers' messages by majority of nine

MPs have backed the Grieve motion requiring the release of some no-deal planning documents, and private messages from No 10 officials about prorogation, by 311 votes to 302 – a majority of nine.

Updated

Text of Dominic Grieve's motion

Here is the text of Dominic Grieve’s motion.

That a humble address be presented to Her Majesty, that she will be graciously pleased to direct ministers to lay before this House, not later than 11.00pm Wednesday 11 September, all correspondence and other communications (whether formal or informal, in both written and electronic form, including but not limited to messaging services including WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Facebook messenger, private email accounts both encrypted and unencrypted, text messaging and iMessage and the use of both official and personal mobile phones) to, from or within the present administration, since 23 July 2019 relating to the prorogation of Parliament sent or received by one or more of the following individuals: Hugh Bennett, Simon Burton, Dominic Cummings, Nikki da Costa, Tom Irven, Sir Roy Stone, Christopher James, Lee Cain or Beatrice Timpson; and that ministers be further directed to lay before this House no later than 11.00pm Wednesday 11 September all the documents prepared within Her Majesty’s government since 23 July 2019 relating to operation Yellowhammer and submitted to the cabinet or a cabinet committee.

MPs are now voting on Dominic Grieve’s SO24 motion.

Dominic Grieve intervenes. He asks Gove to explain why no government official swore an affidavit for the prorogation court case?

Gove says the question for MPs is, are they willing to ignore data protection legislation, the ECHR and the normal conventions of government, just so that Grieve’s curiosity can be satisfied.

John Bercow, the Speaker, intervenes and calls the vote.

Gove says he has already said that the government intends to plan a version of the Operation Yellowhammer report on no-deal planning.

But it is neither an impact assessment or a worst-case scenario, he says.

Gove says the Grieve motion is unprecedented.

It is a fishing expedition, he says.

He says it drives a coach and horses through privacy regulation.

And he says it may be in breach of article eight of the European convention on human rights on privacy.

He suggests this is an unprecedented example of people who claim to respect conventions undermining them.

Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, is now winding up for the government.

He says documentation about how the government decided to prorogue parliament is already in the public domain, because of the court cases that have been taking place.

He says it rare for such information to be in the public domain.

Sylvia Hermon, the independent MP from Northern Ireland, says Julian Smith, the Northern Ireland secretary, made it clear last week that he was not consulted about the decision to prorogue parliament.

He says submissions sent to the PM do not normally go to the whole of the cabinet.

He says the government is now being asked to submit every idea on this submitted by officials to the PM. But there has to be a “safe space” where advice can be private, he says.

He says Sir Mark Sedwill, the cabinet secretary, told a committee earlier today that if this motion were passed, it would have a chilling effect on the advice given to ministers.

He says that four of the people named in the motion are civil servants, not just one as Dominic Grieve said earlier.

These are from Lindsay Hoyle, the most senior of the three deputy speakers and one of the favourites to replace John Bercow as Speaker.

Liaison committee challenges Boris Johnson to go ahead with hearing planned for Wednesday despite prorogation

Boris Johnson was due to give evidence to the Commons liaison committee, which represents all select committee chairs, on Wednesday. It would have been his first appearance before the committee, which questions prime ministers three times a year, for about 90 minutes at a time. But the decision to prorogue parliament means the committee hearing will not go ahead because Commons committees do not formally meet during prorogation.

But Sarah Wollaston, the committee’s chair, has written to Johnson asking him to agree to meet them anyway, as he originally said he would. It would not be an official committee hearing, but there is nothing to stop MPs agreeing to hold a meeting at any time they want.

If prorogation meant the committee could not use a Commons committee room for the hearing, doubtless the BBC or Sky would be more than happy to host the hearing.

(Or the Guardian - we’ll find you a room and a video feed.)

Owen Paterson, a Tory Brexiter, is speaking now. He says the motion names nine “relatively junior” people. He says it is unfair that they are being asked to disclose their private communications.

I just think before this witch hunt atmosphere continues, would members opposite like to consider they are talking about nine relatively junior members assisting the government.

Can we just think of the impact on them that their private emails, their private phone to their family and friends, are all going to be inspected.

And who is the omniscient person, this great found wisdom, on who will judge whether those messages are pertinent to this motion?

(The list includes Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s de facto chief of staff. No one thinks he is relatively junior.)

Updated

Cherry speculates that people in government may have discussed the real reason for prorogation not in official emails, which would be subject to disclosure rules, but in private messages or using burner phones.

She says that is why the motion (see 5.35pm) asks for the release of private messages relating to the prorogation of parliament.

If they have done nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear, she says.

She says she knows enough about English history to know that two kings, Edward II and Richard II, were brought down by “unaccountable whispers of poison”. This motion could reveal other “unaccountable whispers of poison”, she suggests.

Updated

Cherry refers MPs to this article by the legal commentator David Allen Green in the Financial Times (paywall) at the weekend.

She says the court case revolved around the government’s motives for proroguing parliament - the matter of “bad faith”.

She says that in litigation like this, faced with an allegation of bad faith, the normal response of a respondent would be to provide a witness statement.

But in this case the government did not do that, he says – a point made by Green.

Here is an extract from Green’s article.

Could it be that a witness statement was intended and prepared but that the relevant senior officials refused to sign it? Or that the document contained something the government did not want the court, or the world, to know? Ms Cherry asked Michael Gove, the minister responsible for no-deal planning, about it. He said he had “absolutely no idea”.

Witness statements are formal court documents, and it is a criminal offence to sign one that you know to be incorrect. They are serious documents for serious people, as far apart from the trivial discourse of political sloganeering and promises as one can imagine. Witness statements matter.

The government’s position on prorogation is that the request was made for routine reasons, and not to frustrate parliament. The legal challengers in London say there is evidence that ministers themselves do not quite believe it. But that is the official version.

The government has disclosed some documents which, on their face, show that the prorogation was routine but Ms Cherry and others fear that these do not provide a full account, and that the decision was contained in unofficial communications, such as WhatsApp messages. My own view is that if the government’s disclosed documents were the entire story then a witness statement would not have been a problem.

Updated

Cherry says if the courts decide the prorogation was unlawful, they can order parliament to return.

In the Commons Joanna Cherry, the SNP justice and home affairs spokeswoman, is speaking now. She is one of the MPs backing the legal challenge in Scotland against the decision to prorogue parliament.

She says even the “dogs in the street” know the real reason for prorogation was to do with the desire to try to stop MPs blocking a no-deal Brexit.

She says as late as 25 August No 10 was denying that it planned to prorogue parliament, even though the decision to prorogue was taken earlier.

She says the government has a reputation for being economical with the truth.

Updated

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, used his speech in the debate to say Labour would be backing the Grieve motion. He said that in recent weeks there had been a growing lack of trust in the government among MPs.

Updated

Grieve says whistleblowers told him real story of prorogation 'smacked of scandal'

Here is the key quote from Dominic Grieve.

In his speech opening the debate, he referred to the government’s claim that the five-week prorogation was not related to its desire to limit the opportunity for MPs to obstruct a no-deal Brexit. Ministers claimed that that was not a factor, and that the length of the prorogation was just to do with the need to prepare for the Queen’s speech.

But, Grieve said, when the government was taken to court, there were claims that that government lawyers could not find any officials willing to swear an affidavit backing up the government’s case. He continued:

Then a most remarkable thing happened, and this is where it becomes more difficult for me. I have to say that in the course of the days that followed, I started to be given information from public officials informing me that they believed that the handling of this matters smacked of scandal. There’s no other way to describe it.

Of course, that places me in a difficulty because it is simply the information that I’ve been given, and I want to make absolutely clear that I’m not in a position any more than I think any member in this house to be able to ascertain if that information is mistaken or not.

I can only say that I believe those sources to be reliable and also in my experience extraordinarily unusual that I should get such approaches with individuals expressing their disquiet about the handling of this matter and some of the underlying issues to which it could give rise.

So it is as a consequence of that that I have drafted … the humble address concerning the prorogation documents.

Grieve said one of the nine officials named in his motion was a civil servant, but all the rest were special advisers (political appointees). He said he had named them because they might have information that would shed light on what happened. But he stressed that the decision to name these people did not mean he was making any “imputation” against them.

Updated

Grieve accuses government of not respecting conventions essential for orderly government

Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, intervenes again. He says this motion would be binding on the government. But it would not be binding on individuals.

He says he thinks, in what he is saying, Grieve is narrowing the information that he wants to request.

Grieve does not accept this. He says advisers should be willing to provide the information requested in this motion, if MPs vote for it.

If they are not willing to do that, that would amount to a “slide towards a government that will not respect the conventions without which orderly government in this country cannot take place”.

Updated

Labour’s Kevin Brennan intervenes. He says Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s de facto chief of staff, asked a special adviser to hand over her personal mobile phone for inspection before he sacked her.

Geoffrey Cox suggets No 10 could not force staff to comply with Grieve’s motion

Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, intervenes. He asks what legal right the government has to require its employees to give up its personal email accounts and private messages.

Grieve says these are government employees. During the course of their work they have to comply with the civil service code, including not using private email addresses to carry out official work.

He says, in addition to that, it is a question of what the Commons requests. He says he understands this house could act abusively.

But he says, if any government employee is asked to look and see if a communication has been carried out relevant to work, you should be willing to provide it. That should not be a matter of coercion, he says.

  • Geoffrey Cox suggests No 10 could not force staff to comply with Grieve’s motion.

Updated

In the Commons Chris Leslie, the Independent Group for Change MP, intervenes on Dominic Grieve to quote from a Mail Online story quoting a No 10 source saying that even if the motion is passed Downing Street will not comply.

He says that is the problem. NNo 10 is quoted saying things like this that ignore all conventional rules. He says it is impossible to know where these comments come from.

Updated

Grieve says, when questions about this were asked at PMQs, Boris Johnson refused to engage with the questions. He says he does not trust Johnson to provide answers on this.

Dominic Grieve opens debate on motion to to force publication of Operation Yellowhammer and private No 10 prorogation correspondence

Dominic Grieve is opening the debate on his standing order 24 motion that would force the publication of the government’s Operation Yellowhammer document and No 10’s private prorogation correspondence.

Here is the text of the motion.

He started by saying how concerned he was by government’s decision to prorogue parliament for five weeks.

Referring to Boris Johnson’s comment about how the September sitting was something introduced by the “girly swot” David Cameron, he says he guessed Johnson mentioned this as a contrast with his own “manly idleness”.

Grieve also says, after the announcement came out, he was contacted by people claiming that the decision amounted to a scandal. He says the government claimed that the long prorogation had nothing to do with limiting the opportunities for MPs to stop a no-deal Brexit, but that in fact that may be untrue.

He says his motion requires the publication of private messages relating to prorogation sent by nine named officials, from 23 July. The nine officials are named in his motion. He says that the fact that people have been named should not be seen as an allegation of wrongdoing.

Updated

Updated list of timings for the rest of the day

From now until 7.15pm: MPs debate the Grieve SO24 motion saying the government should publish its Operation Yellowhammer documents and correspondence about proroguing parliament. At 7.15pm there will be a vote taking about 15 minutes.

7.30pm: MPs will debate Jeremy Corbyn’s motion for 90 minutes. It may go through at the end without a division.

Around 9pm: MPs will debate a motion under the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act and Lords amendments to the parliamentary buildings (restoration and renewal) bill. In theory, up to two and a half hours has been set aside for these matters, but they are likely to wrap up much sooner – perhaps in about an hour.

Around 10pm: MPs begin the 90-minute debate on Boris Johnson’s motion calling for an early election. When it finishes there will be a vote, which will take about 15 minutes. After that parliament will prorogue.

Updated

John Bercow says he will allow the Corbyn application for an emergency debate too.

He says the debate will start after the Grieve SO24 one. It will last for up to 90 minutes, he says.

Jeremy Corbyn says he wants an urgent debate on a matter of overriding importance on this motion:

That this house welcomes the completion of all parliamentary stages of the European Union (withdrawal) (No 6) bill and has considered the matter of the importance of the rule of law and ministers obligation to comply with the law.

He says MPs will be concerned by suggestions from No 10 that the prime minister may not obey this law.

Updated

Bercow says that debate will start now, and that it will last for two hours.

But first he is hearing Jeremy Corbyn’s application for another SO24 debate.

Bercow grants emergency debate on motion that could force publication of Operation Yellowhammer documents

Dominic Grieve is now making his application for a standing order 24 debate. Here is the motion he is proposing.

Grieve says MPs will now have the chance to ask about Operation Yellowhammer because of the prorogation, and also have a chance to ask about the government’s motives for proroguing parliament for five weeks.

He says his motion would enable MPs to get these documents before Brexit. He says, if the motion is agreed, he will explain in the debate why these documents are required.

John Bercow allows the motion.

Some MPs shout now, but at least 40 MPs (the number required) stand up, meaning it will go ahead.

Updated

Gordon Brown says Brexit could be 'biggest own goal in our peacetime economic history'

Parliament should be debating the “devastating” consequences of a no-deal Brexit that could put lives at risk, instead of being suspended, the former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown has said. Speaking ahead of a “No to no deal” rally in Glasgow this evening. Brown said:

Boris Johnson and his ministers say that Britain is taking back control. But in reality, Britain is losing control – of our food supplies, of our medical supplies and of our manufacturing supplies …

Can the prime minister guarantee that medical supplies – the 1m medical packs that come every day into the country through ports such as Dover – arrive uninterrupted and without putting lives at risk?

Can he pledge that our food supplies – 30% of which come from mainland Europe and another 10% through countries where Europe has trade agreements – will arrive uninterrupted without putting nutritional standards at risk and pushing food prices up 10%?

Brown said without these assurance, Brexit would be “the biggest own goal in our peacetime economic history … no matter how much it is dressed up as a patriotic act”.

Updated

These are from the Institute for Government’s Hannah White.

More on the backstop. This is from the Financial Times’s George Parker.

Updated

Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, is pleased about John Bercow’s departure.

Updated

This is what my colleague Rajeev Syal wrote earlier this year about the candidates to be next Speaker.

Here is video of John Bercow’s resignation statement.

The Labour MP Jim Cunningham has also announced he is standing down at the next election, the BBC’s Simon Gilbert reports.

Updated

In the Commons the Bercow leaving do tributes are still rolling on. For a different take, this from the Times’ Esther Webber.

Bill to stop no-deal Brexit on 31 October becomes law after Queen grants royal assent

This is from PA Media.

A new law designed to stop the government forcing through a no-deal has reached the statute book. The granting of royal assent for the legislation was announced by the Lord Speaker in the House of Lords, ahead of the suspension or prorogation of parliament.

The new act requires a delay to Brexit beyond 31 October unless a divorce deal is approved or parliament agrees to leaving the EU without one by 19 October.

Boris Johnson has previously branded it the “surrender bill”, claiming it took away control of the UK’s negotiations with the EU by allowing parliament to block no deal.

Downing Street has said the government will obey the law, but repeated that the PM would not be seeking a further extension to the article 50 withdrawal process.

Updated

In the Commons chamber the tributes to John Bercow are still coming. But not everyone is joining in. This is from the BBC’s Vicki Young.

Updated

One theory doing the rounds in Dublin is that Boris Johnson may pull a Northern Ireland-only backstop out of the bag at the last minute as a means of forcing a Brexit deal through parliament in between 17 October and 31 October.

The idea was mooted early on in Brexit talks but famously dropped after opposition from the DUP, which accused Theresa May of trying to break up the union of the United Kingdom by creating regulatory checks down the Irish Sea.

But Johnson’s proposal for an all-island agriculture zone is one of the key elements of the backstop and now that the DUP no longer has the leverage it had because of the changed arithmetic, some believe this is where the landing zone is.

As Daniel Boffey reported on Friday, it is understood the UK has suggested there is a need for Stormont to be able to vote on the continuation of the proposed common regulatory area, which has been described by EU officials as a “backstop-lite”.

The suggestion that Stormont could have a role in dynamic regulatory alignment has been rejected by the EU, but it is being seen as a sign of the thinking in Conservative quarters.

It may also explain why efforts are being redoubled to get Stormont back up and running by the deadline for direct rule in October.

One British source said the all-island agri-zone “is a very serious proposal” and should not be dismissed, with another reporting one senior cabinet minister dropping strong hints that a Northern Ireland-only backstop is not off the table, despite statements to the contrary by Boris Johnson.

So is it possible that Johnson comes back from Brussels on 17 October with no deal, and, faced with the law that will require him to seek an extension, reverts to the original Northern Ireland-only backstop in a very last die-in-a-ditch moment?

Updated

A few months ago we posted this video with some highlights from John Bercow’s time as Speaker.

These are from the House magazine’s Seb Whale.

From the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar

From my colleague Patrick Wintour

The tributes to John Bercow are still coming in. They have included tributes from Dame Cheryl Gillan, who praised Bercow for the support he has given to those who have campaigned on behalf of those with autism, from Angela Eagle, who praised his campaigning on behalf of LGBT issues, and from Peter Bone, the Tory Brexiter, who said that even though he disagreed with some of Bercow’s rulings, he thought Bercow had been an “outstanding” Speaker.

Bercow told Bone it was big of him to say that in the light of their Brexit disagreements.

Full text of John Bercow's resignation statement

Here is the full text of John Bercow’s resignation statement.

Colleagues, I would like to make a personal statement to the house. At the 2017 election I promised my wife and children that it would be my last. This is a pledge that I intend to keep. If the house votes tonight for an early general election, my tenure as Speaker and MP will end when this parliament ends.

If the house does not so vote, I have concluded that the least disruptive and most democratic course of action would be for me stand down at the close of business on Thursday, 31 October. Least disruptive because that date will fall shortly after the votes on the Queen’s speech expected on 21 and 22 October.

The week also after that may be quite lively and it would be best to have an experienced figure in the chair for that short period.

Most democratic because it will mean that a ballot is held when all members have some knowledge of the candidates. This is far preferable to a contest at the beginning of a parliament when new MPs will not be similarly informed and may find themselves vulnerable to undue institutional influence.

We would not want anyone to be whipped senseless, would we? Throughout my time as Speaker I have sought to increase the relative authority of this legislature for which I will make absolutely no apology to anyone, anywhere, at any time.

To deploy a perhaps dangerous phrase, I have also sought to be the backbencher’s backstop.

I could not do so without the support of a small but superb team in Speaker’s House, the wider house staff, my Buckingham constituents, and above all my wife, Sally, and our three children, Oliver, Freddy and Jemima. From the bottom of my heart, I thank them all profusely.

I could also not have served without the repeated support of this house and its members past and present. This is a wonderful place filled overwhelmingly by people who are motivated by their notion of the national interest by their perception of the public good. And by their duty, not as delegates, but as representatives, to do what they believe is right for our country.

We degrade this parliament at our peril. I have served as a member of parliament for 22 years, and for the last 10 as Speaker. This has been, let me put it explicitly, the greatest privilege and honour of my professional life for which I will be eternally grateful.

I wish my successor in the chair the very best fortune in standing up for the rights of honourable and right honourable members individually and for parliament institutionally as the Speaker of the House of Commons.

Updated

It is important to remember, of course, that only yesterday the Conservatives announced that they were going to field a candidate against John Bercow at the next election, even though the Speaker is normally given a clear run, because they had concluded he was biased against them on Brexit. The story is here.

A few minutes ago Michael Gove praised Bercow lavishly. (See 3.51pm.) Maybe he was being sincere if speaking in a personal capacity (Gove is an accomplished parliamentarian debater, and did not seem to mind Bercow giving backbenchers the chance to hold the executive to account), but for a Conservative party and government representative to be praising Bercow a day after launching a plan to unseat him, and on the day the government is closing parliament to stop ministers being held to account, was astonishingly hypocritical.

Updated

David Lidington, the former Cabinet Office minister, represents the constituency next door to Bercow’s in Buckinghamshire. He says Bercow never allowed his duties as Speaker to detract from his need to represent his constituents.

Updated

Hilary Benn, the chair of the Commons Brexit committee, whose bill designed to rule out a no-deal Brexit on 31 October was passed as a result of a procedural ruling allowed by Bercow, praises Bercow as a reforming Speaker who has empowered parliament.

Bercow says Gove never complained about urgent questions being granted at short notice, because he was always quick enough and bright enough to respond.

He suggests that praising Gove may not do him credit on the Tory benches.

(Many Tory MPs loath Bercow, and will be glad to see him gone.)

Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, is speaking now. He says for the first time he would like to associate himself with what Jeremy Corbyn said. He says Bercow was a tenacious backbencher, and frontbencher too.

He says he has no wish to prematurely truncate Bercow’ role in the chair.

He says he has always appreciated the way Bercow has tried to ensure the executive has been held to account. He says Bercow has acted in the best tradition of Speakers.

He says Bercow has tried to make the executive answerable to the Commons, just as the house is answerable to the people.

He ends by saying he and Bercow have children at the same school.

Jeremy Corbyn rises on a point of order and uses it to thank John Bercow for his work as Speaker.

He says Bercow has “totally changed the way in which the job has been done”. He has gone out to the country and spoken at schools and factories. He says he will always remember Bercow speaking to students with learning disabilities at an event in Corbyn’s constituency. He says he has made the role of Speaker more powerful.

Corbyn says, as someone who aspires to hold executive office, he approves of a powerful parliament holding the executive to account. He says he has tried to do that himself during his career.

Bercow says he could not have served without the support of the Commons.

He says it is filled with people motivated by their sense of public duty, and with people who see themselves not as delegates but as representatives – there to do what is best for the public.

He says he has been an MP for 22 years, and Speaker for 10 years. It has been the greatest honour of his life, he says.

He wishes his successor all the best in terms of standing up for the rights of MPs individually, and for parliament institutionally.

Bercow has finished. He receives a round of applause, although with most of the clapping coming from the opposition benches.

Updated

Bercow says he has always sought to be the champion of backbenchers.

If you like, he has been their backstop, he says.

He thanks House of Commons staff.

And he thanks his wife and his three children. He sounds very emotional at this point.

John Bercow says he will stand down as Speaker by end of October

John Bercow, the Speaker, says he wants to make a personal statement.

At the 2017 election he promised his wife and children that it would be his last, he says.

He says if the Commons votes for an early general election, his tenure as Speaker and as an MP will end when this parliament ends.

He says, if MPs do not vote for an election, he has concluded the least disruptiveoption will be to stand down at close of play on Thursday 31 October.

He says the votes on the Queen’s speech will come at the start of that week. He says it would make sense to have an experienced Speaker in the chair for those votes.

And he says this would be the most democratic option because it would allow the new Speaker to be elected by MPs who know the candidates.

Updated

From the Evening Standard’s Joe Murphy

Tory MPs are falling like skittles at the moment. Another, Mark Prisk, has announced that he is standing down at the next election.

Prisk, 57, a former minister, voted remain in 2016 and voted with the government in the divisions on Theresa May’s Brexit deal. In his letter announcing his decision he says it is not a reaction to Brexit. But he also deprecates “the rise of narrow ideology over pragmatic, common sense”, and so it is not hard to guess what he thinks of what Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings are doing to the Conservative party.

Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, has put out this statement about Boris Johnson’s meeting with Leo Varadkar in Dublin this morning. She said:

I am encouraged by the prime minister’s commitment to getting a sensible deal. I hope the discussions in Dublin lay the foundation for a way forward.

We want the referendum result implemented. To do otherwise would be to damage democracy but we have never been champions of exiting the European Union without a deal.

To secure a sensible deal which respects the economic and constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom will require pragmatic discussions on all sides.

The prime minister has already ruled out a Northern Ireland-only backstop because it would be anti-democratic, unconstitutional and would mean our core industries would be subject to EU rules without any means of changing them.

We will continue to work with the government and will also use any discussions with the taoiseach to encourage efforts towards a sensible deal.

Foster is right to say that Johnson has ruled out a Northern Ireland-only backstop. But he also told told Tory MPs during the leadership contest that he was not attracted to the idea of proroguing parliament, and look what happened to that pledge.

Perhaps she has included that paragraph because she wants to hold him to his commitment not to have a Northern Ireland only arrangement. It is interesting that she is saying he has ruled out a Northern Ireland backstop on the grounds that it is undemocratic, when in fact that is his argument for ruling out the UK-wide backstop. The argument for ruling out a Northern Ireland only one is different; that it would lead to a regulatory border down the Irish Sea.

Updated

From the Daily Mirror’s Pippa Crerar

MPs seeking to use SO24 motion to force publication of Operation Yellowhammer and private No 10 prorogation correspondence

Here is the full text of Dominic Grieve’s SO24 motion. (See 2.23pm.)

What is happening in parliament this afternoon, and when?

The government intends to prorogue parliament this evening, but before MPs get sent away for their five-week recess, they have got a huge amount to get through. Here is the timetable for the rest of the day.

I use the word “timetable” provisionally, because at this point it is not at all clear how long everything will take. In theory, if everything took the maximum amount of time allocated, the Commons could still be sitting at 8am tomorrow morning. No one expects that to happen. But the final vote, on whether or not to have an early election, may come at around 11pm.

Here is what we know.

2.30pm: Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, takes questions.

3.30pm: Two MPs make applications for emergency debates under standing order 24. They are Dominic Grieve, the Tory pro-European, and Jeremy Corbyn. Taking advantage of the Speaker’s decision to allow SO24 motions to be used not just for neutral motions (ie, ones with no practical effect), Grieve has used the process to table a “humble address” that, if passed, forces the government to release written material. And he is asking for not just one batch of material, but two: all private correspondence relating to the decision to prorogue parliament, and the Operation Yellowhammer government no-deal planning documents. Corbyn’s motion is about the rule of law, but I have not seen the text yet.

The Speaker will have to decide whether to accept one or both motions. Given the level of anger in the Commons about the prorogation decision, it is quite likely both will be allowed.

In theory each debate could last up to three hours, taking you to 10pm if both motions were to be put to a vote. But at Westminster today there is an assumption that MPs will get through the SO24 debate or debates more quickly.

Early evening?: The government has tabled five motions under the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act. Up to 90 minutes is allocated for each debate, but it is understood that four of the motions will get pulled, and the other one is not expected to take the full 90 minutes.

Early/mid evening?: MPs have to conclude the parliamentary buildings (restoration and renewal) bill, which is returning from the Lords. Up to an hour has been set aside for this debate, but, again, it could wrap up more quickly than that.

9pm or later?: MPs begin the 90-minute debate on Boris Johnson’s motion calling for an early election. Johnson is expected to win the vote technically, because most MPs voting are expected to vote in favour, but lose the vote in practical terms, because under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act two thirds of MPs (434) must vote in favour for the election election to happen.

Around 11pm or later?: Parliament prorogues. This involves a ceremony taking place in the House of Lords, with MPs summoned to attend, as happens with the Queen’s speech - only without the Queen.

Updated

Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party, is suggesting Boris Johnson could be impeached if he ignores the law designed to rule out a no-deal Brexit on 31 October. Liz Saville Roberts, Plaid’s Wesminster leader, said this after the meeting of opposition leaders this morning.

I am glad that as opposition parties, we are united in our belief that Boris Johnson’s attempt to undermine the rule of law must be stopped.

If the prime minister refuses to seek an extension to the period under article 50, he will have broken the law – plain and simple – and he must be subject to legal repercussions.

I told other opposition parties this morning that if he does break the law, we should be ready to impeach Boris Johnson – a procedure that he himself supported in 2004 when current Plaid Cymru leader Adam Price sought to impeach Tony Blair for lying.

Saville Roberts did not mention the fact that Price’s attempt to impeach Blair in 2004 got nowhere. As this Commons library briefing (pdf) explains, “impeachment is considered obsolete, as it has been superseded by other forms of accountability”. Ken Macdonald, a former director of public prosecutions, has suggested Johnson could be jailed for contempt of court if he ignored this law.

Updated

This is what Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, said after the meeting of opposition parties this morning.

It is clear there must be an early election - but it cannot happen while the Tory government is threatening to subvert the law to force through a catastrophic no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

If Boris Johnson wants an election he must obey the law and take a no-deal Brexit off the table. It is beyond belief that the prime minister is disrespecting democracy by seeking to shut down parliament and railroad through an extreme Brexit against the will of parliament and the people.

Once the threat of no deal is off the table, we will move for an early election.

Ian Blackford.
Ian Blackford. Photograph: Amer Ghazzal/REX/Shutterstock

Updated

The government has spent tens of thousands of pounds in recent days on adverts promising “Brexit is happening” on 31 October, despite increasing uncertainty over whether it actually will, PA Media reports. Figures from Facebook showed the government had paid out £30,531 on the targeted posts in the five days since they were launched on 4 September – the same week MPs voted to block a no-deal departure. The adverts point to information for businesses and members of the public on how to prepare for the planned exit on Halloween.

Updated

Corbyn says decision to prorogue parliament tonight 'disgraceful'

Jeremy Corbyn has described the government’s decision to prorogue parliament this evening as “disgraceful”. Asked about the move, Corbyn said:

I think it is disgraceful. Parliament should be sitting. Parliament should be holding the government to account. And the prime minister appears to want to run away from questions.

Corbyn also confirmed that the opposition parties have agreed not to back an early election until the government has complied with the bill ruling out a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

Jeremy Corbyn leaves his home in north London
Jeremy Corbyn leaves his home in north London this morning. Photograph: Isabel Infantes/AFP/Getty Images

Updated

Opposition party leaders confirm their opposition to general election until Brexit delayed

This is from Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem leader, commenting after a meeting with Jeremy Corbyn and other opposition leaders this morning.

One consequence of the decision to prorogue parliament this evening is that Boris Johnson will not have to give evidence to the Commons liaison committee at a session that was scheduled for Wednesday. Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee (and a member of the liaison committee) has issue this statement on behalf of the People’s Vote campaign, which wants a second referendum. He said:

It is extraordinary that Boris Johnson will shut down parliament this evening for over a month at the very moment when we need our elected MPs to be in the House of Commons holding the government to account. It also means that the prime minister will avoid having to face questions from the liaison committee on Wednesday. I don’t think he was relishing the prospect.

Richard Benyon, one of the 21 Conservative MPs who lost the whip last week after he voted against the government, has announced he is standing down at the next election.

Here is a full list of MPs who are standing down. There are now almost 20 MPs, elected as Tories at the last election, who have said they are not standing again. Almost all are from the centrist, one nation wing of the party. There are another 13 who could go because they lost the whip last week and may struggle to get re-elected as independents.

Updated

Back in the public administration committee, Sir Mark Sedwill, the cabinet secretary, said that in the event of a general election, essential government business could continue. That would include the Brexit talks, he said.

Johnson and Varadkar conclude talks saying 'significant gaps' remain between them

Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar have issued a joint statement following their talks in Dublin. Here it is in full.

They said that while “common ground” was established in some areas, “significant gaps” remain between them.

The prime minister and the taoiseach had a positive and constructive meeting in Government Buildings this morning.

This was an essential and timely opportunity for the prime minister and the taoiseach to establish a relationship and a better understanding of each other’s positions.

They spoke privately over breakfast for more than half an hour before joining their delegations for another half-hour meeting.

While they agreed that the discussions are at an early stage, common ground was established in some areas although significant gaps remain.

The UK and Ireland are committed to securing an agreement between the European Union and the UK, and recognise that negotiations take place through the Brussels taskforce.

They also shared their commitment to the Belfast/Good Friday agreement and the restoration of the power-sharing institutions in Northern Ireland.

They look forward to meeting each other again in the near future.

Updated

Labour’s Rupa Huq goes next.

Q: When were you told of the PM’s plan to prorogue parliament for five weeks?

Sedwill says the paper has been revealed in court. He was on holiday at the time, but he was kept informed, and read that paper on the day it was submitted to the PM, or the day after.

The SNP’s Ronnie Cowan asks if, in the event of a vote of no confidence, the PM could just run down the clock for 14 days without recommending an alternative PM to the Queen.

Sedwill confirms that that is the case.

  • Sedwill suggests that, following a vote of no confidence, the prime minster would not be obliged to suggest an alternative PM to the Queen.

Cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill questioned by MPs

Sir Mark Sedwill, the cabinet secretary, has just started giving evidence to the Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee.

There is a live feed here.

Sedwill has just said the prime minister is under a duty to resign only when he, or she, can make a recommendation to the Queen as to who is most likely to be able to command the confidence of the House of Commons.

That is a political judgment the PM must exercise, with advice from the cabinet secretary.

Q: Does the PM need to test that, with a sitting House of Commons?

No, says Sedwill.

He says when Boris Johnson was appointed there was talk of having a vote of confidence in the house. But that did not go ahead.

Updated

From Sky’s Sam Coates

Boris Johnson 'not going to seek an extension', Downing Street says

Downing Street has also insisted, again, that Boris Johnson will refused to request an article 50 extension - even though legislation passed last week, and due to receive royal assent later today, would require him to do this if MPs do not pass a deal or vote to approve a no-deal Brexit. The prime minister’s spokesman told journalists at the morning lobby briefing:

The prime minister is not going to seek an extension.

If MPs want to resolve this there is an easy way - vote for an election today and let the public decide.

Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, claims that Boris Johnson has changed tack and that he is now going “all out” for Theresa May’s Brexit deal.

Johnson/Varadkar press conference - Summary

Here are the main quotes from the Boris Johnson/Leo Varadkar press conference.

  • Boris Johnson insisted that he genuinely wanted to secure a Brexit deal before 31 October and he described a no-deal Brexit as “a failure of statecraft for which we would all be responsible”. This is a marked change of tone from Johnson, who in the past has repeatedly insisted that the dangers of no deal have been exaggerated by his critics. He said:

I want to find a deal. I have looked carefully at no-deal. Yes, we could do it, the UK could certainly get through it, but be in no doubt that outcome would be a failure of statecraft for which we would all be responsible.

He also insisted a deal could be achieved.

I would overwhelmingly prefer to find an agreement. I do believe that a deal can be done by October 18 [the final day of the EU summit] so let’s do it together.

  • He said he was “undaunted” by the opposition to his strategy in parliament. He said:

We will come out on October 31, and I’m sure that parliamentarians will see the wisdom of doing that and respecting, honouring, the referendum result - the democratic referendum result.

And, I’m absolutely undaunted by whatever may take place in parliament.

I think what the British people want us to do is to deliver a deal and to get on and take us out on October 31.

The story of Brexit will not end if the United Kingdom leaves on 31 October or even 31 January – there is no such thing as a clean break. No such thing as just getting it done. Rather, we just enter a new phase.

If there is no deal, I believe that’s possible, it will cause severe disruption for British and Irish people alike. We will have to get back to the negotiating table. When we do, the first and only items on the agenda will be citizens’ rights, the financial settlement and the Irish border. All the issues we had resolved in the withdrawal agreement we made with your predecessor. An agreement made in good faith by 28 governments.

Varadkar said, even if there were a deal, negotiations between the UK and the EU would have to continue.

We will enter talks on a future relationship agreement between the EU and UK. It’s going to be tough dealing with issues ranging from tariffs to fishing rights, product standards and state aid. It will then have to be ratified by 31 parliaments.

  • He said that, even if Johnson agreed a deal by 31 October, negotiating a free trade deal with the EU during the time set aside for the transition, and getting it ratified by all EU parliaments, would be a “Herculean task”.
  • He said that he was prepared to listen to Johnson’s ideas for an alternative to the backstop, but he would not just accept a “promise”. He said:

I am ready to listen, but what we will not do is replace a legal guarantee with a promise.

  • He said he thought the EU would need a “good reason” if it were to agree to another article 50 extension. He wanted this matter resolved at the October summit, he said. He explained:

I’m very keen to have this matter resolved at the EU summit. Brexit has dominated politics for far too long now. This is an opportunity for common ground and finding a solution.

As for an extension, we’d like to see this dealt with but if there is a good reason to have an extension we would consider it.

  • He said Ireland would oppose the reintroduction of direct rule in Northern Ireland, which he said would be “contrary to the St Andrews agreement”.
  • Johnson claimed he had “an abundance of proposals” for alternatives to the backstop. But he refused to give any detail of what they were. He said:

I’ve seen the old border and how absolutely vital it is we keep the open border, on the plan, it’s fairly obvious, we need to find a way of ensuring that the UK is not kept locked in backstop arrangement while giving Ireland the assurance that it needs.

Whether it’s electronic pre-clearance or concept of the unity of island for agri-foods, and other ideas we’ll bring forward to address the full range.

I don’t underestimate the technical problems but I do think there is a way through.

  • Varadkar said having no backstop would mean there being no deal. He said:

In the absence of agreed alternative arrangements, no backstop is no deal for us.

Boris Johnson with Leo Varadkar (right) at Government Buildings
Boris Johnson with Leo Varadkar (right) at Government Buildings Photograph: POOL/Reuters

Prorogation is the process that happens when parliament gets suspended at the end of one session of parliament before the start of another, which starts with a new Queens’s speech. It is not the same as parliament being dissolved, which is what happens before a general election. And it is not the same as when parliament gets adjourned, for a recess, as happens over a holiday period. If you want to learn more about the process, this House of Commons library briefing note (pdf) may tell you everything you need to know.

Updated

Parliament to be prorogued tonight, Downing Street confirms

No 10 has confirmed at the morning lobby briefing that parliament will be prorogued at the end of proceedings tonight. This is from Sky’s Lewis Goodall.

Updated

Up to 100 demonstrators gathered outside Leinster House, the Irish parliament, in Dublin this morning ahead of Boris Johnson’s visit to Dublin, PA Media reports. The protest was led by Seamus McDonnell from Co Armagh, who chanted: “No customs, no border, no Brexit.”

Sinn Féin councillor Dessie Ellis said:

We’re here today to protest against Boris Johnson’s visit to Dublin. We want to send out a strong message that we will not stand for a hard border or any border. There are people from all around the country here to tell him that today but particularly from the border region.

People living in the border region will suffer immensely if a border comes back so the taoiseach needs to stand strong, stand his ground and give that message from the Irish people.

Updated

The Criminal Bar Association has condemned suggestions from the government that it might try to ignore the law saying the PM would have to request a Brexit extension by 19 October, unless Boris Johnson either agrees a deal or gets MPs to vote for no deal. This is from the CBA’s chair, Caroline Goodwin:

As the CBA our role is not to say ‘remain’ or ‘leave’ but part of our role is to explain the law – criminal law – and play our part in upholding the rule of law. Standing up for the rule of law underpins our civil society – the economy, justice system, societal cohesion.

In or out, the EU, a government that stands up for the rule of law acts in the best interests of the people – parliament included. Any government – the executive – which ignores the rule of law and actively seeks to break the law undermines the entire justice system, opens the door wide open to mob rule and very quickly to anarchy.

How can a government on the one hand pledge to unleash a ‘reign of terror’ on criminals when its own leadership threatens to break the law?

We cannot expect people not to rob, rape and murder when a government declares it may break the law. We cannot lay rape to the rule of law.

Updated

Boris Johnson (right) opening the guestbook at the page signed by Donald Trump and his wife Melania before holding talks with Leo Varadkar (centre) at Government buildings in Dublin
Boris Johnson (right) opening the guestbook at the page signed by Donald Trump and his wife Melania before holding talks with Leo Varadkar (centre) at Government Buildings in Dublin Photograph: Charles Mcquillan/AFP/Getty Images

Updated

Johnson/Varadkar press conference - verdict from Twitter commentariat

And this is what other journalists are saying about the Boris Johnson/Leo Varadkar press conference.

From RTE’s Tony Connelly

From Sky’s Adam Boulton

From the Sun’s Steve Hawkes

From the BBC’s Vicki Young

From Euronews’s Darren McCaffrey

From the BBC’s Faisal Islam

From politics.co.uk’s Ian Dunt

From my colleague Dan Sabbagh

From the Irish News’s Allison Morris

Boris Johnson (left) with Leo Varadkar in Dublin
Boris Johnson (left) with Leo Varadkar in Dublin
 Photograph: Aidan Crawley/EPA

Updated

Boris Johnson/Leo Varadkar press conference - snap verdict

That was a slightly longer press conference than we had been led to expect and, given the circumstances, it was perhaps not as frosty as it might have been. During the summer it emerged that, when Boris Johnson was foreign secretary, he once said about Leo Varadkar: “Why isn’t he called Murphy like all the rest of them?” Johnson campaigned for a policy outcome that will probably cause immense damage to the Irish economy, and for the last two years his Brexiter allies have frequently demonised Varadkar as the obstacle to a successful Brexit. Johnson then delayed his first visit to Dublin for weeks (despite this morning claiming that he believed it was important to speak to the Irish first – see 9.59am.) Varadkar could be forgiven for wanting to tell him to take a jump.

Instead, Varadkar sounded sincere about wanting to ensure Ireland remains a friend to the UK in the future. (Realistically, that’s the only sensible economic strategy.) And Johnson sounded considerably more measured and composed than he did in his public appearances on Thursday and Friday last week (not difficult). Perhaps shaken by the way people like his brother Jo Johnson and Amber Rudd have concluded he is not serious about finding a Brexit deal, he was much more negative about the reality of a no-deal Brexit than he has been for ages, describing it as “a failure of statecraft for which we would all be responsible”.

But that did not prevent Johnson being disconcerted by some of the questions. He repeatedly dodged a question about when he last visited the Irish border. He ignored a question about whether he stood by the claim he one made about how technology could solve the border issue because that is how the congestion charge is enforced on the border between Camden and Islington. And he was humbled by a brilliant question pointing out that, while he is happy to use “dead in a ditch” as a metaphor, Brexit undermines arrangements that have preserved the peace in an country where until recently hundreds of people did end up dead in ditches literally.

Johnson claimed to have “an abundance of proposals” to resolve the backstop. (See 10.08am.) But, unless he is moving towards approving a Northern Ireland-only backstop (which is possible, although the DUP would erupt), his comments about wanting to preserve the all-Ireland economy while avoiding border checks and still taking the UK out of the EU, suggest he is still fundamentally stranded in ‘have cake and eat it’ territory.

Johnson’s strategy is driven by the understandable belief that many British voters just want to see Brexit done and for the whole crisis to go away. But this may be misconceived. As Varadkar argued forcefully in his opening remarks, there is no such thing as a “clean-break Brexit”, and this problem will be with us for years. (See 9.47am.)

Boris Johnson meeting Leo Varadkar (left) in Dublin.e
Boris Johnson meeting Leo Varadkar (left) in Dublin.
e Photograph: Aidan Crawley/EPA

Updated

Johnson claims he has 'abundance of proposals' to find solution to backstop

Q: The Irish say they have received no new proposals today. Have you got anything today? And if you create an all-Ireland agrifoods zone, won’t that put a border in the Irish Sea that the DUP won’t accept.

Johnson says the government has “an abundance of proposals”. But he does not want to share them with the media. He says he will discuss ideas with Varadkar. He wants changes to the political declaration, as well as to the withdrawal agreement.

He says he thinks he has “the ideal amount of time” to sort this out. Angela Merkel said 30 days would be enough to find a solution. She was right.

Varadkar says “no backstop is no deal”. That is not an option Ireland finds acceptable, he says.

And that’s it. I will give a verdict, summary and reaction soon.

Updated

Q: When you talk about people being dead in ditches, there is a sense that you don’t really understand what is at stake here. When did you last visit the border? Do you still think it is like the border between Camden and Islington?

Johnson says he thinks everyone here understands the importance of the border. The UK will never impose checks at the border, he says. There must be an open border, so goods and people can circulate in the normal way.

He says he genuinely thinks that solutions can be found.

Updated

Varadkar says EU would need 'good reason' to grant another Brexit extension

Varadkar says he hopes this will get settled at the EU summit in October.

Most EU countries would prefer not to have an extension.

But if there were a “good reason” for one, the EU would consider it.

Boris Johnson says he is 'undaunted' by parliament's opposition to his strategy

Q: How can you convince Varadkar that you have the power to get anything through parliament?

Johnson says everyone can see the Brexit talks have been going on for far too long. The EU wants this done, and he wants this done. And he thinks parliamentarians will see the wisdom of this.

He claims he is “undaunted” by what is happening in parliament. The British people want him to deliver Brexit.

He says he wants to “manage down” expectations.

I don’t think we are going to have a complete breakthrough here today.

Updated

Q: What would the Irish government think about London imposing direct rule on Northern Ireland?

Varadkar says the Irish would oppose direct rule, as contrary to the St Andrews agreement.

Updated

Johnson and Varadkar are now taking questions.

Q: Have you visted the border as PM? And when are we going to see the detail of your backstop plan?

Johnson says he knows what the border was like in the old days. He knows how vital it is not to return to those days.

He claims that the “landing zone” is obvious.

There are two areas where progress can be made.

First, there is a lot that can be done on trusted traders schemes etc.

Second, you can accept the unity of Ireland for sanitary and phytosanitary regulations.

He says, if you can address these two points, you can go a long way towards a solution.

He says he accepts “the locus for the negotiation remains Brussels”.

But he wants to discuss with the Irish how they can assist with that process.

Other EU leaders ask him if he has made progress with the Irish. So it is incumbent on the UK to talk first to Ireland.

(But Johnson has not talked first to Ireland. He visited Berlin and Paris first, last month.)

Updated

Johnson says he wants a deal.

They have spent three years “masticating” over this problem.

He says their predecessors solved far harder problems.

Johnson says no-deal Brexit would be 'failure of statecraft for which we would all be responsible'

Johnson says there are two tasks before November.

They must restore the government in Northern Ireland.

And they must get Brexit done, he says. The UK must come out by 31 October or “permanent damage” may be done to trust in the political system.

There are three questions to resolve, he says.

1) Can they ensure that unchecked movement of goods and people, and cattle, continues at the border? Johnson says he thinks the answer is yes.

2) Can they maintain the Belfast agreement? Johnson says he thinks the answer is yes.

3) Can we protect the economic unity of Ireland. Again, Johnson says he thinks the answer is yes.

Johnson says the government must achieve these aims, while allowing the UK to leave the EU.

He says he thinks, when you look at these problems, there are practical solutions.

If there weren’t, the backstop would not be described as a backstop.

Johnson says he wants to get a deal.

A no-deal Brexit would be “a failure of statecraft for which we would all be responsible”.

Updated

Boris Johnson is speaking now.

He says he first met Varadkar at a St Patrick’s day parade in London when he was mayor.

He says the “vast crowd” illustrated the close and intricate relationship between the British and the Irish.

He says their predecessors took the two countries forward in circumstances that were much harder.

He says the British eat 50% of cheese and beef produced in Ireland.

And the England cricket captain was born in Dublin, he says.

Updated

Varadkar quotes from something Gen Alan Brooke wrote about seeing Ireland when flying back after a visit to the US with Churchill during the second world war.

Updated

Varadkar says there can be no such thing as 'clean-break Brexit'

Leo Varadkar is speaking now.

He says there will be no such thing as a “clean-break Brexit”. He says if there is no deal, the UK will have to renegotiate a new relationship with the EU anyway.

And he says that, even if there is a deal, they will have to negotiate a trade deal.

  • Varadkar says there can be no such thing as a “clean-break Brexit”.

He says he thinks a Brexit deal is possible.

And he says Ireland wants to be a friend to the UK in a future.

On the backstop, he says Ireland cannot replace a legal deal with a promise.

  • Varadkar he says is not willing to replace the backstop with a promise.

He says he and Boris Johnson have spoken twice by phone.

But the UK has still not proposed a legal, operative alternative to the backstop, he says.

Updated

Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar have posed for a picture on the steps of Government Buildings.

But they just gone in without speaking to the media.

But they might come out again. Someone has been testing the microphones.

And the two podiums have been moved, so they are now near the door, and under shelter.

There is a live feed at the top of this blog.

Updated

Boris Johnson has repeatedly claimed that the talks with the EU intended to find an alternative to the backstop are advancing well. “We are making substantial progress,” he told MPs at PMQs on Wednesday.

But yesterday Leo Varadkar, the Irish taoiseach, said the opposite. As the FT reports in its splash (paywall), this is what he said when asked if he agreed that progress was being made in the talks.

If that is what’s being said, that’s a very optimistic assessment of where we stand.

We will hear from both leaders imminently.

No 10 has about 20 different options to defy law intended to block no deal, Tory Brexiter claims

Immediately after the Today programme’s interview with the former supreme court judge Lord Sumption (see 9.07am), for a counter view they put up the backbench Tory Brexiter Nigel Evans. He did not seem too bothered by Sumption’s argument that the strategy outlined in the Daily Telegraph would be unlawful. He said he and his colleagues had been discussing in the House of Commons tearoom on Thursday what Boris Johnson might do to circumvent the law requiring him to ask for a no-deal Brexit, and Evans said: “We whittled them down to about 20.”

He did not list all 20, but he referred to two: the government tabling a vote of no confidence in itself, or the government passing a one-line bill setting the date for an early election.

Evans also argued that, even though Johnson did not have the support of the Commons, he did have the backing of the public. Evans explained:

You have to remember, 400 MPs representing leave seats voted remain. You really do have parliament against the people. It’s not a great look. And I will be standing alongside the prime minister in trying to deliver what the people voted for.

The two ideas Evans did propose are problematic. The government could in theory try to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, but that would open up a 14-day period during which MPs could agree to support an alternative PM and government. And it could try to pass primary legislation requiring an election on 15 October, but that would require a majority, which Johnson does not have, and it could be amended in ways unacceptable to Number 10.

Updated

Another former lord chancellor, David Gauke, has also said that the plan to try to sabotage any letter sent to the EU requesting a Brexit delay with a second hostile letter would not work.

Gauke, of course, is one of the 21 Tories who had the whip removed last week after voting against the government on this issue.

I’m sorry comments were not open earlier. They are open now.

When Boris Johnson was deciding whether to back remain or leave in the EU referendum in 2016, he famously wrote two versions of his column for the Telegraph, one making the case for remain and one making the case for leave, before finally making his mind up – and publishing the leave one. In other circumstances, and for other individuals, that might be seen as a reasonable approach to taking a difficult decision. But because of Johnson’s long record of inconsistency, the story has come to be seen as emblematic of his duplicity.

As referred to earlier, according to today’s Daily Telegraph splash (paywall), Johnson is considering a new version of the “two contradictory letters strategy” to try to confound the law passed by parliament requiring him to request an article 50 extension if he has failed to agree a Brexit deal by 19 October, and if MPs have not voted to agree no deal (which they won’t). Here is an extract from Owen Bennett and Harry Yorke’s story.

Boris Johnson has drawn up plans to “sabotage” any Brexit extension without breaking the law, the Telegraph has learnt ...

One plan under serious consideration would see the prime minister send an accompanying letter alongside the request to extend article 50 setting out that the government does not want any delay after Oct 31.

On Sunday night, a cabinet source told The Telegraph: “There is a prescribed letter that has to be sent ... Does that stop the prime minister sending other documents to the EU? I don’t think it does.

“A political explainer perhaps, as to where the government’s policy is. It has to make clear that the government is asking for an extension, but let’s not forget what the next step is.

“Once that is done, the Europeans are going to ask: ‘Why? What is the reason?’ [What] if the government said: ‘We don’t have any reasons for an extension’?

“There is a clear path now: the Europeans need to refuse an extension.”

Lord Sumption, a former supreme court judge, told the Today programme earlier this would be illegal. (See 8.09am.) This is what he said when asked if it would be legal for the PM to seek an article 50 extension while trying to sabotage the strategy at the same time.

No, of course it wouldn’t. The bill, or act as it’s about to become, says that he’s got to apply for an extension. Not only has he got to send the letter, he’s got to apply for an extension.

To send the letter and then try to neutralise it seems to me, plainly, a breach of the act.

What you’ve got to realise is the courts are not very fond of loopholes.

Other lawyers have said the same thing. This is from Charlie Falconer, the former Labour lord chancellor.

And these are from Adam Wagner, the barrister and legal commentator.

Updated

From the Irish Times’ Pat Leahy

Updated

Good morning. I’m Andrew Sparrow, taking over from Patrick Greenfield.

Boris Johnson is in Dublin already for his talks with Leo Varadkar, the Irish taoiseach (prime minister). They are due to hold a mini press conference at about 9.15am.

Journalists are already outside Government Buildings in Dublin, where Varadkar’s office is based, waiting for the leaders to arrive.

Secretary of state for Northern Ireland denies he is resigning

Julian Smith has indicated he will not resign from the government despite official papers released last week indicating the Northern Ireland secretary had clashed with No10 over suspending parliament.

Updated

Kuenssberg: Leaders opposing no-deal Brexit to meet this morning

Jeremy Corbyn and other opposition leaders working to stop a no-deal Brexit will meet again this morning to plan their next steps, according to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg. The government is expected to lose another attempt to force an October election later today.

Meanwhile, our Brexit correspondent, Lisa O’Carroll, is in Dublin waiting for the British prime minister to arrive.

Updated

Lord Sumption: two Brexit extension letters would not be legal

The former supreme court judge Lord Sumption has told the BBC’s Today programme that simultaneously asking the EU for an extension while asking the bloc to reject the request would not be legal. This is how Boris Johnson’s government is planning to sabotage any Brexit extension without breaking the law, according to the Telegraph.

Johnson and Varadkar are taking questions just after 9am as the prime minister arrives in Dublin. We’ll bring you the most important answers.

Updated

Irish finance minister: we would support Brexit extension

Paschal Donohoe, Ireland’s finance minister, has told the BBC’s Today programme that his government would support a further Brexit extension but said it needed the backing of all EU27 member states. Ahead of today’s meeting between Boris Johnson and the taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, Donohoe said the Irish were looking forward to further understanding the UK government’s Brexit views and discussing the political standoff in Northern Ireland. Direct rule from London under a no-deal Brexit would be “exceptionally serious”, according to the Irish finance minister.

The Irish finance minister, Paschal Donohoe
The Irish finance minister, Paschal Donohoe. Photograph: Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters

Updated

Good morning readers. I’m taking over the live blogging reins until Andrew Sparrow is ready to guide you through another big day of Brexit developments.

Nobody from the government is doing any broadcast rounds this morning, it appears, but I will bring you the most important politics news lines as they happen.

Tweet me at @pgreenfielduk if you have any questions.

Updated

We’ve already heard this morning about the potential impact of Brexit on the economy, according to KPMG.

But for a real-time picture, we can see that the pound rose close to $1.23 earlier this morning before slipping back. It is now buying $1.227. It is worth €1.113.

The pound has benefited from the government’s recent calamities, which investors have seen as making no deal less likely, in turn pushing up sterling.

Updated

The other big story of the day so far is that British Airways has been forced to cancel “nearly 100% of our flights” after pilots went on strike for 48 hours over pay.

BA told passengers in a statement on its website:

We understand the frustration and disruption Balpa’s strike action has caused you. After many months of trying to resolve the pay dispute, we are extremely sorry that it has come to this.

The pilots are on strike for 48 hours and have further action planned on 27 September. The airline said it was offering all affected customers full refunds or the option to re-book to another date of travel or alternative airline. Flights on BA CityFlyer, SUN-AIR and Comair were not affected.

BA operates more than 800 flights a day, with most expected to be cancelled, affecting up to 145,000 passengers each day.

You can read our full story on the strike here.

Updated

John Mann: 'Voters are wondering what Labour is for'

The Labour MP John Mann, who quit the party on Saturday to become the government’s antisemitism tsar, has been speaking to the BBC about his new role and Brexit.

John Mann
John Mann Photograph: BBC

Taking Brexit first, Mann told the Today programme that activists knocking on the doors of Labour voters in the north of England heartlands “would find voters who voted Brexit and who reject the direction that Jeremy Corbyn was taking the party”.

He added:

The vast majority of Labour supporters in the heartlands voted Brexit. They are despairing about what they are seeing in parliament. They are scratching their heads, wondering what Labour is for.

An opponent of Jeremy Corbyn, Mann denied he would use his new role as the government’s “independent” antisemitism role as a way of attacking the Labour leader’s record on the issue.

“That would be dismissive of antisemitism … Labour has to get its act together and root out antisemitism,” he said.

Updated

We are likely to hear a great deal more about the government’s manoeuvres in the next few days.

But a reader’s letter raises an interesting argument that some of the farcical episodes in the Johnson administration’s short tenure – think the bungled police academy speech and even Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Commons slouch – are all part of the masterplan to distract voters from the serious defeats being inflicted on the government at Westminster.

You can read it here:

Updated

Norman Smith, the BBC’s assistant political editor, has just been talking on Radio 4’s Today programme talking about some of the machinations we might expect at Westminster today.

He said if MPs do reject the government’s bid to force an election and then the no-deal bill is given royal assent, we can expect Downing Street to prorogue parliament. This is because the government has no other way of preventing rebel Tory MPs and opposition parties from seizing total control of the parliamentary timetable and holding debates on, for example, forcing the release of details of the no-deal Brexit planning document, Operation Yellowhammer.

Smith said Johnson had “lost control of parliament, his majority, control of election timing, and a no-deal Brexit. He can’t do much.”

He also adds that his sources maintain No 10 would “not break the law” by ignoring the no-deal bill. “It’s not an option,” he said.

Updated

KPMG predicts recession

The latest gloomy report about what will happen to the economy in the event of no deal comes from KPMG. The consultancy predicts Britain would lose 1.5% growth and fall into its first recession for a decade if we crash out. Consumer spending would be badly hit, it says. Yael Selfin, KPMG UK’s chief economist, said: “With the Brexit debate poised on a knife-edge, the UK economy is now at a crossroads.”

Here’s the full story:

Footfall on the high street has dropped in the past three months.
Footfall on the high street has dropped in the past three months. Photograph: SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

A retail footfall survey today adds to the downbeat economic mood. It says visits to the high street were down 1.9% in the three months to the end of August as people preferred out-of-town centres or online shopping. My colleague Miles Brignall has the full story here:

Papers roundup

Given the complexity of the political situation, it is not surprising that there is considerable divergence on way the papers have approached the Brexit turmoil today.

The Times’ splash headline says “Johnson in retreat over delay to Brexit” but the Telegraph reckons No 10 has a plan to thwart backbenchers’ no-deal bill, saying: “Johnson ‘can legally stop Brexit extension’”.

The Telegraph quotes a No 10 source as saying that, if the government is forced to request an extension to article 50 as the backbench no-deal bill will do, it could append a letter to the request saying that the UK does not have any reason to extend the deadline for Brexit from 31 October.

The source tells the Telegraph (whose star columnist used to be the PM):

Once that is done, the Europeans are going to ask: ‘Why? What is the reason?’ [What] if the Government said: ‘We don’t have any reasons for an extension’? There is a clear path now: the Europeans need to refuse an extension.”

The Scotsman reports “Johnson will ‘test to the limit’ no-deal legislation”. The Guardian throws it forward to focus on Johnson’s trip to Ireland: “PM heads to Dublin amid fears of more resignations”, on which subject the FT says: “Varadkar plays down prospects of progress on Brexit deadlock”.

The Mail has its own Brexit scoop from an interview with the culture secretary, Nicky Morgan, a remainer who nevertheless pledges to remain loyal to Johnson. But she demands of his approach to talks with the EU: “What is your plan, Boris?”. The Express proclaims “Britain is still backing Boris”. The Sun says the PM will fight the no-deal bill in court but leads with: “Little Mix Jesy: my suicide bid”.

Updated

Good morning and welcome to the politics live blog. This is Martin Farrer kicking off the blog before Andy Sparrow and my colleagues in London take over on what promises to be another momentous day at Westminster and beyond.

After the resignation of the work and pensions secretary, Amber Rudd, dealt another blow to Boris Johnson’s government, there is more fevered speculation about whether or not the prime minister will try to bypass the backbench bill blocking no deal if, as is likely, it becomes law today.

It seems probable that there will be more twists and turns than an Ashes series, but here are some of the fixed points, along with possible developments:

  • Boris Johnson heads to Dublin for talks with his Irish counterpart, Leo Varadkar, on how to break the stalemate over a solution to the Irish backstop. Read our splash story on this subject here.
  • Johnson will then fly back to London where he is expected to make another attempt to force a general election on 15 October by asking MPs to support a motion tabled under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act.
  • The gambit is likely to fail, according to most calculations, because opposition parties still want to ensure that a no-deal Brexit is definitely off the table before they go to the country. This would enable them to portray Johnson as having broken his key promise of delivering Brexit “come what may” on 31 October, writes Michael Savage, in this very handy explainer about what’s been going on and what lies ahead.
  • Meanwhile, the backbench bill to block no deal is expected to receive royal assent today.
  • If that goes ahead, the key question will be whether Johnson is somehow able to circumvent the legislation and go ahead with Brexit. There are reports swirling around that No 10 believes it can go to court to get around the law, but an equal number saying the government won’t be able to. The latter point to a tweet by justice secretary Robert Buckland that he has spoken to the PM “regarding the importance of the rule of law”.
  • There is the possibility that the EU could prevent Britain from delaying its exit anyway, according to our Brussels correspondent Daniel Boffey.
  • And there is also the chance of further cabinet resignations following Rudd’s decision to stand down. We report that she has been contacted by three cabinet ministers and nine junior ministers worried about the government’s Brexit policy since tendering her resignation.
  • In all the chaos you might have missed the fact that Rudd was replaced as work and pensions secretary yesterday by Thérèse Coffey, MP for Suffolk Coastal, a loyalist who was promoted from her role as environment minister.

And I liked this picture of Johnson and his latest nemesis at the Tory conference last year. She was a big fan of Jeremy Hunt’s bid for the leadership:

Amber Rudd and Boris Johnson in Manchester last October.
Amber Rudd and Boris Johnson in Manchester last October. Photograph: Geoff Pugh/REX/Shutterstock

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
Daredevil Creator Explains Why The Netflix Show Happened Despite Being Pitched As Two Movies
Drew Goddard goes way back with the Man Without Fear.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Zendaya to 'go into hiding' over fears fans will be 'sick of her' in 2026
Zendaya is to appear in movies Spider-Man: Brand New Day, Dune: Part Three, The Odyssey, and The Drama this year, and she is planning to "go into hiding" over fears fans will get "sick" of seeing her.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
The 6 best new shows and movies streaming this week on Netflix, Prime Video, Disney Plus, and more (March 30–April 5)
Creature features, the return of Your Friends and Neighbours, and more great new shows and movies
Total Film
Total Film
Every phone ping takes 7 seconds of your attention — here’s how to get it back
Notifications steal seven seconds of your focus according to a new study, but there are ways to avoid this.
TechRadar
TechRadar
'Show Me Your Greencard' Video From Braintree, MA Goes Viral—Outrage Sparks Over Racist Sign
A viral video from Braintree, Massachusetts, shows a woman displaying a 'Show Me Your Greencard' sign, sparking accusations of racism and a broader debate on everyday discrimination.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Angelina Jolie 'Clone' Rumours Explained: Was Brad Pitt's Ex Replaced by a Body Double at a China Fashion Show?
Angelina Jolie's appearance at a Shanghai Tom Ford event triggered online frenzy over clone and body double claims, fuelling debate on her looks amid longstanding health disclosures.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play