Closing summary
We’re going to wrap up this live blog now, so here’s a summary of the day’s politics news:
-
The prime minister, Theresa May, was told by her Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, that avoiding a no-deal Brexit was “the wish of the whole world”. The two leaders spoke at a press conference after a meeting this afternoon. In a boost to May, Abe said he backed her Brexit deal and urged British MPs to vote it through.
-
May also spoke to trade union leaders in a bid to drum up support for the deal. But, unlike her encounter with Abe, she was given short shrift. Some noted pointedly that her overtures come years into the Brexit process and one said the deal “isn’t good enough and non-binding assurances on workers’ rights won’t cut it.”
-
And former senior defence figures warned May’s withdrawal agreement would threaten national security in its current form. An ex-MI6 chief and a former head of the armed forces wrote to all Conservative party chairmen asking them to ensure their MPs vote against it.
-
MPs debated Brexit in the Commons, with Labour’s David Lammy saying there was “no leftwing justification” for it and the Conservatives’ Royston Smith saying he would prefer to lose his seat than abandon the process of leaving the EU. The SNP’s Mhairi Black ridiculed May’s contention that it is her deal or no deal.
- And the DUP joined the list of those seeking to condemn May’s deal, reiterating that they cannot support it as it stands. Its leader, Arlene Foster, said the backstop must go, though no-deal was not an option her party preferred.
- Earlier in the day, the business secretary Greg Clark called on MPs to come together to prevent a no-deal Brexit. He signalled his strong opposition to leaving without a deal but he would not threaten explicitly to resign from the government if such a strategy became policy.
- The Commons Speaker, John Bercow, defended his controversial ruling on Grieve amendment yesterday. He had clashed with the leader of the Commons, Andrea Leadsom, who said his role was to “uphold the rules that parliament has made for itself, not to arbitrarily change those rules”. Bercow countered that there was “nothing arbitrary” in it.
- You can read a summary of Jeremy Corbyn’s speech on Brexit here.
And, for those who’d still like to read a little more, my colleague Jessica Elgot has the full story on May and Abe’s meeting today:
For his part, Coveney said his day involved meeting business leaders, trade unions, farmers’ representatives, women’s groups and other people working in the voluntary and community sector.
I have to say that, in all the meetings we have had today, there is very strong support for what the prime minister is advocating for now and I wanted to try to reinforce many of those messages.
Asked if he thought the DUP was “out of step” with public opinion in Northern Ireland, he responded:
It’s not for me to say that. The DUP have a very important constituency, they are the largest party in Northern Ireland. I respect that. But I’ve got to listen to the other political parties too and business organisations and community organisations.
I think we have a job to do to all work together here to try to navigate a way through what is a very complex and difficult negotiation.
The prime minister said earlier that she wanted her deal to go through the Commons with the support of the DUP. The DUP, however, have been busy making it clear – for anyone who remained in any doubt – that they will not support it without significant changes being made.
After the party held discussions with Ireland’s deputy leader, Simon Coveney, the DUP leader, Arlene Foster, released this statement:
The withdrawal agreement is not a fair deal and we cannot support it. It should be no more acceptable to build a new east-west border than it is to build a new north-south border.
The backstop is not needed. No one is going to build a hard border. We will work with the government to reach a better deal for the United Kingdom but this will require more pragmatism from the European Union.
Exiting the European Union without a deal is not our favoured outcome. To reach a better deal will require a change of heart in Dublin and Brussels. I trust the Irish government will reflect on our principled objections to the withdrawal agreement and recognise that there is a better way which can work for both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom.
In response, a Number 10 spokeswoman has said:
The claim is completely wrong. Nothing in the withdrawal agreement or our political declaration cuts across Nato, our defence or intelligence relationship with the USA or with the Five Eyes alliance.
In fact, our deal delivers the broadest security agreement the EU has with any of its partners.
In the letter, they also claim that the offer of a “new, deep and special relationship” with the EU in defence, security and intelligence “cuts across the three fundamentals of our national security policy” – including Nato membership, the US relationship and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance.
An ex-MI6 chief and a former head of the armed forces have warned that the prime minister’s Brexit deal will threaten national security if it is not defeated, according to Sky News. The letter from Sir Richard Dearlove and Field Marshal Lord Guthrie reads:
We are taking the unprecedented step of writing to all Conservative party chairmen to advise and to warn you that this withdrawal agreement, if not defeated, will threaten the national security of the country in fundamental ways. Please ensure that your MP does not vote for this bad agreement.
The first duty of the state, above trade, is the security of its citizens. The withdrawal agreement abrogates this fundamental contract and would place control of aspects of our national security in foreign hands.
Please ensure that your MP votes against this bad agreement and supports a sovereign Brexit on WTO rules, without payment of ransom, for which we now know from an heroic anonymous civil servant, the civil service is, of course, fully prepared.
MPs are debating Brexit in the Commons, where the SNP’s Mhairi Black has labeled Theresa May’s claim that MPs must choose between her deal and a no-deal Brexit a “piece of nonsense”.
Since long before the ink had even dried on the text, the prime minister has been trying to create this narrative that it’s a choice between her deal and no deal.
But the prime minister clearly has options beyond her deal and no deal: She could ask for an extension of Article 50; she could keep us in the single market and customs union; or she could take the choice back to the people.
So, to say it’s her deal or no deal is a piece of nonsense. And what she’s failing to say to the public is that she’s deliberately manufactured things to appear that way, in a cynical attempt to save her own skin.
Earlier, we mentioned the reports that the GMB’s general secretary, Tim Roache, spoke to the prime minister about her Brexit deal. Since then, he’s had this to say:
I represent 620,000 working people and it’s about time their voices were heard. After nearly three years I’m glad the prime minister finally picked up the phone.
As you would expect, I was very clear about GMB’s position – the deal on the table isn’t good enough and non-binding assurances on workers’ rights won’t cut it.
If the deal genuinely did the job for GMB members, our union would support it. But it doesn’t. It’s clear more time is required, we need to extend Article 50 and, ultimately, give the final say on Brexit to the public.
As Abe and May meet, the Department for International Trade is trumpeting a series of deals between British and Japanese firms it says will be “worth more than £200m and will help to support hundreds of jobs in the UK”.
It says the toy store, Hamleys, and the British motorcycle company, Norton, will each increase their presence in Japan and the Japanese drinks firm that owns Lucozade and Ribena will invest in the UK. Officials also say that British farmers will “now be able to export beef and lamb to Japan for the first time since the two meats were banned in 1996”.
The anti-Brexit group Best for Britain has put out this comment from the Labour MP Martin Whitfield about what Shinzo Abe had to say about a no-deal Brexit. (See 5.12pm.) Whitfield said:
It is humiliating for the prime minister to be told to her face that the whole world wants to avoid a no-deal scenario, yet she still refuses to rule it out.
Countries across the globe are looking at Britain in despair. Japan, like our other allies, understands the folly of a no-deal Brexit. Why doesn’t Theresa May?
That’s all from me for today.
My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is taking over now.
Japanese PM Shinzo Abe says 'whole world' wants UK to avoid no-deal Brexit
Here is the quote from Shinzo Abe, the Japanese prime minister, where he said “the whole world” was hoping that Theresa May would avoid a no-deal Brexit. He said:
The world is watching the UK as it exits the European Union.
I would like to extend my deepest respect for the strong will and hard work by Theresa for the parliamentary approval of the withdrawal agreement.
Japan and the UK have been building a very strong partnership, not only in the political arena but also the economic area. For Japan, the UK is the gateway to the European market, Japanese businesses have created 1,000 bases in the UK offering more than 150,000 jobs.
It is the strong will of Japan to further develop this strong partnership with the UK, to invest more into your country and to enjoy further economic growth with the UK.
That is why we truly hope that a no-deal Brexit will be avoided, and in fact that is the whole wish of the whole world.
Japan is in total support of the draft withdrawal agreement worked out between the EU and Prime Minister May which provides for transition to ensure legal stability for businesses that have invested into this country.
Updated
Q: [To May] Do you think the speaker is neutral?
May says this is a matter for the Commons. MPs need to know that there is consistent interpretation of the rules.
She says she was “surprised” by John Bercow’s decision yesterday. It is for him to explain it.
She says Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, asked him to publish the advice he got from the clerks.
Q: Is it right that the speedboat killer can still get legal aid?
May says Jack Shepherd should give himself up and face justice. The MoJ is looking at the legal aid issue.
Q: What do you think of the future economic relationship between the two countries?
Abe says there will be negotiations to start a new economic relatonship with the UK. The two countries will continue to be the closest partners respectively in Europe and Asia.
Q: What is happening to the plan for a Hitachi power plant in the UK?
Abe says he did not discuss this with May. It is an important project for both countries, but the partners involved have still not decided what will happen next.
May says this is a commercial decision for the company.
May and Abe are now taking questions.
Q: [To May] You have lost two votes in two days. And your business secretary says no deal will be a disaster. So can you rule that out? And are you still ruling out a permanent customs union?
May says she has got a good deal. She wants a more ambitious trading relationship with the EU than it has with any other third country. It is an unprecedented offer.
Out of the customs union, the UK could strike good trade deals with countries like Japan.
Turning to the Commons, May says the only way to avoid no deal is to have a deal. She is still working with the EU on the backstop issue.
Referring to her calls with union leaders, she says her deal is in the national interest.
Q: [To Abe] Could Japan still use the UK as a gateway to the continent if the UK leaves with no deal?
Abe says Japan has a close economic relationship with the UK. Many Japanese firms have invested in the UK.
After Brexit, Japan wants to maintain this very good relationship. He hopes there will be more investment in the UK.
He says the withdrawal agreement is very much to be welcomed.
But the people of the UK have to take the final decision, he says.
Shinzo Abe is talking now. He says the world is watching the UK as it leaves the EU.
He says Japan welcomes the progress made in the withdrawal process. He praises May for her hardwork in relation to getting parliament to approve the deal.
He says Japanse firms have 1,000 bases in the UK, supporting 150,000 jobs.
He says he truly hopes a no-deal Brexit will be avoided.
That is the wish of the whole world.
- Japanese PM Shinzo Abe says “the whole world” wants the UK to avoid a no-deal Brexit.
Updated
Theresa May's press conference
Theresa May is now holding a press conference with Shinzo Abe, the Japanese prime minister.
May is making her opening statement, celebrating the close links between the UK and Japan.
'No leftwing justification for Brexit,' says David Lammy
Here are are extracts from two of the more noteworthy speeches in today’s Commons Brexit debate.
Labour’s David Lammy said there was “no leftwing justification for Brexit”. He told MPs:
Brexit is a con, a trick, a swindle, a fraud, a deception that will hurt most of those people it promised to help, a dangerous fantasy which will make every problem it claims to solve worse ...
Friends on this side of the House tell me to appease Labour voters in industrial towns - the former miners, the factory workers, those who feel they’ve been left behind. I say we must not patronise them with cowardice, let’s tell them the truth - you were old a lie.
Immigrants have not taken your jobs, our schools and colleges failed to give you the skills, hospitals are not crumbling because of health tourists but decades of austerity that ground them down to the bone, you cannot afford a house because both parties failed to build, not because of Mohammed down the road who moved in, and wealth was hoarded in London when it should have been shared across the country.
Blame us, blame Westminster, do not blame Brussels for our own country’s mistakes and do not be angry at us for telling you the truth, be angry at the chancers who sold you a lie ...
Just as I speak plainly to the government this time around, let me also speak to the pposition about some home truths. There is no leftwing justification for Brexit.
Ditching workers’ rights, social protections and ending environmental cooperation is not progressive.
This is a project about neo-liberal deregulation, it’s Thatcherism on steroids pushed by her modern-day disciples.
Leaving the EU will not free us from the injustices of global capitalism, it will make us subordinate to Trump’s US.
Socialism confined to one country will not work, whether you like it or not, the world we live in is global, we can only fix the rigged system if we cooperate across border lines.
The party of Keir Hardie has always been international. We must not let down our young supporters by failing to stand with them at the biggest issue of our lives.
And the Conservative Royston Smith said that he would rather lose his job as an MP than cancel Brexit - but that he could not vote for Theresa May’s deal. He said:
I want a deal, but as it stands I don’t want her deal... Take the backstop out and I will compromise again and reluctantly vote for the deal ...
I would rather lose my seat, honour my commitments to my constituents and preserve what integrity is left in this place than behave as so many others are, in their own self-interest.
Trudy Harrison, another Conservative MP who previously was opposed to Theresa May’s Brexit deal, has said that she will support it, ITV’s Daniel Hewitt reports.
A rare bit of good news for the PM - Tory MP Trudy Harrison, previously against her deal, has changed her mind and will now back the Withdrawal Agreement. She tells me the threat of no deal is too big to ignore.
— Daniel Hewitt (@DanielHewittITV) January 10, 2019
The GMB general secretary Tim Roache took a call from Theresa May this afternoon about her Brexit deal, the BBC reports.
GMB confirm to me that their General Secretary Tim Roache took a call from the Prime Minister this afternoon about Brexit.
— Chris Mason (@ChrisMasonBBC) January 10, 2019
Labour’s Brexit plans are “bollocks”, Michael Gove, the environment secretary, told the Commons earlier. As the Press Association reports, as he opened today’s Brexit debate, Gove referred to reports that shadow international trade secretary Barry Gardiner had referred to one of Labour’s six Brexit tests in that way. Praising the Brent North MP’s “truth and perfect clarity”, Gove said the Commons was grateful for his casting of light on “the testicular nature” of Labour’s six Brexit tests. Gove went on:
[Gardiner] summed them up, pithily, in a word which in Spanish translates as ‘cojones’ and in English rhymes with ‘rollocks’. I know, Mr Speaker, there are some distinguished citizens in this country who have put on their cars a poster or sticker saying ‘bollocks to Brexit’ - but we now know from Labour’s own frontbench that their official Brexit position is bollocks.
I have to say that the shadow international trade secretary is a jewel and an ornament to the Labour front bench. He speaks the truth with perfect clarity, and in his description of Labour’s own policy can I say across the House we’re grateful to him, grateful to the constant Gardiner for the way in which he has cast light on the testicular nature of Labour’s position.
The Lib Dem MP Sir Edward Davey raised a point of order, asking the speaker, John Bercow, if he had “made a new ruling on parliamentary language” by allowing Gove to use the term. Bercow said that Gove had not been disorderly and that use of the word was “a matter of taste”.
Labour MPs backing the workers’ rights amendment that the government is welcoming (see 9.20am) have been stressing that it is only the start of a process that could make the deal more acceptable to the opposition.
John Mann, who tabled the amendment, told the BBC that, although opposition MPs would be more likely to accept the deal if May accepted Labour’s conditions, that was not likely to happen next Tuesday. He went on:
This is the start of the process. You could reasonably say perhaps it should have been done a long time ago. But we are where we are. And there are other issues that need to be gone through, clarified.
And Lisa Nandy, who has also signed the amendment, told the World at One:
The amendment that we’ve tabled, even though it represents progress, isn’t sufficient to give me or many other Labour MPs confidence that this will lead to the sort of close relationship economically with the EU that we need to protect jobs in our constituencies.
I’ve been saying for five months now that I would be prepared to vote for the withdrawal agreement, but Theresa May needs to get in touch with Labour on our frontbenches and backbenches, and start having this dialogue about what we need to have the confidence to vote for it.
Until now, she’s only been prepared to talk to her party and particularly the right of her party. Until she starts to tilt back to the centre and have those conversations with the majority of parliament who don’t support no deal and don’t support a hard Brexit, she’s not going to get this withdrawal agreement through.
That’s the importance of what happened this week. Finally there seems to be a recognition from the Conservative leadership that they are going to have to do that.
Talking of George Freeman, he has tweeted a lovely picture from inside the Commons chamber.
Whisper it quietly .... Parliament is taking back control. A palpable outbreak in today’s debate of cross-party unity amongst sensible MPs who share both respect for the EUref result but also rejection of an ideological #NoDeal Brexit. #CountryBeforeParty pic.twitter.com/i59Rz9qIJU
— George Freeman MP (@GeorgeFreemanMP) January 10, 2019
Theresa May must be desperate. According to Channel 4 News’s Gary Gibbon, she has started calling trade union leaders in a bid to win more support for her Brexit deal. Until now, she has expressed precious little interest in anything they have to say. Last year Frances O’Grady, the TUC general secretary, revealed that she had had more meetings with the German chancellor Angela Merkel than with May.
Gibbon has written up the details in a blog. Here’s an extract.
As part of a Brexit outreach, trying to work out where opinion is amongst the wider Labour movement, the PM has called Unite’s Len McCluskey and is also planning to speak to the GMB’s Tim Roache.
After her meeting with Labour MPs led by John Mann, Mrs May’s team came away with the message that few were ready to vote for her on the basis of a pledge on workers’ rights but more could be available if there was a different approach to the final Brexit deal.
One who was in the conversation came away with the strong impression that could include talking about full membership of the customs union and a closer relationship with the single market.
Sir Nicholas Soames, the Conservative former minister who rebelled for only the second time in his 35-year parliamentary career on Tuesday to show his opposition to a no-deal Brexit, told the World at One that the government should have reached out to Labour sooner. He said:
I really do believe that our current situation of trying to deal with this in highly partisan terms is proved to be completely useless. It’s simply not working and that is because the parties are split, parliament is split, the country is split.
It is for parliament now to do its duty, in my view, and come to a cross-party agreement. I think if the government had been more effective in reaching out to the Labour party - which it should have been, earlier on - we would have made more progress.
I do believe there are opportunities now for that to happen and I believe that such work is now going on. There is a genuine understanding that this bear-garden cannot continue and we must now work together to find a conclusion.
Sensible opinion is that no-deal is not a price worth paying. I think that is a consensus around which moderate opinion of Conservatives and Labour across the House can rally round.
The Conservative MP George Freeman told the Commons he would back Theresa May’s Brexit deal “with a heavy heart”. He explained:
Don’t accuse me please of Project Fear - this is serious Project Business that we serve. I will, with a heavy heart, on Tuesday vote for this deal because we’re now in the dying stages and no deal is unconscionable. But I beg colleagues to ask their front benches in pursuit of something we can all be proud of.
The BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg reckons he is the first Tory to switch from opposing the deal to supporting it.
Freeman has got form for swithering. In December 2017, in the debate that saw the government defeated on Dominic Grieve’s “meaningful vote” amendment (the first - there have been several) he told the Commons he would be rebelling - only to change his mind at the very last minute after a minor concession was announced.
Updated
Eurotunnel has accused the government of “distortionary and anti-competitive” behaviour over the award of contracts worth more than £100m to provide additional cross-Channel capacity in the case of a no-deal Brexit. As the Press Association reports, Jacques Gounon, chief executive of the train operator’s parent company Getlink, wrote to the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, to voice “serious concern” about his decision to hand the work to three ferry companies. In an apparent indication that the company was considering legal action over the move, Gounon said Getlink “reserve all our rights to challenge such a measure both in the UK and France”. According to the letter, obtained by the Financial Times, Gounon said Eurotunnel’s Le Shuttle service was the “most efficient way” to supply vital goods to the UK and would remain so even if new border procedures were introduced after Brexit. A spokesman for the Department for Transport said:
The government has invested heavily to ensure disruption at our ports is minimised in a no-deal scenario, while maximising flows through Eurotunnel and Dover continues to be our highest priority.
The contracts agreed with ferry companies are entirely compliant with UK law and represent just one element of our sensible contingency work.
Here is David Miliband, the Labour former foreign secretary, on Jeremy Corbyn’s speech. (See 2.05pm.)
Jeremy Corbyn says the real divide is many/few not remain/leave. But remain v leave has CRITICAL impact on many/few divide. Leave is a sluice gate to a more unequal and poorer Britain. There is no #brexit for the many.
— David Miliband (@DMiliband) January 10, 2019
Dave Ward, the general secretary of the CWU union, has joined union colleagues (see 11.06am) in dismissing the government offer on workers’ rights today (see 9.20am) as meaningless.
At no point in the last two and a half years has the Prime Minister asked to speak to anyone at the CWU about protecting workers rights after Brexit. There is no clearer signal of her priorities than this.
— Dave Ward (@DaveWardGS) January 10, 2019
The old motto remains as true as always - when it comes to workers rights, you can never trust a Tory. This latest development is nothing other than a pathetic last-ditch attempt to win a handful of votes for May’s disastrous withdrawal agreement.
— Dave Ward (@DaveWardGS) January 10, 2019
Any Labour MP considering siding with the government over this meaningless promise should take a hard look at themselves. The only thing that will deliver protection for the basic rights that already exist - and extend on them - will be the election of a Corbyn government.
— Dave Ward (@DaveWardGS) January 10, 2019
Corbyn's speech and Q&A - Summary and analysis
Jeremy Corbyn is often described as a lifelong Eurosceptic. That is not wrong, but it does not fully explain Corbyn’s stance on Brexit because another point is that he is not hugely interested in the topic either. The issues that engage him are ones like poverty and human rights. All of this helps to explain why his speech on Brexit this morning was, in certain respects, something of a non-event. In relation to some questions - like when will Labour table a confidence motion, or would Labour extend article 50? - we almost ended up knowing less about Labour’s position after the speech than we did before.
But even politicians’ evasions can be interesting. And, on the plus side, the speech did reflect Corbyn’s determination to move beyond Brexit. There was an argument in it.
Here are the main points from the speech and the Q&A
- Corbyn downplayed suggestions that the party will table a no confidence motion in Theresa May’s government if she loses her Brexit vote next week. Yesterday two members of the shadow cabinet said he would table a no confidence motion almost immediately if May loses the vote. But today, when he addressed the issue in his speech, and when he was pressed on this in his Q&A, he just restated his preference for a general election, adding:
[If May does not agree to call an election], Labour will table a motion of no confidence in the government at the moment we judge it to have the best chance of success. Clearly, Labour does not have enough MPs in parliament to win a confidence vote on its own. So, members across the House should vote with us to break the deadlock.
Many Tory MPs have said they would vote against May’s Brexit deal, but support her government in a confidence motion. There are two scenarios where it becomes possible to imagine Labour winning; if MPs voted for the deal including the Irish backstop, leading the DUP to conclude that voting with Labour to bring down the government was the only way it can kill the backstop; or if May committed to a no-deal Brexit, leading Tory pro-Europeans to conclude that voting with Labour to bring down their own government was the only way to stop that happening. Either of these situations could arise, but probably not next week.
- Corbyn insisted that the real divide in Britain is not remain v leave, but the many v the few. This was the most interesting argument in the speech, and it reflected Corbyn’s ongoing desire to understand why people voted for leave in the referendum, and his interest in what can be done to reunite the country. He said:
The truth is, the real divide in our country is not between those who voted to remain in the EU and those who voted to leave. It is between the many – who do the work, who create the wealth and pay their taxes, and the few – who set the rules, who reap the rewards and so often dodge taxes ...
People across the country, whether they voted leave or remain know that the system isn’t working for them.
Some see the EU as a defence against insecurity and hostility. Others see the EU as part of an establishment that plunged them into insecurity and hostility in the first place.
But it’s the failed system rigged against the many to protect the interests of the few that is the real cause of inequality and insecurity whether it’s in Tottenham or Mansfield ...
Because for both sides the EU referendum was about much more than our relationship with our biggest trading partner and its rules.
It was about what has happened to our people over decades and how to build a better future.
But the problem with this argument is that it runs counter to the wealth of academic evidence saying that identity politics is growing increasingly powerful, and the remain/leave divide (and the values split that it represents) is what matters. You can find a library of research on this topic here. Depicting politics as a conflict between the many and the few implies a class analysis of voting behaviour. But class is no longer the factor that determines how people vote; age is far more important (among other things), as these two charts from a YouGov analysis of the 2017 general election show. There is nothing wrong at all with Corbyn’s desire to reset the terms of engagement, but he faces a very tough challenge.
- Corbyn suggested that he remains personally sceptical about backing a second referendum on Brexit. He did not rule out the idea, and more than once he fairly restated Labour’s carefully-crafted compromise position on the subject, as agreed at the party conference. But anyone hoping for evidence that Corbyn was warming to the idea would have been disappointed. Invited by Channel 4 News’ Jon Snow to talk about policies that might appeal to young people (Snow was thinking of a “people’s vote”), Corbyn sidestepped the topic and instead started talking about tuition fees. And, asked what Labour’s Brexit policy would be if there were a general election, Corbyn just confirmed that the party would go into the election promising an alternative Brexit deal. He did not propose putting that deal to the public in a referendum, even though a member of his shadow cabinet has recently floated this option.
- Corbyn accepted that Labour would have to extend article 50 to allow time to renegotiate Brexit if it won an early election. This is little more than a statement of what is blindingly obvious; even if May announced an election today, and Labour won, there would be no time for the renegotiation it wants before 29 March. But the party is reluctant to say this explicitly, presumably for fear of being seen as defying the outcome of the referendum. Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, went about as far down this road as anyone has when he said in the Commons yesterday that delaying article 50 “may well be inevitable”. Asked about this, Corbyn said:
Quite clearly, moving into office at a period right up against the clock, there would need to be time for that negotiation,. What Keir was doing was reflecting the practicalities of how that negotiation would be undertaken.
- Corbyn spurned what appears to be a Number 10 attempt to win Labour support with a move on workers’ rights. Asked about the John Mann amendment (see 9.20am and 10.52am), Corbyn replied:
It’s already been quite clearly and emphatically rejected by the TUC and leading trade unions. They say it simply doesn’t guarantee the protections that we are seeking. We don’t endorse or accept what has been put forward and we agree with the TUC and the other general secretaries who have already rejected that view.
It was not surprising that Corbyn is not impressed by the amendment, because in practical terms it would not have much of an effect. What is really interesting is the contrast with Corbyn’s conference speech. In Liverpool in September Corbyn made a point of saying in his speech that, if May could produce a Brexit deal that matched Labour’s terms, he would support it. But today there was no offer to cooperate with May over Brexit. Corbyn also did not say anything about working with Tory backbenchers to produce an alternative Brexit plan. In the Commons yesterday Sir Oliver Letwin, the Conservative former cabinet minister, asked Starmer specifically if Labour would be willing to cooperate with government backbenchers like himself on some sort of Norway option. There was nothing in today’s speech to suggest that Corbyn is interested in taking up this offer.
Photograph: Sean Smith for the Guardian
Updated
Nicola Blackwood, a former Conservative MP has been appointed as a health minister and made a life peer, Downing Street has announced. She will replace Lord O’Shaughnessy as health minister after he resigned in December citing “family circumstances”. Blackwood was a health minister until she lost her Oxford West and Abingdon seat in the 2017 general election.
Simon Coveney, Ireland’s deputy premier, has denied meddling in UK politics, insisting he has an obligation to challenge those “misrepresenting” what the Brexit deal contains. Although his comments about the importance of the Irish backstop have frequently angered Tory Brexiters, Coveney told BBC Radio Ulster that he was not interfering in British politics. He said:
I am not trying to meddle, I’m trying to be a candid friend.
There isn’t an anti-British or English bone in my body, but I believe I have an obligation in the context of the relationships between these two islands and on this island, north and south, to try to find a solution that can allow us all to live together in peace, that allows us to trade together and live normal lives as neighbours together.
Some people are choosing, in my view, to misrepresent what that deal is about for the future, particularly for Northern Ireland, and I need to speak up on that - I wouldn’t be fulfilling my obligations if I didn’t.
Bercow says there was 'nothing arbitrary' in his controversial ruling on Grieve amendment
In the Commons earlier John Bercow, the speaker, clashed with Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, over his decision yesterday to defy precedent and allow a vote on a procedural amendment tabled by the anti-Brexit Tory Dominic Grieve.
Leadsom, a Brexiter, told MPs this morning that the speaker’s job was to “uphold the rules that parliament has made for itself, not to arbitrarily change those rules”.
In response, Bercow said:
There was nothing arbitrary about the conduct of the chair yesterday.
This speaker is well aware of how to go about the business of chairing the proceedings of the House because he’s been doing so for nine and a half years.
I hope colleagues will understand when I say that I require no lessons or lectures from others about how to discharge my obligations to parliament and in support of the rights of backbench parliamentarians.
I have been doing it, I’m continuing to do it and I will go on doing it, no matter how much abuse I get from whatever quarter. It’s water off a duck’s back as far as I am concerned.
Corbyn's Brexit speech - Verdict from Twitter commentariat
Here is some Twitter comment on the Corbyn Brexit speech from journalists.
From the BBC’s Norman Smith
So..what did we learn from @jeremycorbyn speech.
— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) January 10, 2019
1. Don't expect confidence vote day after PM's deal is voted down.
2. JC has no desire for a second referendum.
From Sky’s Beth Rigby
Jeremy Corbyn making it pretty clear that he is unkeen on a Second Referendum; extending article 50 looks like a far more attractive option for his Plan B if he can’t get his general election
— Beth Rigby (@BethRigby) January 10, 2019
From the Times’ Sam Coates
Jeremy Corbyn speech headlines
— Sam Coates Times (@SamCoatesTimes) January 10, 2019
- We'll go into a general election promising to renegotiate brexit (and implictly no 2 ref promise)
- Wants to bring people from both sides together (implicit discomfort with 2 ref to reverse brexit)
- Admits Labour alone can't bring down May
in short:
— Sam Coates Times (@SamCoatesTimes) January 10, 2019
Corbyn clearly signalling his discomfort with a second referendum
From ITV’s Robert Peston
Although this is restatement of official Labour policy, campaigners for a referendum will see it as a victory - because they feared @jeremycorbyn was about to back away from what he calls a “public vote” and start treating with @theresa_may on a Brexit compromise pic.twitter.com/JU8Ef6J9jn
— Robert Peston (@Peston) January 10, 2019
From PoliticsHome’s Kevin Schofield
Did we actually learn anything new from the Corbyn Brexit speech?
— Kevin Schofield (@PolhomeEditor) January 10, 2019
* Says Labour will vote against Brexit deal - AGAIN.
* Called for general election - AGAIN.
* Said no confidence motion will be tabled but won't say when - AGAIN.
From my colleague Jessica Elgot
Corbyn doesn’t answer my question at all or engage in any way about whether endorsing a second referendum would alienate voters here in Wakefield. Just restates the policy of opposing the deal and keeping options on the table.
— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) January 10, 2019
It’s a real bind for Labour, especially in seats like this which they need to hold and win over new votes for Labour - and in seats like Morley next door which they need to gain
— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) January 10, 2019
From the Observer’s Michael Savage
Read Corbyn speech - takes us no further.
— Michael Savage (@michaelsavage) January 10, 2019
BUT interesting in what it tells us about his approach - theme is: divide isn't Remain/Leave, but haves/have nots.
His team understandably don't want politics to be just Brexit - but no politician gets to choose the context they're in.
From the Daily Mirror’s Pippa Crerar
I’ve always felt it was really important to look at the reasons WHY people voted the way they did in the referendum. Jeremy Corbyn is one of the few politicians I’ve heard who has properly articulated this.
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) January 10, 2019
MPs will get just 90 minutes to debate Brexit 'plan B' under current plan, No 10 says
Meanwhile, my colleague Dan Sabbagh has posted this from the Downing Street lobby briefing.
Downing St outlining it believes that if May's deal is voted down, the Plan B debate outlined under Grieve will only be 90min long and there will be only one amendment. That won't be popular...
— Dan Sabbagh (@dansabbagh) January 10, 2019
Q: Many Labour members want the party to promise a second referendum if there is an election. Do you have reservations about that?
Corbyn says at the Labour conference the party adopted a sequential policy, calling for a vote against May’s vote, then a general election, and if that can’t happen potentially a popular vote.
Q: [From Channel 4 News’ Jon Snow] Channel 4 News has been speaking to young people who could not vote in the referendum. Most want to remain. Have you forgotten them?
Corbyn says he is very aware of how young people want free higher education, and access to training and jobs. He understands what they feel about remain. But he also understands the views of those who voted leave. His speech today was about how you can bring the country together. The government’s policies will not do that.
He says Labour will vote against May’s deal on Tuesday.
It will then, if it is successful, be calling for a general election, he says.
He says he does not want to live in a country where people rely on food banks. He wants to live in a country that cares for people.
And that’s it. The Corbyn Q&A is over.
I will post a summary soon.
Corbyn says accepting May’s deal would lock the UK into a process that would not be a good one.
Q: Will you call a no confidence vote next week?
Corbyn says the vote next week could be the third defeat for the government in a week. This is a government that cannot command a majority in the Commons. Labour will move a no confidence motion “at a time of our choosing”, when it judges there is best chance of success, he says.
This chaos cannot go on, he says. The only way out is a general election.
Q: Is there a split between you and Starmer on this over extending article 50?
No, says Corbyn. He repeats the point about how what Starmer said about extending article 50 yesterday just reflected the practicalities.
Corbyn's Q&A
Corbyn is now taking questions.
Q: If you do get a general election, what will Labour’s Brexit policy be?
Corbyn says the policy will be one of negotiating around a customs union, and not allowing workers’ rights to fall below EU standards. That is implicit in the government’s policy. Labour would want to negotiate with the EU urgently. But the party would make election policy in a democratic way.
Q: Do you back the Mann amendment on workers’ rights? And is there anything Theresa May could offer that would make you support her deal?
Corbyn says what has been offered by the government does not go far enough on workers’ rights. Labour does not accept what has been put forward. It agrees with what the TUC and other unions are saying.
Q: Do you agree with Keir Starmer that extending article 50 may be inevitable.
Starmer says if Labour took office, there would have to be a renegotiation. Starmer was reflecting the practicalities of this.
- Corbyn implies Labour would extend article 50 if it took office to allow time for a new Brexit negotiation.
Corbyn is now winding up.
The Conservatives are never going to tackle the burning injustices in our country or act to overcome the deep and growing inequalities.
They are incapable of leading us out of a crisis they created.
Britain deserves a government that can govern.
The need for a government with a clear purpose and direction for the country could not be more urgent.
A general election is the right answer and the best way to break the deadlock.
Labour is ready to bring Leave and Remain voters together to rebuild Britain for the many not the few.
Corbyn confirms Labour would continue to match EU standards on workers’ rights after Brexit.
Finally, why are we absolutely insistent on at least keeping pace with EU rights at work environmental standards and consumer protections?
It’s because with those guarantees and a radical Labour government that stands up for people against powerful vested interests, we can give workers and consumers more control over their lives.
Corbyn restates his call for the UK to be in a customs union with the EU after Brexit.
Why is a customs union necessary?
It’s because a new customs union and a radical Labour government with an active industrial strategy will allow a renaissance in our manufacturing sector, which will create good, secure jobs and help restore pride and prosperity to parts of our country that have been ignored for too long.
Why do we need a strong relationship with the single market?
It’s because frictionless trade and a radical Labour government with a plan to invest in every region and nation of our country, will give us the chance to kick-start real growth in our economy, allowing the wealth created by this country’s workforce to be shared more fairly.
Corbyn says Labour will table no confidence motion when it thinks it has best chance of winning
Corbyn renews his call for a general election if Theresa May loses the vote on her deal on Tuesday next week. (See 11.12am.)
And he says, if there is no election, Labour will table a no confidence motion when it thinks it has the best chance of winning.
So I say to Theresa May: if you are so confident in your deal then call that election and let the people decide.
If not, Labour will table a motion of no confidence in the government at the moment we judge it to have the best chance of success.
Clearly, Labour does not have enough MPs in parliament to win a confidence vote on its own.
So members across the House should vote with us to break the deadlock.
This paralysis cannot continue. Uncertainty is putting people’s jobs and livelihoods at risk.
And if a general election cannot be secured then we will keep all options on the table, including the option of campaigning for a public vote.
But an election must be the priority. It is not only the most practical option, it is also the most democratic option.
It could give the winning party a renewed mandate to negotiate a better deal for Britain and secure support for it in Parliament and across the country.
Yesterday two members of the shadow cabinet said Corbyn would table a no confidence motion almost immediately if May loses the vote next week. What Corbyn has said just now puts that in doubt, because it is not obvious that Labour would have a good chance of winning if the vote were held next week.
Jeremy Corbyn is speaking now.
He thanks Laura Pidcock for her introduction. And he welcomes Richard Burgon, the shadow justice secretary, who is also here. And he said Burgon did well in his media interviews this morning - so well that the Tories have gone into overdrive attacking him, he says.
The Conservatives have put out a news release saying that, in various interviews, Burgon failed on a total of 23 occasions to say what Labour’s policy on Brexit would be if there were to be a general election.
The Labour MP Laura Pidcock is introducing Jeremy Corbyn.
She says in Wakefield people voted overwhelmingly for Brexit.
Jeremy Corbyn's Brexit speech
Jeremy Corbyn is about to deliver his Brexit speech in Wakefield.
Here are two extracts released in advance.
- Corbyn will renew his call for a general election.
Let there be no doubt: Theresa May’s deal is a bad deal and Labour will vote against it next week in parliament.
If the government cannot pass its most important legislation, then there must be a general election at the earliest opportunity. A government that cannot get its business through the House of Commons is no government at all. So I say to Theresa May: if you are so confident in your deal, call that election, and let the people decide.
To break the deadlock an election is not only the most practical option, it is also the most democratic option. It would give the winning party a renewed mandate to negotiate a better deal for Britain and secure support for it in Parliament and across the country.
For both sides, the EU referendum was about so much more than our relationship with our biggest trading partner and its rules. It was about what’s happened to our people over decades and how to build a better future.
The need for a government with a clear purpose and direction for the country could not be more urgent. Labour stands ready to bring leave and remain voters together to rebuild Britain for the many, not the few.
- He will claim that the real divide in the UK is not between remain and leave, but between the many and the few.
The real divide in our country is not between those who voted to remain in the EU and those who voted to leave. It is between the many, who do the work, create the wealth and pay taxes, and the few, who set the rules, reap the rewards and so often dodge taxes.
If you’re living in Tottenham, you may well have voted to Remain. You’ve got high bills, rising debts, you’re in insecure work, you struggle to make your wages stretch, and you may be on universal credit and accessing food banks. You’re up against it.
If you’re living in Mansfield, you are likely to have voted to Leave. You’ve got high bills, rising debts, you’re in insecure work, you struggle to make your wages stretch, and you may be on universal credit and accessing food banks. You’re up against it.
People across the country, whether they voted leave or remain, both know that the system isn’t working for them. Some see the European Union as a defence against insecurity and hostility. Others see the European Union as part of an establishment that plunged them into insecurity and hostility in the first place.
But it’s the failed system rigged against the many to protect the interests of the few that is the real cause of inequality and insecurity, whether in Tottenham or Mansfield. And the real solution is to transform Britain to work in the interests of the vast majority, by challenging the entrenched power of a privileged elite. That is how we can help to heal the referendum’s deep divisions.
Union leaders have dismissed the government’s announcement that it could accept the Mann amendment on workers’ rights. (See 9.20am and 10.52am.) This is from Frances O’Grady, the general secretary of the TUC.
This amendment makes no change to a bad deal for working people’s jobs and rights.
We’ve been clear that what working people need is a long-term, binding guarantee that their rights will keep pace with those across Europe. The amendment doesn’t deliver that. It doesn’t even provide an adequate guarantee for the rights we already have.
And since the political declaration isn’t legally binding, there’s nothing to stop a future government from ignoring it altogether.
The prime minister has talked a big game on workers’ rights all along, but once again the reality falls short.
And this is from Tim Roache, general secretary of the GMB.
The government has systematically refused to engage with trade unions over workers’ rights and is now trying to buy off MPs with legally unenforceable tweaks that are not worth the paper they are written on.
These assurances are meaningless at best, and at worst a cynical attempt to use workers’ rights as a bargaining chip for self-preservation.
To be clear - this doesn’t guarantee workers a single thing. Any MP who thinks this is enough to make a bad deal good needs to have a serious word with themselves.
What the Mann amendment on workers' rights after Brexit would actually achieve?
Here is the full text of the John Mann workers’ rights amendment (see 9.20am) to the motion backing the government’s Brexit deal. It says:
At end, add “agrees with paragraph 79 of the political declaration that the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition and that provisions to ensure this should cover state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing field arrangements provided for in the withdrawal agreement and commensurate with the overall economic relationship; and determines not to allow the UK leaving the EU to result in any lowering after exit day of common EU UK standards provided for in the withdrawal agreement in relation to employment, environmental protection and health and safety which will continue to protect the wellbeing of every person in this country; and determines that the government should invite the House to consider any measure approved by EU institutions after exit day which strengthens any of these protections.
The amendment has also been signed by the Labour MPs Gareth Snell, Caroline Flint and Lisa Nandy. Like all the amendments to the motion, it is available on the order paper (pdf).
In many respects this amendment just restates commitments that the government has already given (which is why it is has been easy for Number 10 to welcome it). The first clause (from “agrees with paragraph 79” to “overall economic relationship”) literally just repeats the first sentence of paragraph 79 of the political declaration on the future partnership (pdf). Labour point out that the political declaration is not legally binding, but the motion being voted on next week would not be legally binding either.
The next clause (about not lowering common EU UK standards provided for in the withdrawal agreement) also just restates something already agreed by the government. The withdrawal agreement (pdf), which is legally binding, has “non-regression” clauses on labour and social standards (p359) and on environmental protection (p355). These are intended to ensure that, after Brexit, standards in the UK are not lowered below the level that will apply at the end of the transition period (when the UK will no longer be obliged to meet EU standards).
The only bit of the amendment with potential clout is the final clause, saying the government should invite MPs to “consider any measure approved by EU institutions after exit day which strengthens any of these protections”. At this point it is important to understand the difference between non-regression, which effectively means agreeing not to go backwards in terms of standards, and dynamic alignment, which means agreeing to carry on matching EU standards if they raise theirs in the future. One of Labour’s main objections to Theresa May’s Chequers plan for Brexit was that it promised dynamic alignment on state aid (“the UK would make an upfront commitment to maintain a common rulebook with the EU on state aid, enforced by the CMA [Competition and Markets Authority],” the Chequers white paper said), while it just promised non-regression on labour and environmental standards.
The Mann amendment amounts to a nudge in the direction of dynamic alignment on workers’ rights and environmental standards. But asking the Commons to “consider” matching any tougher EU laws that come into force after Brexit is not the same as making a firm commitment to do so.
Updated
Clark suggests he would resign from cabinet rather than agree to no-deal Brexit
Greg Clark, the business secretary, has been giving a series of interviews this morning, and he has also written an article for Politico Europe. As well as signalling that the government will support the John Mann workers’ rights amendment (see 9.20am), here are the other points he has been making.
- Clark suggested that he would resign rather than remain in a cabinet implementing a no-deal Brexit. In his Politico article he said:
Parliament can establish that it wants a no-deal Brexit to be ruled out. Most MPs, across the House, including many in government, would not countenance leaving on March 29 with no agreement.
But he would not threaten explicitly to resign in these circumstances (as his junior minister, Richard Harrington, did earlier this week). Asked on the Today programme if he would resign rather than see no deal, Clark said:
I would always work and fight to make sure that the policy of the government is to have a good deal, to avoid what I think would be a disaster which would be no deal.
- Clark called for MPs to “come together” to agree a Brexit deal. He told the Today programme:
It is my strong view that we need to come together. We need to act to avoid a no-deal because I don’t think there is anything remotely like a majority in parliament that will tolerate this.
- He indicated that he was in favour of holding a series of indicative votes in the Commons, to see which of the various options available has most support, in the event of Theresa May’s deal being defeated. Other pro-European cabinet ministers have also floated this idea, but Number 10 seems to be resisting. Clark said:
I have said in public and in discussions that to establish what parliament wants and what parliament supports can be a useful step.
You need, it seems to me, to move from parliament being just a scrutineer but to be active participants, and that means discovering parliament’s mind.
In doing so I think what would very quickly be established, there is a substantial majority that absolutely does not want to see no deal.
Updated
Government reaches out to Labour by welcoming workers' rights Brexit amendment
Greg Clark, the business secretary, has indicated that the government will back a Labour amendment to the motion approving the government’s Brexit deal guaranteeing workers’ rights. As the Daily Mirror reports, the amendment has been tabled by Labour MPs, and the government is welcoming it in the hope of getting some Labour MPs to back May’s deal.
Asked about it on Sky News this morning, Clark said:
It seems to me, if you want to come together with an agreement, you’ve got to listen to all sides. When it comes to workers’ rights, Theresa May has always been very clear that she believes in our strong tradition of workers’ rights ... The Labour party introduced the minimum wage, the Conservative party introduced the national living wage ...
This amendment has been put down by a number of Labour MPs. It seems to be consonant with the cross-party view that has prevailed for decades now, that we should be strengthening workers’ rights in this country ... We have not come to the debate yet, but [the prime minister] has said, rightly in my view, that we will look at it with sympathy.
Quite what practical impact this amendment would have is a matter of debate, but John Mann, the Brexiter Labour MP who tabled it, told the Mirror it was mattered. “If we have a guarantee that works on workers’ rights and conditions, that’s significant,” Mann said.
But Richard Burgon, the shadow justice secretary, was sceptical about the amendment when asked about it on the Today programme this morning. He said:
When it comes to the crunch I don’t trust the Conservatives on workers’ rights. Even the noises that are being made in the press by the Conservatives don’t mean any such agreement would be legally binding when it comes to protecting workers’ rights.
We’ll hear from both May and Jeremy Corbyn on this later. May is holding a press conference, and Corbyn is giving what is billed as a major Brexit speech.
MIRROR: May caves in on workers rights to save Brexit deal #tomorrowspaperstoday pic.twitter.com/RAAIW9hcjl
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) January 9, 2019
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, speaks at a conference in Dublin.
10.30am: Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, takes business questions in the Commons.
11am: Jeremy Corbyn gives a speech on Brexit.
After 11.30am: Michael Gove, the environment secretary, opens day two of the Brexit debate.
Late afternoon: Theresa May holds a press conference in Downing Street with the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe.
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, but mostly I will be focusing on Brexit, the Corbyn speech and the May press conference. I plan to post a summary when I finish, after 5pm.
You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. 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 it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply ATL, although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.
Updated
