Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Kate Lyons (now), Kevin Rawlinson and Andrew Sparrow (earlier)

Labour, Tory hard-Brexiters and DUP line up against May – as it happened

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, at the the EU commission HQ in Brussels yesterday.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, at the the EU commission HQ in Brussels yesterday. Photograph: François Lenoir/Reuters

We’re going to close down the blog for the night, thanks for reading along and for your comments. We’ll be back when you wake up for another day of Politics Live. It’ll be a big day, get some rest and see you here in the morning!

Updated

What we know so far

  • An emergency cabinet meeting will be held at 2pm Wednesday to sign off on Theresa May’s long-awaited final Brexit deal.
  • Cabinet ministers were summoned to Downing Street on Tuesday for one-on-one briefings with May or her chief of staff, so they could be briefed on the deal reached with Brussels.
  • Wednesday’s cabinet meeting is expected to last for three hours and if the deal is approved by cabinet tomorrow, Number 10 will launch an all-out campaign to sell the deal to the public, beginning with a live televised press conference tomorrow night.
  • The agreement will likely be taken to parliament in mid-December, after an EU summit at the end of November. It is unclear whether the agreement will get the required support in parliament, with reports that Penny Mordaunt asked May to allow ministers a free vote on the subject.
  • Jeremy Corbyn, Vince Cable and the Westminster leaders of Plaid Cymru and the SNP signed a letter addressed to May tonight, worried that May would not allow what they call “truly meaningful debate” on the subject in parliament. They are calling for an extended debate time for the motion and the option to table amendments.
  • Corbyn put out a statement suggesting Labour may vote against the deal. “From what we know of the shambolic handling of these negotiations, this is unlikely to be a good deal for the country...If this deal doesn’t meet our six tests and work for the whole country, then we will vote against it.”
  • Chief among the questions raised by the agreement, is how the Irish border will be handled and whether it will include a “backstop”, the mechanism that will ensure there is no hard border in Ireland after Brexit.

One bright spot in this day of hectic Brexit news is that people are being very funny on the internet about it all. And if you’re still up at 12:30am following the twists and turns of Brexit news, then you probably need the jokes as much as you need sleep and potentially a stiff drink.

I’m clearly not the only one enjoying the quips, Labour MP Stella Creasy just retweeted this classic:

I’ve been loving people’s captions on some of the photos of ministers heading in one-by-one to meet with Theresa May.

Mood.

The front pages of the papers are out and unsurprisingly May’s Brexit deal is the main story.

The Guardian’s splash is “Brexit: May tells her cabinet, this is the deal – now back me”. The Daily Mail calls it “Judgment Day”. The Daily Telegraph says “May faces ‘moment of truth’ on Brexit deal”. The FT has a similar headline: “May faces moment of truth in cabinet clash over Brexit draft”.

The Times is unhappy, writing “May accused of betrayal as she unveils Brexit deal” and the i writes “Deal done”, though then acknowledges how far the deal has to go before Brexit has happened.

The Daily Express, however, is loving the deal: “This Brexit deal is best for Britain”, runs their headline.

Laura Kuenssberg is logging off Twitter for the day, which is a sign that news may be slowing down. She says that if Cabinet signs off on the deal tomorrow then the date it is taken to – and approved by – the EU is likely to be 25 November.

What happens tomorrow?

Ministers have been given hundreds of pages of the deal to study overnight. Cabinet will reconvene tomorrow at 2pm to discuss and vote on the agreement. Cabinet is expected to last for three hours.

Tom Newton Dunn, the Sun’s political editor says that if the cabinet approves the deal, a “massive sales job” will begin immediately and the prime minister will give a live TV press conference. The agreement will be published in full, before it goes to parliament for a vote. Newton Dunn says that today Penny Mordaunt asked the PM to give ministers a free vote on her deal in parliament – a worrying sign.

Updated

ITV journalist, Robert Peston, has this explanation of how the Northern Ireland question will be handled in the Brexit deal, as he understands it. Good luck making your way to the end and still being able to think straight – no disrespect to Mr Peston, who has done a great job attempting to explain this – but this is such a knotty subject that it is bound to do people’s heads in. But this where we are now...

Opposition party leaders call on May for 'truly meaningful' parliamentary vote

Jeremy Corbyn, Vince Cable and the Westminster leaders of Plaid Cymru and the SNP have written to the prime minister earlier this evening calling for a “truly meaningful vote” in parliament on the Brexit withdrawal agreement.

In a joint letter, the leaders of the opposition parties say existing procedures, such as limiting debate to 90 minutes, are not appropriate in this case and have urged May to allow multiple amendments to be tabled.

“While we recognise Parliament will have to approve or disapprove any agreement, it would be reckless to present this vote as take-it-or-leave-it without Parliament being able to suggest an alternative,” said the letter.

“Recent interventions from Government ministers have suggested that you and your government may seek to limit or constrain the process on the final vote, in an attempt to muzzle Parliament. We want to be clear that this would be wholly unacceptable.”

This is Kate Lyons taking over the blog from Kevin Rawlinson.

The Sun’s political editor, Tom Newton Dunn, says five senior ministers – Dominic Raab, Jeremy Hunt, Sajid Javid, Michael Gove and Geoffrey Cox – have signed on to back the deal, and that Andrea Leadsom and Chris Grayling are also in favour, but that Esther McVey and Penny Mordaunt are not.

Updated

The DUP’s leader, Arlene Foster, has given perhaps the clearest indication yet that her party is unwilling to give Theresa May the votes she may require to get her deal through parliament. She has said:

We want a sensible deal which works for Northern Ireland, the United Kingdom and our neighbours in the Republic of Ireland. But our desire for a deal will not be superseded by a willingness to accept any deal.

An agreement which places new trade barriers between Northern Ireland and Great Britain will fundamentally undermine the constitutional and economic integrity of the United Kingdom. That is not acceptable.

Over time, such a deal will weaken the union. No unionist prime minister could argue that such a deal is in the national interest.

It would be democratically unacceptable for Northern Ireland trade rules to be set by Brussels. Northern Ireland would have no representation in Brussels and would be dependent on a Dublin government speaking up for our core industries.

I am heartened by friends of the union on both sides of the House and across the United Kingdom who have pledged to stand with the DUP in opposing a deal which weakens the union and hands control to Brussels, rather than Parliament.

These are momentous days and the decisions being taken will have long-lasting ramifications.

The prime minister must win the support of the cabinet and the House of Commons. Every individual vote will count.

Speaking to Ireland’s broadcaster RTÉ, the DUP’s Sammy Wilson said May’s was not a deal that his party could support.

What we’ve heard and seen of the deal it is something which we would absolutely oppose.

It goes against everything the government promised it would deliver. Indeed, it’s a regurgitation of what the prime minister said last March, no British prime minister could ever sign up to and it would split the United Kingdom..

It would keep the UK tied and handcuffed to the European Union with the key for those handcuffs remaining in the hands of the EU. I don’t think it’s only us who will be opposing it.

Updated

The former Brexit secretary, David Davis, who stepped down from the government because he felt unable to support May’s Chequers proposals, has echoed many of his more hardline pro-Brexit colleagues, saying:

This is the moment of truth. This is the fork in the road. Do we pursue a future as an independent nation or accept EU domination, imprisonment in the customs union and second class status?

Cabinet and all Conservative MPs should stand up, be counted and say no to this capitulation.

Updated

My colleague, Peter Walker, is tweeting from a second referendum rally in Westminster he describes as “half rock concert half evangelical church meeting”.

Updated

The remain-supporting London mayor, Sadiq Khan, is yet another prominent figure to criticise the terms to which Theresa May is thought to have agreed, saying they would represent a “bad deal for Britain which risks damaging jobs and growth for the next generation”. He said:

Cabinet ministers must now put aside their personal interests and ambitions and do what’s in the national interest. MPs should not be supporting an agreement that damages our public services and makes it harder for our children and grandchildren.

This deal still needs to be agreed by the cabinet, approved by Parliament and ratified by the EU. It’s clearer than ever that the British public must now be given a say on the terms of the final deal – with staying in the European Union an option on the ballot paper.

Nobody voted for fewer jobs and opportunities and lower economic growth, which is exactly what this deal risks delivering for London and the rest of the country.

Updated

Mary Lou McDonald, the president of Sinn Féin, said she remained concerned that the backstop in the final text could be temporary and not the “cast iron” arrangement promised last year when Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker signed off the first phase of Brexit talks.

Last December, a joint report by UK and EU negotiators was agreed, in which it was stated there would be no hard border in Ireland. The taoiseach assured us that this was a ‘cast iron’ guarantee. The withdrawal agreement must give legal effect to that ‘cast iron’ guarantee.

While we await the publication of this document, it is a matter of concern that some are presenting the backstop agreement as temporary.

Brexit is for the long term and what is required is a durable, permanent and legally robust agreement that safeguards Irish interests and ensures there is no hard border on the island of Ireland.

Updated

The leaders of the four main opposition parties in Westminster – Jeremy Corbyn for Labour, Vince Cable for the Lib Dems, Ian Blackford for the SNP and Liz Saville Roberts for Plaid Cymru – have written to the prime minister demanding a “truly meaningful vote”. Here’s the full text of their letter:

We are writing to you with regard to an issue of the utmost importance: That is to ensure that Parliament has a truly meaningful vote on any Brexit withdrawal agreement.

Recent interventions from government ministers have suggested that you and your government may seek to limit or constrain the process on the final vote, in an attempt to muzzle Parliament. We want to be clear that this would be wholly unacceptable.

In particular, paragraph six of the government’s memorandum on the issue stated that: “Amendments could have the effect – whether deliberately or accidentally – of inhibiting the government’s legal ability to ratify the withdrawal agreement”.

We believe that Parliament should be able to consider, debate and vote on amendments before a decisive vote on the substantive motion. That would give this sovereign parliament an opportunity to express its view over the terms of departure from the EU. It is unthinkable that Parliament could be silenced at such a crucial period for the country.

We recognise that it will be necessary for a business motion to be agreed by the House to govern arrangements for consideration of this motion. But the existing procedures, which include limiting debate to 90 minutes, are not appropriate. So a much more extensive business motion will be needed for this crucial issue.

As a minimum, any motion to this House must include the possibility for multiple amendments to be tabled, with the Speaker able to select multiple amendments to be taken before the main motion. While we recognise Parliament will have to approve ordisapprove any agreement, it would be reckless to present this vote as take-it-or-leave-it without Parliament being able to suggest an alternative.

We, as party leaders, have championed parliamentary scrutiny and engagement throughout this process and, throughout the debate, we have had repeated assurances from across the dispatch box that MPs would be able to express their support for alternative options. Now, it seems the government has abandoned its willingness to let Parliament take back control and seems determined to limit the role of this sovereign parliament.

We believe Parliament must be allowed to express its view and hold the executive to account. This would not be possible if Parliament was unable to table, debate and consider amendments before any decision on the substantive motion.

The leader of the influential ERG, Jacob Rees Mogg, describes the deal as a “middle muddle fiddle fuddle” that is doomed from the start.

“There is a risk we are in 1846 territory,” he tells Channel 4 News, referring to the 19th century split in the Conservative party over the corn laws.

[Theresa May] should have listened to Michel Barnier, who said from the very beginning you can either be in the EU or [be] a third country, but she tried to find a third route when she should have gone the way of the European Research Group and asked for a clean break.

Updated

Finally, after months of procrastination, the government and parliament are reaching the point where choices about Brexit that ministers and MPs have been avoiding since the summer of 2016 can no longer be put off. Some key decisions may be taken within the next 24 hours; others in the run-up to the parliamentary vote (which we are now expecting in mid-December, after an EU summit expected at the end of November).

Here are the key questions that will need to be answered soon:

The Irish taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, has told his ministers to be on “standby” for a special cabinet meeting tomorrow to update them on Brexit. He is expected to meet his deputy, Simon Coveney, and the minister for European affairs, Helen McEntee, tonight to discuss the latest text.

Updated

The divisions wihin the Tory party are laid bare. The Conservative MP Jonathan Djanogly asked:

We noted earlier that Scotland’s first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has insisted in a series of tweets that an unsatisfactory deal from Theresa May could be an “opportunity to get better options back on the table”.

Meanwhile, the Scottish government’s Brexit secretary, Michael Russell, who has just emerged from an evening meeting of joint ministerial committee on European negotiations in London, has described it as “completely unacceptable” that the devolved administrations have still not seen the detail of any draft deal.

We know no more coming out of tonight’s [meeting] than we did going in. We must be able to scrutinise the deal and understand its implications.

I am clear, however, that reaching agreement at technical level does not negate the threat posed by Brexit to jobs and living standards. The best way to avoid that is to stay in the EU, in line with how people in Scotland voted.

If that is not possible, the only acceptable deal is one that keeps us in the single market as well as the customs union. That would resolve the backstop and ensure truly frictionless trade with the EU, which Scottish government analysis shows is in the best interests of Scotland and the UK as a whole.

With the government under fire on many sides, the chief whip Julian Smith sought to keep up an optimistic tone. This from Talk Radio’s Ross Kempsell:

An air of nervousness has descended in Dublin with scant comment from either the prime minister or his deputy prime minister.

Lisa Chambers, the Brexit spokesman for Fianna Fáil, the main opposition party in Ireland, said she felt “positive” that a deal seemed likely in London, but added: “We are very concerned that we are so close to the edge and we still don’t have a deal.”

She also said she was unsurprised by Boris Johnson’s comments that “For the first time since partition, Dublin would have more say in some aspects of the governing of Northern Ireland than London”, something also raised by Jacob Rees Mogg in interviews with the BBC.

Chambers said: “They do not want a deal, they just want a clean break, they are on a different page to my party.”

She questioned their assertion that Dublin would have more say over Northern Ireland than the UK would, pointing out that the Good Friday agreement was an “international treaty and still stands” and it spells out in detail the role of Dublin and London in relation to Northern Ireland.

Under the draft withdrawal deal in March, the UK and the EU both agreed to uphold all aspects of the agreement.

Updated

Various figures from across the political spectrum are piling the pressure on May; not least the hard Brexit figures in her own party, such as the former Tory leader, Iain Duncan Smith. This via Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh:

Mark Francois, the deputy chair of the hard Brexit-supporting Tory group, the ERG, has joined colleagues in calling on government ministers not to back the deal:

Those members of the cabinet, what they do over the next 24 hours will probably be the most important thing they do in their lives. They now have an opportunity to stand up for their country and to defend its destiny. We very much hope that they will take it.

And, as might be expected, the criticism is not coming solely from one side of the Brexit debate. The first minister of Scotland, the SNP’s Nicola Sturgeon:

The party’s Europe spokesman, Stephen Gethins, added:

It is emerging from reports that Northern Ireland will indeed have deeper and different provisions on customs and regulations than Scotland and the rest of the UK.

The SNP has consistently said that, if a closer relationship between Northern Ireland and the EU can be done, then the same can apply to Scotland. The UK government must now set out the details of the draft agreement.

With Northern Ireland’s status at the centre of the convastion, the DUP’s Nigel Dodds is ramping up the pressure from his own party, on which May relies; expressing his paryt’s deep reservations in yet clearer language:

The DUP has said for a long time that we want a proper Brexit, one that delivers on the referendum result – control of our borders, our laws and our money, and that the United Kingdom leaves as one kingdom, that there’s no separation down the Irish Sea.

I am very, very confident that across the piece in parliament, people will look at this and say, what does it do to our precious union, and what does it do for the United Kingdom in the decades ahead?

We have to see the details of it, but it appears to be a UK-wide customs agreement but deeper implications for Northern Ireland both on customs and single market, And as Jacob has said, if that means that we’re taking the rules and laws set in Brussels, not in Westminster or Belfast, then that’s unacceptable.

And he hinted his MPs could help vote down the Conseravatives’ budget if they were unhappy with the direction of travel:

The finance bill has a long way to go through parliament, there will be a lot of opportunities for amendments, but let’s see what happens.

Updated

Perhaps not entirely surprisingly, the Lib Dems are not impressed with what May is thought to have agreed. The party’s leader, Vince Cable, said:

Any Brexit deal will leave the UK weakened and the public poorer. And before the ink is dry, the Conservative party will tear into what little Theresa May has been able to agree.

The prime minister now faces a defeat in Parliament, as a majority will be hard or impossible to secure for what she has come up with. A People’s Vote is now the only way to escape from this mess.

Updated

Speaking to the media in the central lobby, the hard Brexiter Jacob Rees-Mogg said reports of May’s plan seemed to show a “sleight of hand” on the backstop proposal.

The separate rules for Northern Ireland have been put in one backstop, rather than being in a separate backstop, which if anything is worse than a backstop to the backstop.

Asked if he believed the deal as described could get through the Commons, he said:

It would only get through if you’ve got the wholehearted support of the Labour party.

The DUP’s deputy leader, Nigel Dodds, indicated his party’s confidence and supply arrangement with the government may not remain in place if the deal May has pulled together is not acceptable to it.

The confidence and supply arrangement is one that we have in terms of ensuring that the government delivers on stable government and delivers on Brexit, and the other priorities that we have.

We’re very clear about what Brexit means. Let us see what transpires over the course of the next fews days and weeks. We are very focused on delivering a proper Brexit for the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and we will ensure that happens.

Asked if the DUP had seen the agreement, Dodds said:

I hope that we will see it pretty soon. It’s incumbent on the government to make sure that people have the greatest clarity.

Asked for his message to cabinet ministers, he said:

My message is that they need to stand behind the union, foursquare, the precious union that the prime minister talked about, and to deliver on the pledges that she made, not just in the Tory manifesto but to the people of this United Kingdom that we would leave the customs union and single market, all of it, and that we would leave as one kingdom.

Let’s see what the deal actually says, but it looks very, very clear that the backstop as proposed does entail special provisions which go much deeper than a UK-wide customs provision for Northern Ireland, and we have made it clear that’s unacceptable.

Updated

Brexit, what next? The 6 key questions to be resolved

Finally, after months of prevarication, the government and parliament are reaching the point where choices about Brexit that ministers and MPs have been avoiding since the summer of 2016 can no longer be avoided. Some key decisions may be taken within the next 24 hours, others in the run-up to the parliamentary vote (which we are now expecting in mid December, after an EU summit expected at the end of November.) It would be foolish to think that everything is going to get settled; as Gordon Brown argued persuasively yesterday, the government’s preferred outcome seems to involve leaving some big strategic decisions unresolved. But, nevertheless, Brexit has entered the endgame.

Here is our latest story summing up what has happened tonight.

And here are the key questions to be answered soon.

1 - Can Theresa May win the backing of her entire cabinet? This is a matter that will be resolved within the next 24 hours. May is seeing some of them individually tonight, applying basic “divide and rule” psychology. In the past some cabinet Brexiters have been braver when it comes to briefing about their reservations rather than acting on them, but if they are going to walk, it will have to be now. There will be particular focus on those who have laid down red lines in public, like Andrea Leadsom (here) or Penny Mordaunt (here).

2 - What will the text of the withdrawal agreement say about the Irish backstop? The backstop is the mechanism that will ensure that there is no hard border in Ireland after Brexit as a fallback if the new trade relationship coming into force after the transition fails to deliver no hard border. There are two issues in particular where the details remain unclear. First, to what extent could the plan lead to goods going to Northern Ireland from Britain being subject to new regulatory checks? And, second, what will be the mechanism for ending the backstop, and will the UK be able to exit unilaterally?

3 - What will the political declaration say about the post-Brexit trade relationship, or the “future framework”, as the UK government describes it? According to the BBC, perhaps very little. (See 5.27pm.) This is crucial, but it has received relatively little attention because the focus in recent weeks has been on the backstop. In particular, will the EU allow the UK to remain effectively in the single market for goods, as May wants? And what will the paper say about May’s hugely complicated, and potentially unworkable, proposed “facilitated customs arrangement”?

4 - Will the DUP support the deal? That partly depends on the answer to 2, but, on the basis of what the DUP is saying tonight (see 5.24pm), the signs don’t look good.

5 - Can May win over some of the more moderate Tory Brexiters? The ERG hardliners have been out tonight rubbishing the deal, without having even seen it, and Steve Baker, one of their leaders, said recently that at least 40 hardliners would vote against it come what may. The PM hopes to contain the scale of the Tory rebellion (which at one stage was expected to reach 80 or more). But the resignation of the remain-voting Jo Johnson on Friday will probably make this difficult. Until Johnson all Brexit resignations were “zero-sum” resignations; when a Brexiter went, at least the Tory pro-Europeans could console themselves that they were winning internal arguments, and the same logic applied when pro-European ministers (like Phillip Lee) quit. But the Johnson resignation was a “double accelerant” resignation. His move is likely to encourage both pro-Europeans and Brexiters to reject the deal (as Anthony Barnett explains in a good openDemocracy blog on it here.) If you are mildly Eurosceptic, you would not want to be seen as caring less about UK sovereignty than a metropolitan remainer like Jo Johnson.

6 - Can May persuade Labour to vote for the deal? On the basis of what Jeremy Corbyn is saying tonight, it looks unlikely (see 6pm), but we will find out for certain over the coming weeks.

I’m now handing over to my colleague Kevin Rawlinson, who will be blogging into the night. I’ll be back early tomorrow.

Updated

Corbyn says this is 'unlikely to be good deal for the country'

Jeremy Corbyn has put out this statement

We will look at the details of what has been agreed when they are available. But from what we know of the shambolic handling of these negotiations, this is unlikely to be a good deal for the country.

Labour has been clear from the beginning that we need a deal to support jobs and the economy - and that guarantees standards and protections. If this deal doesn’t meet our six tests and work for the whole country, then we will vote against it.

This is what Boris Johnson said tonight about Theresa May’s Brexit deal.

This has been ‘Chronicle of a Death Foretold’ for some months. We are going to stay in the customs union, we are going to stay in large parts of the single market.

It’s vassal state stuff as for the first time in 1,000 years this parliament will not have a say over the laws that govern this country.

It is utterly unacceptable to anybody who believes in democracy ...

For the first time since partition, Dublin would have more say in some aspects of the governing of Northern Ireland than London. So I don’t see how you can support from a democratic point of view.

(Reminder - Johnson has not actually read it yet.)

Updated

Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, arrived at 10 Downing Street shortly before 5.40pm, the Press Association reports. He declined to answer questions from reporters as he entered.

A spokesman for chief EU negotiator Michel Barnier said the latest in the negotiations had been set out earlier by commission vice president Frans Timmermans who said that while the talks were making progress “we are not there yet”. As the Press Association reports, the spokesman said: “The UK cabinet will meet tomorrow. We will take stock at the midday presser.”

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory MP who chairs the Brexiter European Research Group, told the BBC that he hoped the cabinet would block Theresa May’s proposed agreement. If that did not happen, parliament should block it, he said.

Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, says the withdrawal agreement has been well trailed. The UK will stay in the customs union and in large parts of the single market. It is “vassal state stuff”, he says. The UK will be bound by laws over which it has no say. That is “utterly unacceptable”, he says.

He also says the deal will not protect the union. There will be customs checks down the Irish Sea. And in some aspects Dublin will have more say over Northern Ireland than London, he says.

He confirms he will vote against it.

This is from the BBC’s Iain Watson.

These are from ITV’s Robert Peston.

The DUP’s Brexit spokesman, Sammy Wilson, told the BBC he would be looking for three things from the withdrawal agreement. He said:

[Firstly], whatever the arrangements put in place, that they do not treat Northern Ireland differently. From what we are hearing that is not the case ...

Secondly, that any arrangements put in place are temporary.

And thirdly, the ability to get out of those arrangements [should be] with the UK government, not the EU or some independent body.

Updated

This is from the Telegraph’s James Crisp.

Five business groups, including the CBI, British Chambers of Commerce and the Institute of Directors have been called in by the government for a Brexit briefing, it has been confirmed.

Here is the Telegraph’s Peter Foster on what to make of the Irish government’s statement this afternoon. (See 4.46pm.)

Downing Street has just sent out a confirmation about tomorrow’s cabinet. A Number 10 spokesman saied:

Cabinet will meet at 2pm tomorrow to consider the draft agreement the negotiating teams have reached in Brussels, and to decide on next steps. Cabinet ministers have been invited to read documentation ahead of that meeting.

This is from Sky’s Mark Stone.

This is from Politico Europe’s Tom McTague.

This is from ITV’s Carl Dinnen.

Here is our news story about tomorrow’s emergency cabinet meeting where ministers will be expected to sign off on the Brexit withdrawal agreement.

A spokesman for Simon Coveney, the Irish foreign minister, said:

Negotiations between the EU and UK on a withdrawal agreement are ongoing and have not concluded. Negotiators are still engaged and a number of issues are outstanding. We are not commenting further on leaks in the media.

The pound has been rising on the back of the news that UK and EU negotiators have agreed a withdrawal agreement text, Reuters’ Andy Bruce reports.

From Jennifer Rankin, the Guardian’s Brussels correspondent

This is the BBC’s Nick Robinson.

From BBC’s Brussels correspondent, Adam Fleming

This is from Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt.

From my colleague Pippa Crerar.

Cabinet to meet tomorrow afternoon to agree Brexit deal

And the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg says the cabinet will meet tomorrow afternoon.

Updated

This is from the Times’ Sam Coates.

The DUP have not seen the text, the BBC’s Emma Vardy reports.

This is from Business Insider’s Adam Payne.

This is from the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn.

And this is from the Telegraph’s Stephen Swinford.

This is from HuffPost’s Paul Waugh, who was at the afternoon Downing Street lobby briefing.

The Times’ political editor, Francis Elliott, says a cabinet has been called for tomorrow.

EU and UK negotiators have agreed a withdrawal agreement text, RTE reports

According to RTE’s Tony Connelly, the UK and the EU have reached an agreement on a Brexit withdrawal text.

MPs approve Labour motion saying government must publish Brexit legal advice

In the Commons Robert Buckland, the solicitor general, is winding up for the government. He claims he expressed a sense of “sheepishness” in Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, because Starmer accepted that the scope of the Labour motion (see 12.59pm) was far wider than necessary.

At the end of Buckland’s speech the Labour motion gets approved on the nod (ie, with no one voting against.)

Starmer rises on a point of order. He says he wants to clarify that all Labour wants is the publication of the final and full legal advice relating to the Brexit withdrawal agreement.

John Bercow, the speaker, says the motion expresses the will of the House. The government will be expected to respond quickly.

Two studies on Tuesday are reminding Ireland about Brexit’s dramatic stakes.

The century-old freedom of travel and residency arrangements between Ireland and the UK, which many people have assumed will endure post Brexit, are in fact “written in sand”, some academic lawyers warn.

The common travel area lacks a single legal agreement and is “a hotchpotch of laws”, according to an 85-page report prepared for the Joint Committee of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Meanwhile a poll conducted jointly by RTE and BBC which questioned more than 1,000 adults on each side of the border found that 62% of people in Northern Ireland think the UK’s exit from the European Union makes a united Ireland more likely. In the Republic, in contrast, only 35% think Brexit makes a united Ireland more likely - reflecting, perhaps, awareness of the economic cost of unification.

If that all seems existential and confusing there is one ray of bright news: New Zealand opened its first ever embassy in Ireland. “The moment the Brexit decision happened on the 23rd of June 2016, it became very clear that we would have to, with respect to Ireland, set up an embassy here,” Winston Peters, New Zealand’s deputy prime minister and minister of foreign affairs, said at the embassy’s opening on Monday. It came with a traditional Maori blessing.

My colleague Lisa O’Carroll has been talking to sheep farmers in Enniskillen, DUP leader Arlene Foster’s hometown. “I don’t see any positives in Brexit”, says one. “The DUP are holding the government to ransom” says another. On average their net income is just £7.000 a year and they rely on EU subsidies. If those go, the communities go they say.

Lisa’s full story is here.

In the debate Sammy Wilson, the DUP’s Brexit spokesman, say he is sympathetic to the government’s position. But he says Labour has made it clear that it is not seeking the legal advice offered to ministers as they go into negotiations.

He said it will be important for Northern Ireland to know what the backstop plans actually mean, and whether they will be genuinely temporary.

MPs set to approve motion forcing government to publish its Brexit legal advice

Here are the main points from the opening of the debate.

  • MPs are set to approve a binding motion saying the government should publish “any legal advice in full” relating to the proposed Brexit withdrawal agreement, including advice offered by Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general. The motion has been tabled by Labour, and the government is not going to vote against. It would be unprecedented in modern times for the government to publish legal advice in this way and David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, criticised what was being proposed, saying it could theoretically require the release of 5,000 documents. (See 1.44pm.) Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, told MPs that Labour only expected to see the government’s final legal advice, implying that it would not be demanding everything covered by the scope of the motion. (See 12.59pm.)
  • Lidington has told MPs that the government intends to publish a legal analysis of the withdrawal agreement. He made this offer in the hope that it would persuade Labour not to put its motion to a vote. And Cox would also come to the Commons to take questions from MPs on the agreement, Lidington said. He told MPs:

I want to give a commitment to the opposition and the House: we will make available to all members of the House, following the conclusion of negotiations and ahead of the meaningful vote, a full, reasoned position statement laying out the government’s both political and also legal position on the proposed withdrawal agreement, and that includes any protocols that might be attached to it.

In addition, the attorney general has authorised me to confirm to the House this afternoon that he is ready to assist further by making an oral statement to the House and to take questions from members of the House in the normal way.

  • Starmer has defended Labour’s decision require the unprecedented release of the attorney general’s legal advice on Brexit. (See 1.19pm.)
  • Anna Soubry, the Conservative pro-European, has accused the government of surrendering to the European Research Group, the Tory faction pushing for a harder Brexit, in this vote. The ERG has been demanding the publication of a legal analysis of the withdrawal deal, and its supporters were planning to abstain, rather than vote with the government against Labour’s motion. Soubry, a lawyer, said that, given the wide scope of Labour’s motion, the government should vote against it. She said she was concerned to learn this afternoon that Tory Mps were being told to abstain instead. She went on:

I don’t know why - I suspect it is because there isn’t a majority. If that’s the case then who is running this country? This government or the ERG?

  • Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general and another leading pro-European in the party, told MPs that he did not agree with the call for the government to publish the full text of its legal advice. Referring to Starmer, Grieve said:

I have great sympathy with the anxieties he is expressing about the legal issues surrounding the potential backstop, but surely he’d agree with me that the proper practice is for the government, at the conclusion of negotiations, to publish a document setting out the government’s position on the law. And if that differs from what the attorney general has advised, I’d expect the attorney general to resign forthwith.

Labour rejects calls to withdraw its motion, meaning it should go through unopposed

Labour sources say the party will not be withdrawing its motion. So, with the government abstaining, it should go through unopposed.

Tory pro-European Anna Soubry claims government has surrendered to ERG

Dominic Grieve, the Consevative former attorney general, and a pro-European who has rebelled against the government on Brexit, is speaking now.

He says he does not know if the leaked document purporting to be an account of how the government would sell Brexit was accurate or not. But if it was accurate, it was a disgrace, he says.

He says he thinks what Labour is trying to do is a mistake.

The attorney general must maintain his independence, and must speak “truth unto power”, he says.

Anna Soubry, another Tory pro-European, says, on the basis of what Grieve is saying, MPs should vote against the motion. But they have been told to abstain, she says. (See 2.22pm.) She says that is concerning. Who is running this country, she asks - the government or the European Research Group?

  • Tory pro-European Anna Soubry claims government has surrendered to ERG.

Government MPs ordered to abstain if Labour motion put to vote

This is from the New Statesman’s Patrick Maguire.

Updated

The SNP’s Peter Grant is still speaking. He says in Scotland the government’s ministerial code does allow legal advice to be published in exceptional circumstances.

David Allen Green, the legal commentator and former government lawyer, says he was not convinced by Lidington’s arguments.

Peter Grant, the SNP’s Europe spokesman, is speaking now.

He says he is at a disadvantage in this debate; he has never been a lawyer. But he also has an advantage; he has never been a lawyer. He says lawyers should be serving the public interest.

He says the government has been saying for months that this is an unprecedented situation. He goes on:

In an unprecedented situation precedents do not apply.

The government will abstain if the motion does get put to a vote, the BBC is reporting.

Lidington says he hopes Labour will not push its motion to vote

Lidington says there is no precedent for a government receiving legal advice one week, and publishing it the next.

He says if that were to happen, in future legal advice would be less likely to be written down. And it might be worse, he says.

He says he hopes Labour will not press its motion to a vote.

  • Lidington says he hopes Labour will not push its motion to a vote.

Lidington says he has found only one precedent for the government publishing legal advice in full in recent years. That was when the Blair government published its Iraq legal advice. But that was two years after it was written, and only after extracts had been selectively leaked to the media, he says.

Neil O’Brien, a Conservative, asks for an assurance that the government opposes the principle of what is in the Labour motion - that the government should have to publish the advice he gets. He says, as a special adviser, he worked with civil servants, and they would oppose this.

Lidington agrees. He says it has been a long-standing principle that law officers’ advice should remain confidential.

Lidington says the Labour motion, as worded, goes beyond what Starmer was asking for in his spech.

Robert Courts, a Conservative, intervenes. He says Lidington’s offer sounds as if it matches what he was proposing in the ERG amendment. (See 9.49am.)

John Bercow, the speaker, says MPs cannot debate the amendment, because it has not been selected.

Lidington says he thinks what is is offering will match what was in the amendment, and what MPs generally have been requesting.

MPs will be able to question attorney general about Brexit agreement, says Lidington

Labour’s Owen Smith says Lidington failed to deny on the Today programme that the UK would be worse off after Brexit. Will the economic analysis compare the deal to the status quo?

Lidington says the government’s analysis will be extensive. And there will be analysis from outside bodies too, he says.

He says the government fully understands the historic nature of the decision MPs will take. Nothing would be served by MPs not having the full information, he says.

He says, after the deal is negotiated, a full reasoned position statement will be provided to MPs with a legal analysis of the deal.

He says Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, has also agreed to make an oral statement to MPs about the deal. That means MPs can question him, he says.

  • Lidington says MPs will be shown a “full, reasoned position statement” with a legal analysis of the Brexit deal after it is concluded. This phrase seems to have been lifted verbatim from the European Research Group amendment tabled, but not being put to a vote later. (See 9.49am.)
  • Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, will take questions from MPs in the Commons about the Brexit deal, Lidington says.
David Lidington
David Lidington Photograph: BBC

Updated

Lidington says government will publish legal analysis of Brexit withdrawal agreement

Lidington says he will agree and accept on behalf of the government that the analysis provided by the government after the withdrawal agreement is ready will include a legal analysis.

  • Lidington says government will publish a legal analysis of the Brexit withdrawal agreement.

Lidington says Labour motion would require release of 5,000 documents

Lidington says the withdrawal agreement is still be negotiated.

Ministers need to be able to prepare their negotiating position in private, he says.

He says the EU has not disclosed its legal advice.

But he says he welcomes Starmer’s acknowledgment that what he is seeking is “not quite so all embracing as a literal reading of the motion” would lead MPs to conclude.

He says, if the wording of the motion were taken literally, there could be 5,000 documents that would have to be disclosed.

  • Lidington says Labour motion would require release of 5,000 documents.

But he says he understands the concern felt by MPs on all sides about this, and their desire to read not just an economic and political analysis of the deal, but a legal analysis too.

One option would be for the House, or one of its committee’s, to commission its own legal advice.

But asking the government to set out its legal advice is “a fair request”, he says.

  • Lidington says call for MPs to see final legal advice is “a fair request”.

Andrew Mitchell, the former Tory chief whip, says Lidington seems to be agreeing to the spirit of the Labour motion. He asks if the government will agree to release the attorney general’s advice on this occasion.

Lidington says he will address this in a moment.

(It sounds as if the compromise, or climbdown, is coming.)

Updated

David Lidington's speech

David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, is now responding for the government.

He thanks Starmer for the constructive tone he adopted.

Updated

Starmer says, when he was a lawyer, he saw attempts to edit or summarise legal advice.

That could lead to it being misrepresented, he says.

Starmer says confidentiality and privilege can justify non-disclosure.

But the government cannot waive those rules for some MPs and not others, he says.

Starmer says the ordinary rules of client confidentiality are waived by the government if there is a public interest in the disclose of government legal advice.

Vicky Ford, a Conservative, asks if Starmer is asking for publication of the final legal advice, or for the publication of any legal advice on this matter. She says the Labour motion refers to any legal advice. (See 12.59pm.)

Starmer says he has set out what he wants (ie, the final advice).

Starmer says this legal advice is not the same as other legal advice.

This advice is about what provisions in a treaty mean. That is not the same as legal advice telling ministers what they must do to act lawfully.

Advice of the latter kind should stay confidential, he says. But this advice is “fundamentally different”.

Starmer says there is precedent for the government publishing legal advice.

The government published a summary of its legal advice on the legality of the Iraq war in 2003. Starmer says at the time he thought the full advice should have been published. The government did subsequently publish the full text in 2005, he says.

Starmer says David Cameron also published a summary of his legal advice before a vote on military action in Syria.

Starmer says the government has already committed to publishing appropriate analysis of the withdrawal deal.

That was a reference to an economic impact analysis, he says. But he says the same principle applies to the legal impact.

Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, says the best solution would be for the government to publish, not the raw legal advice, but a summary. And if the summary does not match the advice, the attorney general should resign.

Anna Soubry, another pro-Euroean Tory, also intervenes. She suggests that what Starmer is asking for is different from what is demanded in the motion.

Starmer says he has been quite clear about what he is requesting.

Starmer says Labour wants the “final” legal advice to be published.

And it wants all MPs to be able to see it, he says, after the withdrawal agreement has been concluded with the EU.

Updated

Starmer says Labour accepts the convention that in normal circumstances government legal advice should not be published.

But he says there are four reasons why that does not apply in this case.

First, this situation is exceptional, he says. He says there is precedent for publishing legal advice in exceptional circumstances.

Second, he says this is general legal advice.

Third, he says the way legal privilege applies to advice from government law officers is different from the way it applies to advice from other lawyers.

And, fourth, he says the government should not be allowed to show its legal advice selectively to just some MPs.

The government seems to have two options in this debate, if it wants to avoid defeat.

It could accept the Labour motion, as the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg suggests it might.

Or it could accept the ERG compromise proposal (see 9.49am), to win over the ERG MPs planning to abstain, as HuffPost’s Paul Waugh suggests.

Keir Starmer's speech

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is opening the debate for Labour.

He says he wants to start by setting the context for the debate.

The phase one agreement from December last year, the joint report (pdf), involved a commitment for a legally binding backstop.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, asks Starmer to confirm that paragaph 50 of that report said there should be no new regulatory barriers between Northern Ireland and Great Britain without the approval of the Northern Ireland assembly. Starmer accepts that.

Starmer says this issue remains unresolved. He is not pretending it is easy, he says. But he says we keep being told a deal is near, only to be told it is not ready.

In any deal the backstop will be in the legally binding part of the agreement, he says - ie, in the withdrawal agreement, not the political declaration.

Starmer says on 17 October it was reported that the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, was asked to provide a full assessment of the legal consequences of the backstop.

Updated

MPs debate Labour call for government's Brexit legal advice to be published

MPs will start debating the Labour motion calling for the government’s Brexit legal advice to be published within the next few minutes.

Here is the text of the Labour motion.

That an humble address be presented to Her Majesty, that she will be graciously pleased to give directions that the following papers be laid before parliament: any legal advice in full, including that provided by the attorney general, on the proposed withdrawal agreement on the terms of the UK’s departure from the European Union including the Northern Ireland backstop and framework for a future relationship between the UK and the European Union.

According to UTV’s Tracey Magee, the DUP will vote with Labour.

UK pushing for 'the best text which can be negotiated' in Brexit talks, May tells cabinet

I’m just back from the lobby briefing. And there is not much a huge amount to report on the Brexit front.

Ministers spent about 45 minutes discussing Brexit at today’s cabinet, including hearing an update on no deal planning from Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary.

The prime minister’s spokesman said:

The prime minister told cabinet that since they last met negotiations had continued in Brussels and good progress had been made. However, the PM said, there remained a small number of outstanding issues as the UK pushes for the best text which can be negotiated.

During the briefing the spokesman was asked about this tweet, from the ITV presenter Tom Bradby.

The spokesman had not seen this, and he said this did not reflect what ministers were told at cabinet. There are remaining issues, the spokesman said. Asked if the remaining issues were around the cabinet table, the spokesman replied: “No, the remaining issues are in Brussels.”

The spokesman also said the talks in Brussels went “well into the evening” last night and that they were carrying on this morning.

On other matter, the spokesman said that David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, would be opening for the government in the Labour debate on publishing the government’s Brexit legal advice. The spokesman would not say what Lidington will be telling MPs, or whether the government will be accepting the Labour motion, but the debate will start in about 10 minutes, and so we won’t have to wait for long.

Asked about reports that Penny Mordaunt, the international development secretary, wants to withdraw the UK from Unesco, the spokesman said this would not happen. The government wanted to see more change to the way Unesco operates, he said. But he insisted: “There’s no change to our commitment to Unesco.”

Updated

I’m off to the Downing Street lobby briefing. I will post again after 12.30pm.

While UK cabinet ministers, who had been expecting to sign off the final Brexit negotiating position, have been told that it will hardly be discussed at their meeting today, the Scottish government is once again railing against Theresa May for keeping them “in the dark”.

Ahead of a meeting of the joint ministerial committee on European negotiations in London later on Tuesday, the Scotland’s minister for constitutional relations Michael Russell called for the latest proposed Brexit deal to be shared with the Scottish Government “as a matter of urgency, on the same basis as the access granted to UK Ministers”. He said:

People in Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU and we are seeking to protect Scotland’s interests as much as possible. Clearly that is harder to do if we are being kept in the dark.

It’s telling that fellow Scot and former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown accused UK government ministers of putting “the principle of devolution at risk” over Brexit negotiations in a speech on Monday, remarks that were immediately welcomed by the SNP government.

ERG to abstain on vote on Labour motion saying government must publish Brexit legal advice

The European Research Group, the faction representing around 50 hardline Tory Brexiters, has said it will abstain in the vote on the Labour motion about publishing the government’s Brexit legal advice. That means a government defeat seems inevitable.

Normally what happens when the government has no chance of winning is that the government decides to back down. We may learn more at the Downing Street lobby briefing at 12pm.

Bercow refuses to allow vote on ERG Brexit legal advice motion, making government defeat more likely

John Bercow, the speaker, has decided not to select the ERG amendment on publishing Brexit legal advice (see 9.49am), meaning it will not be put to a vote.

This means the government has lost its escape option. Unlike other opposition day motions, “humble address” ones are binding on the government and, if Labour wins, the government will be obliged by the vote to publish it.

Given that some Tory MPs have been joining with the opposition in calling for the legal advice to be published, the government’s chances of winning seem slight.

Perhaps ministers might try to buy off the rebels by promising to publish a detailed summary of the legal advice, in line with what was proposed in the ERG amendment.

Alternatively, the government may just argue that the legal advice doesn’t yet exist. Given that the withdrawal agreement has not been concluded, presumably the final legal opinion as to what it means does not exist either. Whether the “humble address” covers just current documents within the government’s possession, or future documents too, is not entirely clear.

You can read all the Guardian’s Brexit articles here.

And here are some of the most interesting articles around this morning from other papers and websites.

Theresa May will be warned by senior Eurosceptic cabinet ministers that leaving the EU without a deal will be better than giving in to Brussels’ demands on Brexit.

Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary, and leading Eurosceptics including Andrea Leadsom and Liam Fox are expected to use a cabinet meeting on Tuesday to warn the prime minister that the EU’s demands are “totally unacceptable”.

On Monday night they were due to meet for eve-of-cabinet drinks at Dr Fox’s office to discuss concerns that Brussels is refusing to back down over the issue of a customs “backstop” with the EU.

They were expected to be joined by Michael Gove, the environment secretary, Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general and Penny Mordaunt, the international development secretary, who all fear Britain could be locked into a customs union with the EU.

[Cabinet Brexiters] are doubling down on their demands that the EU drops its Northern Ireland-only “backstop to the backstop” and that the deal must include a “break clause” mechanism that would allow the UK to unilaterally leave a UK-wide customs arrangement.

The renewed cabinet opposition to the emerging draft Brexit treaty has increased the chances of Britain leaving without a deal. EU sources told BuzzFeed News they would not give in to UK ministers’ demands. If the choice is between a unilateral break clause and no deal, then it is no deal, a senior EU government official said.

Previously, Raab has publicly said that if the EU would not back down on the backstop, the UK would have no choice but to leave without a deal, but his comments were widely regarded as a negotiating tactic.

In the last week, however, he has told colleagues that a no-deal Brexit would be preferable to a deal that breaches those red lines, two UK officials said. They said he had encouraged other ministers that a no-deal scenario could be managed.

Brussels’ talks chief Michel Barnier yesterday claimed a deal was imminent by declaring that “the parameters are very largely defined”.

But it has emerged that the PM refused to accept the deal’s latest draft because it still didn’t give the UK a clear escape from a custom union if the EU started acting in bad faith on talks about a future trade deal.

A senior No10 source said: “There is no point in getting a deal just for the sake of it.

“It must be sellable to parliament. The PM knows that as much as anyone else.”

Senior Brexiteers including Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, and Andrea Leadsom, the Commons leader, met last night to discuss tactics. Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary, and Michael Gove, the environment secretary, were also invited to the meeting organised by Dr Fox in an attempt to ensure that Brexiteers present a united front today in cabinet on the need for the UK to be able to pull out of a customs deal with the EU unilaterally.

They are expected to warn the prime minister that walking away from the negotiations is preferable to locking the government in to EU demands that would in effect give Brussels a veto on future UK trade deals.

Furthermore, there is a good argument that a satisfactory deal would only ever be reached after the supposedly last moment for it had passed and when both sides had to face up to the consequences of the talks failing – the EU side as well as the British. For Ireland, these consequences would be just as serious in many respects as for the UK. This is therefore a scenario in which it would be in the national interest for the cabinet to hold its collective nerve. Sticking together would be the only way to improve the deal at the last minute.

The Irish government, in cahoots with the EU, has deliberately made the border an issue and unfortunately our prime minister and her officials have fallen for it completely by agreeing to a backstop that would see NI being treated differently to the rest of the UK. By implying that the peace process is threatened by a hard border, even though no-one has said they will build it, is scaremongering of the worst kind. The EU wants to keep us locked in to their regulations and rules: the Irish government is playing hardball even though it would suffer most if the UK were to leave on WTO rules. The Irish PM has behaved rather shamefully with some of his rhetoric and is clearly intent on becoming a future EU commissioner ...

Leo Varadkar’s government has erected and maintained a hard border against Northern Ireland fishermen in the hope that this will exert some kind of influence on the UK during the wider Brexit negotiations. Our UK government claims to be maintaining the moral high ground on these issues, but the question arises: how long does the UK keep to the moral high ground when dealing with an Irish government that is taking our goodwill for granted?

When will the prime minister speak out and condemn this behaviour? When will she start speaking out in support of British citizens rather than seeming to care more about Irish views? It is this hypocrisy from Dublin that makes it certain that I and many other MPs will not support an agreement with the EU that panders to this kind of behaviour.

This is significant because until now it had been assumed that Hoey was likely to vote with the government on withdrawal agreement because she has defied that Labour whip and backed the Tories on Brexit issues before.

Unemployment rose to 4.1% in the three months to September, the Office for National Statistics said today. My colleague Graeme Wearden has more on his business live blog.

Boris Johnson claims delays in Brexit talks are 'stage-managed'

Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, has claimed that the hold-ups in the Brexit talks are “stage-managed”.

Updated

Sky’s Beth Rigby says Tory MPs are being told to vote for the ERG amendment on the Brexit legal advice. (See 9.49am.)

Hopes rise ... and then hopes fall. (See 9.09am.) Tony Connelly, RTE’s Europe editor, has written a story this morning quoting an unnamed EU official casting doubt on the chances of a breakthrough this week. He says:

Speaking to RTÉ News, the official said that the implications of a UK-wide customs arrangement is still dividing Prime Minister Theresa May’s cabinet, and that as a result an emergency EU summit in order to approve the withdrawal agreement was unlikely this month ...

The EU official suggested that the so-called level playing field issues which the EU wants clarity on before offering the temporary customs union - such as EU environmental, labour and state aid rules - are causing the hold up, since the UK has to run these late-in-the-day issues through all government departments.

The issue of access to UK fishing waters has also become a point of contention, with coastal states like Ireland, France, the Netherlands, Denmark and Spain all now insisting that reciprocal access for their vessels is a prerequisite for giving the UK tariff - and quota free access to the single market via the temporary customs union.

Tory Brexiters offer government compromise option on publishing Brexit legal advice

It looks as if the government will be forced to accept a compromise over publishing its Brexit legal advice. With the DUP and some Tories calling last week for the advice to be published, Labour decided to use its time today to force a vote on a “humble address” motion (something binding on the government) demanding publication of “any legal advice in full” relating to the EU withdrawal agreement.

But overnight Tory members of the European Research Group, which is pushing for a harder Brexit, have tabled an amendment to Labour’s motion saying the government should publish, not the “legal advice in full”, but “a full, reasoned position statement laying out the government’s political and legal position on the proposed withdrawal agreement”. In other words, they are demanding summary of the legal advice - for which there is precedent, because the Blair government gave a summary of its advice on the legality of the Iraq war shortly before the conflict started in.

Ministers will probably find it hard to object to this, not least because when the withdrawal agreement gets published, you would expect them to publish a full document explaining what it means anyway.

The amendment was tabled by the ERG member Robert Courts, and has been signed by Jacob Rees-Mogg, the ERG chair, Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister and ERG deputy chair, and Mark Francois.

Here is the wording of their amendment in full. It explains what the MPs are saying the government should have to publish.

Line 2, leave out from “parliament:” to the end and insert “a full, reasoned position statement laying out the government’s political and legal position on the proposed withdrawal agreement on the terms of the UK’s departure from the European Union including the Northern Ireland backstop and framework for a future relationship between the UK and the European Union, to include a statement as to the government’s position on the legal effect of the proposed withdrawal agreement in respect to the UK’s ability to withdraw unilaterally from the backstop and to prevent the imposition of regulatory barriers between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.”

Updated

Brexit deal within next 48 hours 'still possible but not at all definite', says Lidington

Many years ago, in the run up to the Good Friday agreement, I spent quite a lot of time covering the Northern Ireland talks. The details were mind-numbingly complicated, and moderately interesting, but when it came to reporting developments in a manner that was comprehensible to most readers, there only two options, and two stories: “Hopes rise for peace”, or “Hopes fade for peace”.

Brexit, I’m afraid, has slipped into the the same news loop. The minutiae are complex, fascinating and hugely important, but the headlines are getting stuck on the “hopes rise/hopes fade” see-saw. Last night the see-saw was going down. This morning, according to David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister and Theresa May’s de facto deputy, it’s on the way up. In an interview on the Today programme, asked if it was possible that there would be a deal within the next 48 hours, he sounded cautiously optimistic. He replied:

Still possible but not at all definite I think pretty much sums it up.

We are not quite there yet. This was always going to be an extremely difficult, extremely complex negotiation but we are almost within touching distance now.

But, as the PM has said, it can’t be a deal at any price. It has got to be one that works in terms of feeling we can deliver on the referendum result and that is why there is a measure of caution.

By “deal”, Lidington was referring to a proposal for the Brexit withdrawal agreement, including what to do about the Irish backstop, agreed by UK and EU negotiators that could be accepted by the cabinet as the UK’s offer. It would still have to be agreed by EU leaders, but the PM may find it easier to agree a text with them than to agree one with her cabinet colleagues.

Of course, it would then have to get through parliament, which is a different matter entirely ...

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.30am: Theresa May chairs cabinet.

9.30am: Unemployment figures are published.

12pm: Downing Street lobby briefing.

After 12.45pm: MPs begin the debate on the Labour motion calling for the government’s Brexit legal advice to be published. They will vote at around 4pm.

2.30pm: Sir Philip Rutnam, permanent secretary at the Home Office, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee.

As usual, I will also be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary at the end of the day, after the vote on the Brexit legal advice.

Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.

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
Ace Frehley, Kiss lead guitarist and band’s cofounder, dies aged 74
The musician died following injuries suffered during a fall in his recording studio last month
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
15 Strange American Breakfast Foods That Shock Travelers
For visitors to the United States, breakfast can feel like an entirely different world. From sugary cereals that double as dessert to savory dishes piled high with gravy or syrup, the American morning meal often defies international logic. While locals see these foods as perfectly normal, travelers are frequently stunned—and…
Grocery Coupon Guide
Grocery Coupon Guide
A Doctor Who Writer Highlighted A Unique Challenge Billie Piper's Reveal Creates, Which Makes Me Wonder If The Hiatus Is A Bigger Deal Than I Thought
I hadn't considered this.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Jennifer Lopez says she wants to keep future romances ‘quiet’ after string of high-profile break-ups
The actor finalized her divorce from Ben Affleck in January
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
If You Thought Kendall Cutting Cucumbers Was Out Of Touch, Kim Kardashian's Admission About 'What A Milk Carton Costs' Is Wild
Can't relate.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Avengers: Doomsday will melt everybody's brain, says Channing Tatum
Channing Tatum has teased details of the new Marvel movie, Avengers: Doomsday.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play