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

May roundly condemned by MPs after delaying Brexit vote to seek fresh backstop assurances – as it happened

Closing summary

We’re going to close down this live blog now – after what can be accurately, if perhaps inadequately, described as an interesting day in Westminster. Here’s a summary of the day’s events.

  • The government put off the meaningful vote on the prime minister’s Brexit plan as it became clear Theresa May had little chance of getting it through parliament. MPs reacted angrily that the debate, which preceded the planned vote, was pulled on the fourth of five days of discussion, while the Speaker, John Bercow, made it clear the Commons’ preference would be for the government to allow it, at the very least, to express its opposition to the shelving of the vote.
  • The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, secured an emergency debate on the issue. The Speaker confirmed it would go ahead first thing on Tuesday and scheduled three hours in the parliamentary timetable.
  • The prime minister set off to tour European capitals and hold talks with prominent EU figures in a bid to win reassurances about the backstop she hopes will win over sceptical MPs. Downing Street said Theresa May would hold talks with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, as well as meeting the Dutch prime minister, Mark Rutte. Besides those discussions, May will also meet the president of the European commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, and the president of the European council, Donald Tusk.
  • European leaders reiterated they would not enter into a renegotiation of the deal. But May was offered a glimmer of hope by Tusk, who said: “We are ready to discuss how to facilitate UK ratification.” He did, however, add: “As time is running out, we will also discuss our preparedness for a no-deal scenario.”
  • On a bruising day for the prime minister, Labour MPs talked openly about trying to force a vote of no confidence. The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, was urged to call such a vote and the leaders of the SNP and the Liberal Democrats confirmed they would back him if he did. But Labour said it would hold off at least until after May returned from the continent.
  • The Brexit secretary accepted the ruling by the ECJ that article 50 is unilaterally revocable. But Stephen Barclay confirmed the government’s policy had not changed – Brexit will go ahead as planned. Just because it was confirmed the government has the right to change course, does not mean it should do so, he told MPs.
  • Towards the close of parliament’s session on Brexit, the Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle marched forward to grab the mace in what he called a “symbolic gesture” of protest at the government’s decision to defer the Brexit vote. He was suspended by the Speaker.

You can read our full round-up of the day’s biggest news here:

Updated

Returning to the subject of the Brexit secretary’s refusal to rule out “returning to the Scottish courts to overturn” the ECJ’s ruling that article 50 is unilaterally revocable (see: 9.08pm), respected legal minds are less than impressed.

The work and pensions secretary, Amber Rudd, has said the only way forward on the Brexit deal is for all parties to make compromises. She has told BBC News:

The only chance we have of getting a withdrawal agreement or something similar through is if everybody compromises. The cabinet minister said further talks with Brussels would focus on the Brexit backstop in Ireland. We don’t want to start negotiating again on fishing, Gibraltar, those matters.

Rudd said she was unsure what form any changes or additions to the deal would take, adding it may be an “addendum”. When asked if the she was ashamed by the “spectacle” in Parliament, Rudd said:

I do think it is shaming. It is shaming that, with all the best will in the world, we are trying to arrive at a deal and we cannot find a compromise agreement at the moment to get it through.

Russell-Moyle later said he acted “on the spur of the moment” because of his frustration MPs were not being listened to. Speaking from the Red Lion pub just outside Parliament, the Labour MP said:

The symbolic gesture of lifting the mace and removing it is that the will of Parliament to govern is no longer there has been removed.

I felt Parliament had effectively given up its sovereign right to govern properly. They stopped me before I got out of the Chamber and I wasn’t going to struggle with someone wearing a huge sword on their hip.

The official feed of parliamentary proceedings, as broadcast on BBC Parliament, did not show the mace being seized – in line with a convention not to show protests.

However, the footage was tweeted by the BBC and swiftly went viral. That potentially set up a conflict with the parliamentary authorities, who fear giving airtime to such incidents can encourage MPs to take part in similar protests.

An additional detail from the Brexit secretary’s appearance before MPs earlier this evening that it’s worth spelling out:

Updated

Brexit debate formally deferred

As expected, a government whip has said the debate should be held “tomorrow”, deferring it to a point in the future.

While MPs cried out “now”, Bercow had already made clear it was the government’s prerogative to decide to postpone the meaningful vote.

After doing so, he was asked to leave the chamber.

The Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle picked up the mace and walked with it over the line, where he was stopped by two female serjeant at arms staff. He put up no resistance as he was stopped and handed over the mace.

The parliamentary mace symbolises royal authority. Without it the house can neither meet nor pass laws.

The mace is silver gilt and just over five feet long. Every day it is carried into the chamber by the serjeant at arms, where it is normally placed on the table of the house.

Tory MPs screamed: “Expel him” and “Name him” as the Speaker, John Bercow, rose to his feet. Bercow said:

By the power given to me by standing order number 43 and I think [Russell-Moyle] will know the implication of his action, I must order [him] to withdraw immediately from the house for the remainder of this day’s sitting. Mr Russell-Moyle please leave the chamber.

Updated

The Speaker, John Bercow, allows Corbyn’s application for an emergency debate, saying it is “absolutely proper to be discussed”.

The debate will be held first thing tomorrow and will last for as much as three hours.

Updated

Corbyn launches challenge to May's Brexit vote postponement

The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, calls for an emergency debate on the government’s decision to postpone the vote, telling the Commons the prime minister has shown a “disregard” for parliament.

He says the government appears to be avoiding the vote because it fears it will lose it.

The government’s incompetence can’t be used as an excuse to threaten the country with no deal.

Updated

The shadow chancellor is, perhaps unsurprisingly, stoking the fire:

At the moment, the Speaker, John Bercow, is dealing with numerous points of order – most of which are related to the government’s behaviour towards the Commons in delaying the vote.

Among the directions he has given, Bercow tells MPs they cannot supersede the government’s decision by shouting “now” when a minister says the debate should be held “tomorrow” (see here for an explanation of what that means).

But Bercow agrees there is “much unhappiness” at the way the government has acted. Meanwhile:

Updated

The former prime minister David Cameron has said he does not regret calling the referendum which led to Brexit. He has told Sky News:

I don’t regret calling a referendum. I made a promise in the election to call a referendum and I called the referendum.

Obviously, I’m very concerned about what’s happening today but I do support the prime minister in her efforts to try and have a close partnership with the European Union. That’s the right thing to do and she has my support.

Updated

Barclay is finished speaking and MPs have moved on to points of order. Here’s his full statement to the House of Commons on the decision of the European court of justice that article 50 is unilaterally revocable.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I will now make a statement on the judgment issued by the European court of justice this morning on the Wightman case.

Mr Speaker, today, the European court of justice has delivered its judgment on the question of the revocability of an article 50 notice. The court has found that the UK has the right, in accordance with its constitutional requirements, to unilaterally revoke the notification of its intention to withdraw from the EU.

We note the judgment from the European court. It is their role to provide rulings on the interpretation of EU law.

This judgment clarifies the law. The judgement does not in any way change our policy. That the government knows this course is possible, just as many undesirable actions are possible, does not change the fact that such an approach is hypothetical and the government has no intention of doing it.

The government’s firm and long-held policy is that we will not revoke the article 50 notice. This position has not changed. To do this, or indeed to hold a second referendum, would be to undermine the result of the 2016 referendum and the professed will of this House to give effect to that result.

This House voted to hold the referendum and promised to deliver it. 544 members of this House voted to give the British public their say, with just 53 opposed. Almost three quarters of the electorate then took part in the 2016 referendum, resulting in 17.4 million votes to leave the European Union. This is the highest number of votes cast for anything in UK electoral history, making this referendum the biggest democratic exercise in our history.

This House then voted again to empower the prime minister to notify under article 50 and voted yet again to repeal the European Communities Act.

The government remains focused on its task and its mandate, and delivering a deal which honours the 2016 referendum result. We will be leaving the EU on the 29th of March next year.

I commend this statement to the House.

Updated

Barclay provokes howls of derision by claiming it is difficult to ascertain the will of the House of Commons because Labour keeps changing its mind. The irony is evidently not lost on MPs.

Updated

EU's no-deal preparations to be stepped up

The rest of the EU 27 and Ireland have agreed preparations for no-deal Brexit will now intensify after telephone talks this afternoon. In a statement issued by Leo Varadkar, they confirmed negotiations would not be re-opened after Theresa May’s deal was put on life support. Varadkar said:

The taoiseach and European council president, Donald Tusk, spoke by phone this afternoon. They discussed this week’s European council meeting and the current situation on Brexit.

They agreed that the withdrawal agreement is the best option and could not be renegotiated. They also agreed that preparations for a ‘no deal’ outcome should intensify.

Earlier, Tusk tweeted:

Updated

Barclay is asked for a third time how much money the government spent fighting the case in the European court of justice. The Brexit secretary says, in effect, that the bill hasn’t yet been totted up.

Updated

Theresa May is to have a bilateral meeting with Dutch prime minister, Mark Rutte, on Tuesday morning in The Hague, Downing Street has announced.

Updated

Joanna Cherry, the SNP MP who was among those pressing the question in the first place, repeats the call for Barclay to make clear how much of taxpayers’money was spent on the legal fight, saying the government was vociferous in its opposition to the argument article 50 could be unilaterally revoked.

Once again, Barclay does not answer that question. Instead, he asks Cherry why the case was brought on a hypothetical basis in the first place – thereby making it necessary to spend the money.

Updated

Barclay is asked by the shadow Brexit minister, Jenny Chapman, how much money the government spent fighting the argument that the article 50 declaration could be unilaterally revoked.

He does not answer. Instead, he restates the point that the government’s policy – that the UK will leave the EU – has not changed and claims it is for Labour to make clear its position on that issue.

“Answer the question,” Labour MPs sitting on the benches opposite, including Chapman, tell him.

Updated

A biting column by Ireland’s former ambassador to the EU, Bobby McDonagh, one of the most respected voices on the Irish diplomatic circuit.

He laments the ignorance, lack of respect for its people and the country in some quarters in London. He names no names but there are many.

Those who question Ireland’s resolve, the intelligence of its people and its motivation over the backstop will not win, he says.

Ireland’s friendship of the UK “will not be dislodged by the aggression and condescension that has characterised some of the recent comment from London”.

It is worth a read to the end – with a lesson on what the backstop is: “Single-use” the same as a plastic bottle ditched in the ocean.

Updated

Leadsom is finished at the dispatch box and the Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, is now on his feet addressing MPs on the European court of justice’s ruling that the UK can unilaterally reverse article 50.

He says the government notes the decision. But, as with many other “undesirable” courses of action, does not intend to go down that road just because it has been confirmed that it can.

Updated

The head of the Best for Britain campaign for a second referendum, Eloise Todd, has attacked the government’s decision to defer the debate.

This is a democratic disgrace. The prime minister’s mantra used to be that no deal was better than a bad deal. Now it seems like she wants to take us to the precipice of no deal to get her bad deal through.

The fact that she might need to wait till the last second to force her deal on the country shows how unpalatable it is. More importantly, it wouldn’t solve any of the splits in this country - leaving only a bitter taste in voters’ mouths.

The only genuine way of solving the current parliamentary gridlock is to give people the final say over Brexit, with the option of staying in the EU.”

The Tory MP, Mark Francois, has delivered one of the most excoriating – and graphic – assessments of the government’s parliamentary manoeuvring. To cheers from the Labour benches, he said:

What the government have done today is shameful.

He accused them of a “complete abuse of this House”, adding:

Having been found in contempt recently for the first time in living memory, they have now gone for a ‘buy one get one free’.

The whole House wanted to debate this, we wanted to vote on it, the people expected us to vote on it. And the government have gone away and hidden in the toilets.

People watching this on television will be confused and bemused and very, very angry at the way their own Parliament has let them down, the government should literally be ashamed of themselves.

To chants of “resign”, Leadsom responded, saying: “I simply do not agree with his assessment.”

The SNP’s shadow Commons leader, Pete Wishart, said Leadsom’s statement was the “ultimate humiliation”.

How they can look this House in the eye and try to suggest, pretend that this is business as usual is quite extraordinary. Our constituents are watching this farce with bewilderment and bemusement with no idea how this country is being run and the leader of the House comes up with no way forward for all of this.

We have now reached the single biggest political crisis since Suez with the biggest capitulation since Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow.

Leadsom responded:

What this demonstrates is the prime minister has very carefully listened to the many hundreds of colleagues who have already expressed their grave concerns, myself included, in the issues around the backstop.

The idea that the prime minister deferred the vote because she is listening to her parliamentary colleagues is one Leadsom has sought to press again and again during her time at the dispatch box this evening.

Updated

One point Leadsom continues to make at the dispatch box – and which bears some explanation – is that the parliamentary procedure by which the Brexit debate will be deferred involves a government minister calling out “tomorrow” when asked when it should start.

In parliamentary procedure, she tells MPs, that does not literally mean tomorrow. It means: ‘At some point in the future’.

In strict procedural terms, our intention this evening after the ministerial statements is to defer the debate until tomorrow, members will be aware that this is a very common procedure the government often names tomorrow as the next date for deferring an order of the day.

It’s then for government to decide when to bring that order back for debate and that is in line with the normal convention.

Updated

Some more detail on those comments from Rees-Mogg, who has said a no-deal Brexit – and the downfall of the prime minister – have become more likely today.

I think we should aim for managed no deal.

But, I’ve made clear and I’ll happily reiterate we need a new prime minister to do that.

If you look at today this is the failure of the prime minister’s policy. The withdrawal agreement was her policy.

Asked if his cause had been advanced by the day’s events, Rees-Mogg said:

I think it’s been a damaging day for the Conservative party, which is a major part of my cause. I think it’s been a humiliating day for the country, which is an even more important part of my cause.

But, does it mean that it’s more likely we will leave the European Union without a withdrawal agreement, then yes. So, one little bit of my cause has been advanced, but two primary bits have been damaged.

This is not a good day for the Conservative party or the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom looks foolish on the world stage.

After the announcement that the ivory bill is to replace the Brexit debate, the Labour MP, Mike Gapes, finds himself unable to avoid the “elephant in the room” pun. The elephant, he tells Leadsom, is Donald Tusk, who has made clear this afternoon that the EU will not renegotiate the deal – whatever May tells MPs.

Leadsom denied the Brexit negotiations had reached a dead end, but congratulated Gapes on a “piece of proper parliamentary pantomime”.

Updated

Leadsom has told the Commons that, in the light of the Brexit debate being deferred, the government will bring forward consideration of the ivory bill to Tuesday and hold a general debate on fuel poverty.

The Labour MP, Lloyd Russell-Moyle, was reprimanded by the Speaker, John Bercow, for screaming “general debate” at Leadsom, who faced cries of “resign” as she attempted to inform MPs of amended business for the week.

The shadow Commons leader, Valerie Vaz, responded to the announcement, saying there was “deep dissatisfaction” among MPs, adding:

This shows a complete disregard for Parliament and for the rights of the House as well as the 164 [MPs] who’ve already spoken and I think there’s almost the same number, more than that, who planned to speak today and tomorrow.

Once again, the decisions of Parliament are being ignored ... The public will look at the behaviour of the government and how it treats their democratically elected representatives and despair.

Asked by various MPs if they would be able to give their views on the Brexit deal, Leadsom repeatedly sought to reassure them that the government would make time. “When?” MPs called out on each occasion.

Updated

The leader of the House, Andrea Leadsom, is on her feet in the Commons chamber, updating MPs on what will replace the Brexit debate and vote in the parliamentary calendar – and taking quite a lot of heat from MPs.

Meanwhile, the prominent Brexiter, Jacob Rees-Mogg, has been having his say.

I think that this is a rotten day for the government. And it is a humiliating day ... I think the feeling is sad that the government is in such a mess. I thought it was as humiliating for the government to pull the vote as to lose by 100.

Rees-Mogg and his fellow Brexiter, Steve Baker, have further bad news for the prime minister: It may not even be enough if she managed to remove the backstop.

Updated

Theresa May's statement - Snap verdict

Theresa May has a remarkable ability to maintain her composure, but even the famous May “death stare”, or an uncharacteristic diversion into lewdness, could not disguise the fact that that amounted to almost three hours of humiliation for the prime minister. The laughter that greeted May at the start, when she said she had been listening carefully to MPs and that there was broad support for most aspects of the deal, was louder and harsher than I can recall for any prime ministerial Common statement of this kind. May seems to have very little chance of obtaining any assurances from the EU going much beyond the cosmetic, and it now seems as if she is gambling on the hope that, if she delays the vote until January (or later?), by that stage MPs will be so spooked by the prospect of a no-deal Brexit that they might vote in favour. It’s a plan, I suppose, but it smacks of desperation and there is no reason to be confident it will work. The CBI is probably right; the UK seems to be sliding into crisis.

On that happy note, I’m handing over to my colleague Kevin Rawlinson.

Updated

Here are three journalists on Theresa May’s statement.

From my colleague Daniel Boffey

From Sky’s Lewis Goodall

From the BBC’s Ben Wright

Here is the FT’s Henry Mance on the fact that MPs will be debating the ivory bill tomorrow.

Which is a fantastic joke - apart from the fact that Donald Tusk isn’t coming to Theresa May’s rescue. (See 6.09pm.)

Updated

Valerie Vaz, the shadow leader of the Commons, says MPs voted to set a timetable for the Brexit deal debate. She says it cannot be right that the government can pull that vote without MPs even getting a say. (See 5.28pm.)

The May statement is now over. Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, is now making a Commons business statement. She announces the replacement business for the week.

And it is not exactly riveting stuff.

Tomorrow, instead of the historic vote on Brexit, MPs will instead debate Lords amendments to the ivory bill. After that, there will be a general debate on fuel poverty.

Labour’s Martin Whitfield asks about the Donald Tusk tweet. (See 6.09pm. ) He asks if the government would be willing to withdraw article 50 to avoid a no deal Brexit.

May says that would mean staying in the EU. That is not what people voted for, she says.

Tusk says EU will 'not renegotiate the deal'

Donald Tusk, the president of the European council, has just posted this on Twitter. He says the EU will not “renegotiate the deal”.

But it will discuss what it can do “to facilitate UK ratification”, he says. That means, I think, “do what it can do help May win the vote”.

British politics has finally cut all links with normality and drifted off into absurdity. In the Commons a moment ago Labour’s Rupa Huq described the decision to call off the vote as an act of “premature parliamentary ejaculation”. In response, Theresa May said that, if Huq were to look carefully, she would see that May is not capable of premature ejaculation.

God knows what they make of this nonsense in Brussels ...

In the Commons, Labour’s Daniel Zeichner says the political declaration is not a deal, but a set of “shared aspirations”.

Updated

Labour rules out tabling no confidence motion until after May brings latest deal back to Commons

And the Labour party has now put out a statement responding to the calls for Jeremy Corbyn to table a motion of no confidence this week. (See 5.55pm.) A party spokesperson said:

We will put down a motion of no confidence when we judge it most likely to be successful.

It is clear to us that Theresa May will not renegotiate the deal when she goes to Brussels, and will only be asking for reassurances from EU leaders.

When she brings the same deal back to the House of Commons without significant changes, others across the House will be faced with that reality.

At that point, she will have decisively and unquestionably lost the confidence of parliament on the most important issue facing the country, and parliament will be more likely to bring about the general election our country needs to end this damaging deadlock.

More than 50 Labour parliamentarians urge Corbyn to table no confidence motion this week

More than 50 Labour parliamentarians are urging Jeremy Corbyn to table a motion of no confidence in the government this week, with a view to the party then campaigning for a second referendum if that fails. They have signed a letter prepared by the Labour MP Ian Murray.

By my count, 36 Labour MPs have already signed the letter, plus 15 Labour peers, 7 MEPs, and 1 Labour MSP.

This is from Labour’s Yvette Cooper.

May says, if this House desires not to have no deal, it will have to accept a deal. And her deal is the best on the table, she says.

Number 10 has just been briefing journalists.

Theresa May’s official spokesman would not say whether he was confident that May could conclude the extra phase of Brexit negotiations by Christmas. As a result, the meaningful vote could take place in January, with a little over two months to go get the legislation required to conclude an agreed Brexit through parliament before March 29.

The spokesman said that the government was still confident of meeting the March 29 deadline, and extending article 50 to give more time for ratification was ruled out.

Any further reassurances would take the form of an agreed text reached with the European Union, but the prime minister’s spokesman was careful to make clear this may not necessarily take the form of rewriting the withdrawal agreement, the UK’s exit treaty from the EU. It could take the form of revisions to the political declaration or an addendum to the withdrawal agreement.

Discussions had begun with European leaders and would continue this week and the UK hopes there will be further discussions at the European summit on Thursday and Friday, although Brexit is not formally on the table. The prime minister would judge when the reassurances were sufficient from a UK perspective, the spokesman added.

Labour’s Kevin Brennan asks May if she can confirm that, after her fresh negotiations with the EU, not a single word in the 585-page withdrawal agreement will have changed.

May says she is going into the negotiations. All options are on the table, she says.

This is from my colleague Jessica Elgot.

Labour’s Owen Smith says, since May has been on her feet, the pound has fallen to its lowest level since early 2017. He says not scheduling a vote on the Brexit deal is grossly irresponsible.

No 10 confirms government rejecting Bercow's call for MPs to get vote on delaying Brexit vote

Downing Street has confirmed that the government will reject John Bercow’s call for a proper vote on delaying tomorrow’s vote. (See 3.59pm.) As the Press Association reports, at a briefing he prime minister’s official spokesman explained the procedure by which the Brexit vote will be deferred. When the Commons clerk reads out the orders of the day on Monday evening, after the final statement, the government whip will call out “tomorrow”. This puts off the two remaining days of debate and any votes until a date yet to be fixed. There is no requirement for vote on this procedure, said the spokesman.

Labour’s Angela Smith says a vote in January would be too late.

May says she will be putting her case in the most forceful way.

Labour’s Mike Gapes asks, if May manages to get “an aspirational addendum” at the EU summit later this week, whether MPs will get a vote on Monday or Tuesday next week.

May says the timing of the vote will depend on how those discussions go.

Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, has renewed his call for article 50 to be withdrawn.

Lee Rowley, a Conservative, asks May to give an assurance of any example where a political assurance has taken precedence over a legal text.

May says Rowley is making an assumption about what she might get.

'Shambles too polite a word for what we've seen from PM', says Welsh first minister

This is from Carwyn Jones, the outgoing Welsh first minister.

Shambles is too polite a word for what we have seen today from the prime minister.

The future economic security of this country is being sacrificed on the altar of her party’s needs. This cannot carry on.

If the prime minister cannot bring forward a deal that commands the support of Parliament, there needs to be a general election.

If there isn’t a general election, there needs to be a people’s vote on the terms on which the UK leaves - or if the country wishes to remain.

Sammy Wilson, the DUP Brexit spokesman, says that every time May comes back from the EU “with her tail between her legs” she “humiliates” the British people. He calls for MPs to get the chance to vote down the deal.

MPs in the chamber are not the only people unable to get an answer from Theresa May as to when the vote might be held. According to the FT’s Laura Hughes, Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, also got the brush off when she raised this during the cabinet conference call this morning.

The Scottish Tory Douglas Ross asks when the vote will be.

May says she will discuss this issue with her EU partners. She does not know how long that process will take.

But she says she wants to work “as quickly and as urgently as possible”.

The Lib Dem MP Tom Brake asks if the government will make time for a no confidence motion “that I know the leader of the opposition will be tabling”.

(It was not clear whether Brake does know that, or whether he is just seeking to shame Jeremy Corbyn into holding one.)

May says there are Commons rules governing these votes. (They take precedence over other business.)

Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, has told the BBC’s Chris Mason he would be happy to see the vote delayed until after Christmas.

This is from the SNP’s Hannah Bardell, who asked May a question a few minutes ago.

And here is a summary of the question, from the Daily Record’s Kirsty Strickland.

Peter Bone, the Tory Brexiter, asks what process the government will use to postpone tomorrow’s vote. He refers to the two options described by John Bercow. (See 3.59pm.)

May ignores the question completely, and just talks about getting a responsible deal.

Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform and one of the best-informed Brussels-watchers, thinks May will only secure “very minor” changes to her deal.

Labour’s Stephen McCabe says, if May thinks that just a few tweaks to the backstop will be enough, she has not been listening hard enough.

May says she is addressing the concerns of MPs.

Justine Greening, the Conservative former cabinet minister and pro-European, asks May about the House of Commons statement that the vote could be delayed until 28 March. (See 4.35pm.)

May says she does not think the scenario described by Greening is correct.

But she won’t say when the vote will take place.

(Greening was just quoting what Commons officials are saying.)

CBI says UK will risk 'sliding towards national crisis' if Brexit deal not agreed soon

The CBI says, if a Brexit deal is not agreed soon, the country will risk “sliding towards a national crisis”. Its director general, Carolyn Fairbairn, said this in a statement.

This is yet another blow for companies desperate for clarity. Investment plans have been paused for two and a half years. Unless a deal is agreed quickly, the country risks sliding towards a national crisis.

Politicians on both sides of the Channel need show leadership, by building consensus to protect both the UK and EU’s prosperity. No one can afford to head into Christmas with the threat of no-deal costing jobs and hitting living standards.

And this is from Stephen Martin, director general of the Institute of Directors. He said:

Business leaders may understand the political reasons for the delay, but today’s announcement will be viewed by most as another extension of the frustration and uncertainty. While we wish the Government well in their attempts to seek further assurances about the backstop, the clock is ticking and one of the only things we know for certain is that our exit date has been written into UK law for next March. The concern among businesses is clear, with two-thirds of our members saying a no-deal Brexit would be negative for their organisation.

This is not the first time Theresa May has mentioned non-DUP voters in Northern Ireland, but it is the first time she has spelled out the need to keep them onside to keep the union of the United Kingdom intact, something the DUP holds dear to its political heart.

“If this house cares about preserving our union, it must listen to those people because our union will only endure with their consent,” she told the house in her statement. (See 4.21pm.)

The mention of “consent” in a Northern Ireland context is a reference to its central principle of the Good Friday agreement that the people of Northern Ireland, not Westminster or voters in Wales, England or Scotland, can determine through a referendum, at any time whether the region stays in the UK or becomes part of a united Ireland.

She spelled out that the backstop was needed to keep border communities stable and warned that the challenge posed by the border must be met with solutions “not rhetoric”.

This is in stark contrast to her high-level messaging up to now which has never conceded that negotiations were all about limited checks in the Irish sea.

Now that the DUP have turned against her, it seems she has been released to communicate the need for a backstop.

A late-in-the-day dividend of the deal.

Updated

Labour’s Emma Reynolds asks May to confirm that she is seeking letters of reassurance from the EU, not changes to the text of the withdrawal agremeent.

May says no option is off the table.

In the Commons a few minutes ago, referring to the EU Withdrawal Act, Theresa May suggested that there would have to be a vote by the end of January. (See 4.02pm.)

But according to the House of Commons official Twitter feed, the 21 January deadline no longer applies. It says:

The Commons has been holding a Twitter Q&A on the procedure around the “meaningful vote”. The process is not straightforward. This chart, from this document, explains some of the various deadlines set out in the EU Withdrawal Act for what must happen next, depending on whether a deal is agreed and how parliament votes.

This Commons statement is potentially significant because the “Grieve amendment” passed last week implied that MPs would get the chance to vote on a “plan B” option if MPs voted down Theresa May’s. But if that did not take place until March, there would be no time for a “plan B”.

Updated

Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader in the Commons, says Labour should call a vote of no confidence in the government. Plaid would support it, she says.

Updated

Theresa May's statement - Key extracts

Here are the key extracts from Theresa May’s statement.

On why the vote has been postponed

We have now had three days of debate on the Withdrawal Agreement setting out the terms of our departure from the EU and the Political Declaration setting out our future relationship after we have left.

I have listened very carefully to what has been said, in this chamber and out of it, by members from all sides.

From listening to those views it is clear that while there is broad support for many of the key aspects of the deal, on one issue – the Northern Ireland backstop – there remains widespread and deep concern.

As a result, if we went ahead and held the vote tomorrow the deal would be rejected by a significant margin.

We will therefore defer the vote scheduled for tomorrow and not proceed to divide the House at this time.

On why any deal must include a backstop

I set out in my speech opening the debate last week the reasons why the backstop is a necessary guarantee to the people of Northern Ireland and why - whatever future relationship you want - there is no deal available that does not include the backstop.

Behind all those arguments are some inescapable facts.

The fact that Northern Ireland shares a land border with another sovereign state.

The fact that the hard-won peace that has been built in Northern Ireland over the last two decades has been built around a seamless border.

And the fact that Brexit will create a wholly new situation: on 30 March the Northern Ireland/Ireland border will for the first time become the external frontier of the European Union’s single market and customs union.

The challenge this poses must be met not with rhetoric but with real and workable solutions.

Businesses operate across that border. People live their lives crossing and re-crossing it every day.

I have been there and spoken to some of those people.

They do not want their everyday lives to change as a result of the decision we have taken.

They do not want a return to a hard border.

And if this House cares about preserving our Union, it must listen to those people, because our Union will only endure with their consent.

On the changes she has already secured to the backstop

The customs element of the backstop is now UK-wide. It no longer splits our country into two customs territories. This also means that the backstop is now an uncomfortable arrangement for the EU, so they won’t want it to come into use, or persist for long if it does.

Both sides are now legally committed to using best endeavours to have our new relationship in place before the end of the implementation period, ensuring the backstop is never used.

If our new relationship isn’t ready, we can now choose to extend the implementation period, further reducing the likelihood of the backstop coming into use.

If the backstop ever does come into use, we now don’t have to get the new relationship in place to get out of it. Alternative arrangements that make use of technology could be put in place instead.

The treaty is now clear that the backstop can only ever be temporary.

And there is now a termination clause.

On what May plans to do next

I spoke to a number of EU leaders over the weekend, and in advance of the European council I will go to see my counterparts in other member states and the leadership of the council and the commission.

I will discuss with them the clear concerns that this House has expressed.

We are also looking closely at new ways of empowering the House of Commons to ensure that any provision for a backstop has democratic legitimacy and to enable the House to place its own obligations on the government to ensure that the backstop cannot be in place indefinitely.

On the alternatives to her plan

So if you want a second referendum to overturn the result of the first, be honest that this risks dividing the country again, when as a House we should be striving to bring it back together.

If you want to remain part of the single market and the customs union, be open that this would require free movement, rule-taking across the economy, and ongoing financial contributions – none of which are in my view compatible with the result of the referendum.

If you want to leave without a deal, be upfront that in the short term, this would cause significant economic damage to parts of our country who can least afford to bear the burden.

I do not believe that any of those courses of action command a majority in this House.

On her personal duty to deliver Brexit

On the morning after the referendum two and a half years ago, I knew that we had witnessed a defining moment for our democracy.

Places that didn’t get a lot of attention at elections and which did not get much coverage on the news were making their voices heard and saying that they wanted things to change.I knew in that moment that Parliament had to deliver for them.

But of course that does not just mean delivering Brexit. It means working across all areas – building a stronger economy, improving public services, tackling social injustices – to make this a country that truly works for everyone, a country where nowhere and nobody is left behind.

And these matters are too important to be afterthoughts in our politics – they deserve to be at the centre of our thinking.

But that can only happen if we get Brexit done and get it done right. And even though I voted remain, from the moment I took up the responsibility of being prime minister of this great country I have known that my duty is to honour the result of that vote.

And I have been just as determined to protect the jobs that put food on the tables of working families and the security partnerships that keep each one of us safe.

And that is what this deal does.

It gives us control of our borders, our money and our laws. It protects jobs, security and our Union.

It is the right deal for Britain.

Labour’s Hilary Benn, chair of the Brexit committee, asks if any of the EU leaders that May spoke to over the weekend said they were willing to renegotiate the backstop protocol in the withdrawal agreement.

May avoids the question, and lists the changes to the backstop she has already secured.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, says what the PM is saying is not credible. He says the backstop is “unacceptable to this house”. May must agree changes to the withdrawal agreement, he says.

May says the vote is being delayed so she can discuss “further reassurances” with EU partners.

Updated

Sterling hits 20-month low

Sterling has suffered a sharp selloff since Theresa May began giving her statement.

The pound has just a 20-month low against the US dollar at $1.2524, down two cents today - a substantial swing.

The pound vs the US dollar today
The pound vs the US dollar today Photograph: Thomson Reuters

Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader, says the government has lost all authority. He says his party will back Labour if it calls a no confidence vote.

May refuses to say when Brexit vote will be held, implying it could be delayed until January

The SNP’s Kirsty Blackman asks May when the vote will be held.

May says she is deferring the vote and going to Brussels to seek assurances.

She refers to the EU Withdrawal Act, which says if there is no deal by 21 January, she must make a statement.

She says MPs must honour the referendum result.

  • May refuses to say when Brexit vote will be held, implying it could be delayed until January.

Updated

Bercow strongly condemns government plans to pull tomorrow’s vote without giving MPs a say

John Bercow, the Speaker, is making an intervention.

He says news emerged that the vote was being cancelled before MPs were told.

He says, given that 164 MPs have already spoken, he thinks it is discourteous to cancel the vote. He says there are two ways to do this.

The best way would be for a minister to move a motion to adjourn the debate.

He says he would be happy to accept such a motion.

The alternative would be for the government to decline to move today’s business, which would lead to the house not having a vote tomorrow, and not having the chance to vote today on whether or not the debate should continue.

In any courteous, respectful and mature environment, allowing the house to have its say on the matter would be the right and obvious course to take.

He says he looks forward to seeing if MPs will rise to the occasion.

  • Bercow condemns government plans to pull tomorrow’s vote without giving MPs a say. The government has not officially said it intends to pull the vote without giving MPs a say. But government sources have briefed this (see 1.43pm), not least because if there were a division on postponing the main vote, there is a good chance the government would lose because Tory Brexiters would vote against. (See 1.38pm.)

It is hard to think of a Speaker - even this one - condemning a government in such strong terms for the way it has handled an item of Commons business.

Updated

May is responding to Corbyn.

She says the deal she has put forward is the best one for honouring the referendum result, while protecting jobs and the economy.

She says Corbyn refused to accept that any deal will require a backstop.

She says he wants the UK to be able to negotiate trade deals, but that that will not be possible under Labour’s plan to stay in the customs union for good.

Updated

Corbyn says there will be no point in May bringing back 'same deal' to MPs.

Jeremy Corbyn is responding now.

He asks if May is seeking substantial changes, or just minor ones.

He says that Leo Varadkar, the Irish PM, said earlier today that May’s red lines were to blame for this mess.

He asks if May intends to bring back her plan.

This is a bad deal for the country and the economy. The government’s own analysis shows it would be worse off, he says.

If May cannot renegotiate this deal, then she must make way, he says.

He says since business has changed in the Commons, MPs should debate the negotiating mandate that May takes to Brussels.

  • Corbyn says there will be no point in May bringing back the “same deal” to MPs.

Updated

May has finished. The final section of her statement was unusually reflective, and almost valedictory.

May says she will try to get further assurances.

She says, after the referendum, she knew parliament had to deliver for people who had voted no.

That meant tackling social injustices, and creating a country that truly works for everyone, she says.

That would only happen if government made Brexit work.

May says, even though she voted remain, she knew when she became PM that she had to deliver Brexit.

But she wants to do it in a way that protects jobs and security, she says.

Updated

May says the government will step up its Brexit no-deal planning

May says the house faces a further question.

Does it want to deliver Brexit?

No, shout SNP MPs loudly.

May goes on. And do MPs want to leave the EU with a deal?

She says she thinks most MPs do want a deal.

Those MPs who disagree with her solution need to deliver an alternative.

If you want a second referendum, be honest, she says, “that this risks dividing the country again when as a house we should be striving to bring it back together”.

And if you want to stay part of the single market and the customs union, be honest that this this involves accepting free movement.

And if you want to leave with no deal, be honest that this will cause significant damage in those parts of the county that can least afford it.

  • May says the government will step up its no-deal planning in case MPs cannot agree on her Brexit deal.

Updated

May says she will hold emergency talks with EU leaders to discuss possible changes to backstop

May says the challenge of the border must be met, with real and workable solutions.

She has visited the Irish border, she says. People there want their lives to continue as now. They don’t want a hard border.

She says she had hoped to persuade MPs that the changes to the backstop would ensure it was not permanent.

She says it is now UK-wide. The EU and the UK have agreed to use best endeavours to ensure it is not needed. She says the UK could extend the transition instead. And there is a mechanism to end it.

But MPs were not persuaded, she says.

  • May says she intends to visit EU leaders and the European commission before this week’s EU summit to discuss changes to it to address MPs’ concerns.

She also says she will consider how MPs could be given a say over the introduction of the backstop.

Updated

She tells MPs that no Brexit deal is available without a backstop

May says the debate has gone on for three days now.

She has listened very carefully to what has been said, she says.

That triggers loud laughter.

There is broad support for many aspects of the deal, she says.

That triggers more laughter.

But there is opposition to the backstop. If the vote went ahead, it would be lost by a large margin. So the vote will be deferred, she says.

  • May confirms Brexit vote delay.
  • She tells MPs that no Brexit deal is available without a backstop.

Theresa May's Commons statement

Theresa May is starting her Commons statement now.

DUP says May must get rid of backstop as part of 'legally binding international treaty'

Arelene Foster, the DUP leader, has just issued this statement.

The deferment of the meaningful vote just about sums up the chaotic nature of the government’s approach to these negotiations. The prime minister was warned that this deal would not work but did not listen.

The fundamentally flawed withdrawal agreement would have undermined our United Kingdom economy and the union itself. The backstop would have left Northern Ireland trapped as a hostage to the European Union.

The prime minister must get rid of the backstop. It is not needed. No one is building a “hard-border” between NI and RoI [Republic of Ireland].

I was categorical that pledges, promises or piecemeal remedies will not work. Unless it is part of the legally binding international treaty, it will not fly with the DUP.

Updated

This is from the Telegraph’s Steven Swinford.

This is from Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon.

These are from the Spectator’s James Forsyth.

The Labour MP Stephen Kinnock has just told BBC News that he wants his party to table a motion of no confidence in the government as soon as possible.

These are from ITV’s Robert Peston.

The Eurasia Group, a consultancy credited with good insight into EU thinking, has sent out a snap analysis of Theresa May’s decision to postpone the Brexit vote. Here is an extract.

[Theresa May] tried to limit the damage in tomorrow’s vote by seeking last-minute concessions from several EU leaders in telephone calls over the weekend. She hoped changes to the Irish backstop could be announced just before tomorrow’s vote. But the EU offered only “clarifications” - not “sweeteners” - and rejected May’s desperate pleas to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement.

Indeed, in Brussels this morning, the sense was that May’s last minute phone diplomacy was lacking in detailed “asks”. She also refused to share what her strategy was going to be regarding management of the Commons - both before and after the vote.

May will likely respond to the overwhelming message from Tory MPs by seeking emergency talks in Brussels with European commission and council leaders before the two-day regular summit of EU leaders on Thursday and Friday. But we remain of the view that any substantive reopening of the withdrawal agreement is unlikely. EU leaders will not be pleased with new demands from May, especially as she only signed off on the deal a few weeks ago.

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

This is from my colleague Severin Carrell.

Although the ECJ has delivered its judgment in this case, which is the important bit, the case still has to go back to the court in Edinburgh to be finalised.

Pro Brexit protesters demonstrating with placards outside the Houses of Parliament today.
Pro Brexit protesters demonstrating with placards outside the Houses of Parliament today. Photograph: Jack Taylor/Getty Images

Graham Brady says Tory MPs want to see progress on backstop

Sir Graham Brady, chair of the Conservative backbench 1922 Committee, told BBC News that the party wants the EU to make concessions on the backstop. He said:

Unless we’ve got the agreement to a point where it can get a majority in the House of Commons, there is no point in having the vote tomorrow.

Asked about the current mood in the Tory party, Brady said:

I think we are looking for progress on the agreement and hoping we can get to a point where we can support the government and get this matter through and settled.

When it was put to him that the EU appears determined not to budge, Brady said:

We are also told that the EU doesn’t like the backstop. We are told by the attorney general the backstop is actually illegal under EU law. It would be very odd to insist on it being permanent and it’s against the law.

And this is from Arlene Foster, the DUP’s leader at Westminster.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP’s leader in the House of Commons, has called Leo Varadkar and Simon Coveney “good negotiators” in a rare moment of praise for his counterparts in Ireland.

Asked by the BBC about the taoiseach’s statement today that the withdrawal agreement would not be re-opened because of turmoil in Wesminster, Dodds replied:

It doesn’t surprise me at all that the Irish taioseach and the foreign minister take this attitude. They are good negotiators. I wouldn’t expect them to say anything else at this stage.

They will wait and sit tight and they will not give any concession until they have to.

Nadhim Zahawi, an education minister, says Theresa May will try to renegotiate the backstop.

This is from the Sunday Times’ Andrew Byrne.

Here is Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader, on Theresa May’s decision to delay the Brexit vote.

Theresa May appears to have marched her depleted troops to the top of the hill only to lose her nerve. She is hopelessly weakened.

There is little point postponing the vote when nothing concerning the deal will change. The Conservatives are wilfully prolonging Brexit uncertainty because they can’t get their deal through parliament.

This deadlock must be broken by giving the people the final say, including the opportunity to remain in the EU.

My colleague Jonathan Freedland has written an article about Theresa May’s decision to pull the Brexit vote. It will be had for the country, he says.

Here’s an extract.

Britain needed the catharsis of Tuesday’s vote. Not for therapeutic reasons, but rather to begin the process of escape from the Brexit quagmire. The vote would have been the first stage in a much-needed process of elimination, whereby MPs would begin to confront the various options and eliminate them one by one.

May would have been defeated. Labour might then have tried, as they have promised, to bring down the government and trigger a general election. That effort would almost certainly have failed. And then the Commons could have got on with the serious business of assessing the Norway-plus scenario and a second referendum, eliminating one or the other until finally a last option was left standing.

Now that process is itself delayed. Which means MPs are leaving themselves too little time.

And here is the article in full.

The UK government spent almost £100,000 on Facebook adverts promoting Theresa May’s Brexit deal in the lead-up to the Commons vote being pulled, figures released by the social media firm show. As the Press Association reports, the company’s ad library report showed between Sunday December 2 and Saturday December 8 the UK government spent £96,684 on 11 promotions on Facebook. They included videos on “what the Brexit Deal means for you - explained in 60 seconds” and others focusing on immigration and jobs. Three videos, intending to explain the deal in terms of free trade, the economy and “controlling our borders”, cost between £10,000 and £50,000 each to promote, reaching between 500,000 and one million Facebook users apiece, the Press Association reports.

This is from Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s lead Brexit spokesman.

Anti Brexit protesters demonstrate with EU flags outside the Houses of Parliament today.
Anti Brexit protesters demonstrate with EU flags outside the Houses of Parliament today. Photograph: Jack Taylor/Getty Images

High court rejects legal challenge to validity of 2016 referendum

A legal challenge to the validity of the 2016 Brexit referendum has been dismissed by the high court.

The decision handed down by Mr Justice Ouseley was greeted with dismay by expatriate Britons who have crowdfunded the case.

The judge said he was refusing permission for a full hearing of the claim on the grounds that there had been a long delay in bringing the claim and “the want of merit”.

Lawyers for the ‘UK in EU’ group had criticised the decision by the prime minister, Theresa May, in not to acting on the findings of the Electoral Commission that there had been illegal overspending by the Vote Leave campaign.

The high court had not been asked to quash the result of the referendum, because it was only advisory, but to provide “declaratory relief” criticising the outcome.

The Commons statement from Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, which will come after Theresa May’s statement and Andrea Leadsom’s business statement, will be about the European court of justice’s article 50 ruling. The government has not got much more to say about this beyond what Michael Gove said this morning (see 8.38am), but if the government did not offer a statement, the SNP’s Joanna Cherry was going to table an urgent question, and that would have come before the May statement (because UQs take precedence over ministerial statements). This arrangement means May’s statement should start on time.

This is from the Telegraph’s Steven Swinford.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP’s leader at Westminster, has put out this statement about the decision to pull the vote.

This vote has been pulled because it would have been overwhelmingly defeated.

Deferring the vote is only of any use if the government is prepared to go to Brussels and insist on necessary changes to the withdrawal agreement.

Few people accepted this was the best deal available and the prime minister’s actions today prove that.

SNP challenges Labour to table no confidence motion

The SNP has challenged Jeremy Corbyn to table a no confidence motion in the government. This is from Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister.

Labour are likely to see this as self-serving, rather than as a genuinely helpful offer. Jeremy Corbyn knows that if he is going to get a general election (which he wants), then he will probably need to win a confidence motion. But Labour has been careful not to commit itself to calling an immediate confidence vote in the event of Theresa May losing the (now postponed) vote on Tuesday, arguing that it is important to choose the timing carefully. Winning a confidence motion would strengthen May’s position, and with the DUP saying it would support her in such a vote, and Tory rebels like Justine Greening saying they would not vote with Labour in a no confidence motion even if that was a means of getting a second referendum, Corbyn must know the chances of success are relatively slim.

The problem with not calling a confidence motion, though, is that it might look to supporters like letting the government off the hook. The SNP is always keen to depict itself as more anti-Tory than Labour, and Sturgeon’s tweet has the advantage of looking collaborative, while containing an implicit hint that Corbyn should be fighting May harder.

A government source has said that there won’t be a vote on a business motion to cancel Tuesday’s vote. (See 1.38pm.) “We are replacing the business with a new statement but it isn’t a motion and therefore isn’t voteable,” the source said.

If the government wants to cancel tomorrow’s vote, the normal way to do this would be by tabling a new business motion. But this would require a vote, and some Conservative Brexiters are saying they would vote against a move to pull the vote.

This is from James Duddridge.

And ITV’s Paul Brand has been picking up the same message from Tory Brexiters like Andrea Jenkyns and Steve Baker.

But, according to Nikki da Costa, who was director of legislative affairs at Downing Street until she resigned last month over the Brexit deal, there is a simple procedural trick the government can use to put off the vote that would not involve MPs having a say. A minister could just intervene when the clerk of the Commons reads out the orders of the day.

She explains all in this Twitter thread, posted this morning before we learnt the vote is being shelved.

Irish PM says it is 'not possible' to reopen any aspect of Brexit deal - although clarifications would be possible

Ireland’s taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said “it is not possible” to renegotiate the Irish border backstop. Speaking to reporters at a non-Brexit event in Dublin, he said it was the UK’s own red lines that made the backstop necessary and that if Theresa May hadn’t laid them down, the deal would have been different. He said:

I don’t think we should ever forget how we got to this point. UK decided to leave the EU and the UK government decided to take lots of options off the tale, whether it was staying in the single market or customs union or Northern Ireland specific backstop.

The reason we’ve ended up in the solution we have is because of the red lines the UK itself laid down.

We’ve already offered a lot of concessions along the way. We ended up with the backstop and this is withdrawal agreement because of the red lines the UK laid down along the way.

As the BBC’s Darran Marshall reports, Varadkar said it would not be possible to reopen any aspect of the agreement without reopening all aspects of it. Varadkar said:

The withdrawal agreement, including the Irish backstop, is the only agreement on the table. It took over a year-and-a-half to negotiate and has the support of 28 governments and it’s not possible to reopen any aspect of that agreement without reopening all aspects of it.

But Varadkar said that he would not object to agreeing statements clarifying what the agreement means.

Updated

Leading Brexiter Steve Baker says postponing vote means PM's deal has been defeated

This is from Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister and deputy chair of the European Research Group, which represents the 50-odd Tory MPs pushing for a harder Brexit. He says the decision to postpone the vote means Theresa May’s Brexit plan has been defeated.

Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has put out this statement about today’s developments at Westminster.

Assuming these reports are accurate, this is a watershed moment and an act of pathetic cowardice by a Tory government which has run out of road and is now collapsing into utter chaos. It is final proof that the interests of a deeply-divided Tory party matter far more to the prime minister than people’s jobs and living standards. That is an unforgivable dereliction of responsibility, and the UK government should now get out of the way and allow others to take charge.

It appears the vote is being delayed because of the Tory party civil war, and in a desperate attempt to save the prime minister’s job. Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain but yet again our views are being ignored, as they have been throughout this disastrous and incompetent Brexit process.

The prime minister’s deal should come before the House of Commons immediately so that it can be voted down and we can replace Tory chaos with a solution that will protect jobs, living standards and Scotland’s place in Europe.

Nicola Sturgeon
Nicola Sturgeon Photograph: Ken Jack - Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images

This morning two Conservatives normally seen as relatively loyal to the leadership declared that they could not vote for the Brexit deal. Their statements have now been overtaken by events - a risk for all of us these days, given that things are moving so quickly - but there are worth flagging up anyway, because they illustrated the extent of opposition to the deal in the party (and help to explain why Downing Street concluded it was on track for a heavy defeat).

This is from the Scottish Conservative John Lamont, who voted remain in 2016 and who is close to the Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson. Lamont said in a statement:

There are clearly significant risks associated with this Withdrawal Agreement, including the potential that fishing could be traded away and the possibility that we will be locked in to the backstop arrangement.

This deal could mean that we retain some of the worst things about EU membership without being able to take advantage of the opportunities of Brexit. The UK could end up in an uncomfortable half-way house - having to follow EU rules without any influence or say over them.

I have come to the conclusion that on balance, these are not risks I am prepared to take.

I want the UK to move on and be able to focus on other, more important things. This withdrawal agreement could mean that we are still talking about Brexit for many more years to come.

While there is little consensus about what should happen next, the clear message that I have received from my constituents was that this agreement does not satisfy many.

And these are from George Freeman, the former life sciences minister and former chair of the PM’s policy board. Freeman also voted remain.

Olly Robbins, the prime minister’s chief Brexit adviser, is back in Brussels, the FT’s Alex Barker reports.

My colleague Graeme Wearden has more about how sterling has been tumbling since the news broke about the Brexit vote being postponed on his business live blog.

Updated

Corbyn says postponement of Brexit vote shows UK no longer has functioning government

Jeremy Corbyn has claimed that Theresa May’s decision to pull the Brexit vote means the UK no longer has a functioning government. In a statement he said:

The government has decided Theresa May’s Brexit deal is so disastrous that it has taken the desperate step of delaying its own vote at the eleventh hour.

We have known for at least two weeks that Theresa May’s worst of all worlds deal was going to be rejected by parliament because it is damaging for Britain. Instead, she ploughed ahead when she should have gone back to Brussels to renegotiate or called an election so the public could elect a new government that could do so.

We don’t have a functioning government. While Theresa May continues to botch Brexit, our public services are at breaking point and our communities suffer from dire under-investment.

Labour’s alternative plan for a jobs first deal must take centre stage in any future talks with Brussels.

Jeremy Corbyn speaks at the Party of European Socialists conference in Lisbon last week.
Jeremy Corbyn speaks at the Party of European Socialists conference in Lisbon last week. Photograph: Horacio Villalobos - Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images

Updated

Here is my colleague Dan Sabbagh’s story about the latest developments.

European commission says it will not renegotiate withdrawal agreement

The European commission has said that it will not renegotiate the withdrawal agreement. At a press briefing the commission’s spokeswoman Mina Andreeva said:

We take note of the court of justice judgment today on the irrevocability of article 50.

We have an agreement on the table which was endorsed by the European council in its article 50 format on the 25th November.

As President Juncker said, this deal is the best and only deal possible. We will not renegotiate - our position has therefore not changed and as far as we are concerned the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union on the 29th March 2019.

Here is the Telegraph’s Gordon Rayner on what might happen next.

We’re also getting a statement from Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, today.

So, that makes three Brexit-related statements (assuming that Andrea Leadsom’s is about the vote.)

And Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, is due to make a statement to MPs later, the BBC reports. That is likely to a confirmation that the Commons business for this week is being rescheduled, because the Tuesday vote is not going ahead.

This is from Sky’s Adam Parsons.

PM to make statement to MPs this afternoon about Brexit developments

Labour whips have confirmed that Theresa May will make a statement to MPs at 3.30pm.

Pound falls following reports Brexit vote postponed

In the wake of reports that the Brexit vote had been called off, sterling fell
0.4% against the US dollar to $1.26, the Press Association reports. Against the euro, the pound was down 0.6% at €1.10.

Updated

Sturgeon says pulling Brexit vote would amount to 'pathetic cowardice' by PM

This is from Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister.

This is from my colleague Jessica Elgot.

I posted a summary of the main points from the lobby earlier. (See 11.32am.) Here is more detail from the Number 10 lobby briefing.

  • The prime minister’s spokeswoman said that over the weekend Theresa May spoke to Donald Tusk, the European council president, Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, Leo Varadkar, the Irish PM, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and Mark Rutte, the Dutch PM. The spokeswoman said May normally spoke to fellow EU leaders ahead of EU summits, but she confirmed that Brexit was discussed and she refused to say any more about what was discussed, saying May needed to update the cabinet first.
  • The spokeswoman said that May considered the deal that was on the table to be “the best deal and the right deal”.
  • The spokeswoman played down the prospect of the legal text of the withdrawal agreement being changed. “[The PM] has said very clearly that it has been agreed and negotiated”, the spokeswoman said. She also said that May herself has said that, if the deal were to be reopened, other EU countries would seek to change elements to their advantage. But the spokeswoman did not categorically rule out that part of the deal being reopened.
  • But the spokeswoman said that the political declaration was “an entirely separate part” of the deal. She stressed that there were two parts to the deal: the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration. She went on:

It is a fact that we will have to turn that [the political declaration] into legal text once we leave the European Union. Certainly we will be building on that ...

This sounded like a hint that May has secured some changes to the political declaration that could be presented as concession to potential Tory rebels. The political declaration is the document setting out the framework for the future relationship. It is not legally binding, and therefore it is relatively easy for the EU to change.

But the problem for May is that what the Tory rebels find most objectionable about the deal is the plan for the backstop, and that is set out in the legally binding withdrawal agreement, not the political declaration.

Updated

The BBC’s political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, says she has been told by two cabinet sources that the vote is being pulled.

This is from Bloomberg’s Ian Wishart.

Updated

May holds emergency conference call with cabinet amid speculation about potential concession

I’m just back from the Downing Street lobby briefing. It was unusually short - mainly because it became obvious to journalists that something is going on, but that they can’t or won’t tell us now because the situation is still fluid. Here are the key points.

  • Downing Street confirmed that Theresa May will hold a conference call with her cabinet at 11.30 to update them on the conclusions of her talks with EU leaders over the weekend.
  • The prime minister’s spokeswoman played down the prospect of the withdrawal agreement being renegotiated - but strongly hinted that there could be changes to the political declaration (the document setting out the framework for the future relationship).
  • The spokeswoman insisted the Commons vote would still to ahead. (But she would say that - see 9.51am.)

Updated

In her Today interview Shami Chakrabarti, the shadow attorney general, sounded relatively negative about the prospect of Labour backing a second referendum on Brexit. She explained the party’s official position (vote down Theresa May’s deal, push for a general election first, and then “all options” are on the table”), but then she added.

It is very premature to be talking about that [a second referendum] today.

Asked what she would say to those Labour activists pushing for a harder line against Brexit, she said:

I would say to them that, whatever we do in the future, we have to listen to all sides of opinion in this country, and we can’t just completely ignore the people that voted out. We need to listen to their concerns.

I’m off to the lobby briefing now. I will post again after 11.30am.

In his Today interview Sir Alan Duncan, the Foreign Office minister, also launched a strong attack on his Tory colleagues trying to defeat Theresa May’s Brexit deal. He said:

What I really resent is the glee some people have in wanting to oppose this, and then in jostling for their own personal gain. This is contemptible. And let’s be absolutely clear that if this goes pear-shaped in the way that it really could, on the back of people opposing the deal that is on offer tomorrow night, the wreckers in history will forever be known as the wreckers.

Cabinet ministers 'on standby for emergency conference call with PM'

This is from the Daily Mail’s Jason Groves.

Updated

Minister demands investigation into claims state-funded body posted anti-Labour messages

Yesterday the Sunday Mail had a cracking story saying that an organisation in Scotland that receives Foreign Office funding to counter Russian online propaganda has been posting tweets critical of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour.

On the Today programme this morning Sir Alan Duncan, the Foreign Office minister, said that he would “totally condemn” action of this kind and that he had demanded an investigation. He said:

I don’t know the facts but if there is any kind of organisation for which we are paying which is involved in domestic politics in that way, I would totally condemn it, and I have already over the weekend asked for a report to be on my desk by 10 o’clock this morning to say if there is any such activity.

Asked if that meant these anti-Labour attacks must stop, Duncan said:

Not only must it stop, I want to know why on earth it happened in the first place.

My colleague Peter Walker has the full story here.

Irish deputy PM says withdrawal agreement, and especially its legal text, 'is not going to change'

Simon Coveney, Ireland’s foreign minister and deputy prime minister, has warned that the backstop part of the withdrawal agreement cannot be changed. Arriving in Brussels for the EU foreign ministers meeting, he said:

The deal ... is not going to change. Particularly the legal language of the withdrawal treaty.

I hope people will see it for what it is, which is a fair, balanced document.

His comment makes it hard to see how Theresa May will be able to extract any significant concessions from the EU over the deal.

Simon Coveney, the Irish deputy PM and foreign minister
Simon Coveney, the Irish deputy PM and foreign minister Photograph: EU

And here is some more reaction from politicians to the ECJ judgment.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative Brexiter and chair of the European Research Group, told his LBC phone-in that the ECJ ruling was not a surprise. “A straight reading of article 50 would lead you to this view, so I’m not unhappy about it,” he said. But he said it would not make a difference.

Will it change any votes tomorrow? I wouldn’t have thought so because the only way to stay in the European Union is to legislate to do so, to reverse the Withdrawal Act, and that would require the government to do a complete U-turn.

I think this government would find it very difficult to remain the government if it went away from what it said in its manifesto and the referendum result.

Dame Margaret Beckett, the Labour former foreign secretary, said in a statement issued by the People’s Vote campaign that the ruling showed staying in the EU was still an option. She said:

This is confirmation that it is still up to us to decide whether we want to keep the existing deal we’ve got in the EU rather than accept a bad deal negotiated by the government.

Shami Chakrabarti, the shadow attorney general, told the Today programme that the ruling wasn’t a surprise.

I don’t think that this legal judgment changes the position because it isn’t a surprise.

Here is some comment on the ECJ ruling from Alec Burnside, an EU law specialist at the law firm Dechert. He said:

The court has been even stronger than the advocate general [in last week’s opinion] in one important respect: the AG said that the revocation had to be done in line with the principles of good faith and sincere cooperation. The court has not included those caveats. The court simply says that the revocation has to be “unequivocal and unconditional”. The court has also chosen to underline that the continuing membership is on unchanged terms. That was never in doubt, but the emphasis is pointed. The court also goes out of its way to stress that the unilateral ability to withdraw serves to protect the right of the individual citizen.

Gove's Today interview - Summary

Here are the main points from the Today interview with Michael Gove, the environment secretary and the most prominent Brexiter in the Conservative party who still supports Theresa May’s deal.

  • Gove said that today’s ECJ judment saying the UK could revoke article 50 unilaterally won’t have any impact because the UK was leaving anyway. (See 8.38am.)
  • He insisted that the vote on the deal would go ahead as planned tomorrow night. Asked if the vote was “definitely, 100% going to happen”, he replied: “Yes.” When pushed, he said: “The vote is going ahead.” (That does not definitely mean that it is going ahead. Cancelling a Commons vote is a bit like devaluing the currency in the old days, when the government ran monetary policy; you have to keep denying that you are going to do it until the moment when you announce it, because if you admit it’s a possibility, people assume it’s a given, and you’ve lost all discretion, plus control of the timing.)
  • He confirmed that May is trying to win further concessions from the EU. He said:

Of course we can improve this deal. And the prime minister is seeking to improve this deal.

This is important because, until now, the government has been insisting that the deal on offer is the only one available. But Gove also warned that there were “risks” in trying to reopen the negotiation.

If negotiations are reopened, there’s a risk we may not get everything we wished for.

  • He said the backstop had significant advantages not fully appreciated by MPs. He said:

The critical thing is that the EU would find itself in a very uncomfortable position on the backstop. It is really important that listeners and colleagues understand this argument. Because if we enter the backstop we have full access to European markets, with no tariffs and no quotas. And at the same time we pay no money. And at the same time we have total control over who comes here. Free movement has ended.

And at the same time we have the ability to diverge in critical areas to abandon or remove European Union rules in critical areas. And, critically also, we have control over our natural resources ...

The backstop has been depicted by some as a vice for the United Kingdom, and clearly there are uncomfortable aspects to it. But, for the European Union, they have done what they said they would never do in these negotiations; they have split the four freedoms, they have allowed us to cherry pick, and it will be, for EU politicians, incredibly uncomfortable to have to explain to their electorates they are allowing unimpeded access for British goods into their markets while Britain is not paying for that access, and Britain is in control of its borders.

  • He claimed that he had managed to persuade some Tory MPs to back the deal with his arguments about the backstop.
  • He said that it was “extremely unlikely” that he would stand for the Conservative party leadership. But he refused to rule it out. Yesterday Boris Johnson, Esther McVey and Dominic Raab all signalled that they were interested in standing too in TV interviews.
Michael Gove
Michael Gove Photograph: Jack Taylor/Getty Images

Updated

Here is some more reaction to the ECJ ruling.

Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, says the judgment shows that article 50 could be extended to allow time for a referendum, with UK deciding to remain in the EU an option after that. (See 9.08am.)

Jolyon Maugham, the lawyer who coordinated the legal case, says this is arguably the most important case in modern domestic legal history.

Catherine Stihler, a Scottish Labour MEP who was one of the parliamentarians who brought the case, says this ruling could pave the way for Brexit to be halted. She said:

This historic ruling paves the way for the disastrous Brexit process to be brought to a halt.

We now know, beyond any doubt, that Westminster can revoke its withdrawal from the European Union.

This has been a lengthy and expensive legal process, but the result proves that it was worthwhile.

In an article for HuffPost, the Labour MP Chris Leslie and the Lib Dem MP Tom Brake, two of parliamentarians involved in the case, say this is a “game-changing moment”.

Today the European Court of Justice has confirmed that the UK can unilaterally revoke its Article 50 notice. It’s a huge and game-changing moment, clarifying definitively that the British people have real choices about Brexit – and that we can still determine our own destiny.

The timing of this judgment is especially valuable for Members of Parliament seeking the right path for the UK amidst the present political turbulence. It is now crystal clear we have real options beyond the Prime Minister’s tactical “my deal/no deal” fiction.

One potentially important feature of today’s EJC judgment is that it says the UK could unilaterally revoke article 50, not just during the two-year article 50 period, but during any possible extension too. In the full judgment (pdf) it says (with bold type added by me for emphasis):

It follows from the foregoing that the notification by a member state of its intention to withdraw does not lead inevitably to the withdrawal of that member state from the European Union. On the contrary, a member state that has reversed its decision to withdraw from the European Union is entitled to revoke that notification for as long as a withdrawal agreement concluded between that member state and the European Union has not entered into force or, if no such agreement has been concluded, for as long as the two-year period laid down in article 50(3) TEU, possibly extended in accordance with that provision, has not expired.

Theresa May has been speaking to EU leaders ahead of the summit starting on Thursday, including the Irish prime minister Leo Varadkar, in a development that has intensified speculation that she is fighting to get new concessions on the backstop. She spoke to Varadkar last night. Commenting on the call, a spokesperson for Varadkar said the call was at May’s request. The spokesperson said:

They discussed the current situation on Brexit, including the planned vote in Westminster on Tuesday

They also discussed preparation for this week’s European Council and looked forward to seeing each other in Brussels on Thursday.

Michael Russell, the Scottish government’s constitutional affairs secretary, has issued this statement about the ECJ ruling. He said:

This is a hugely important decision that provides clarity at an essential point in the UK’s decision making over its future relationship with the EU.

People in Scotland overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU and that continues to be the best option for Scotland and the UK as a whole.

This judgment exposes as false the idea that the only choice is between bad deal negotiated by the UK government or the disaster of no deal.

We now know, thanks to the efforts of Scotland’s parliamentarians, that remaining in the EU is still on the table.

Government says ECJ article 50 ruling irrelevant because UK leaving EU anyway

This will be a hectic, dramatic week, and it started with breaking news at 8am from the European court of justice, which has confirmed that the UK can revoke article 50 unilaterally, and remain in the EU on its current terms of membership (ie, with the rebate, and no obligation to join the euro).

Here is our story.

Here is a summary of the judgment (pdf). Here is an extract from it. And here is the text of the judgment in full (pdf).

In today’s judgment, the full court has ruled that, when a member state has notified the European Council of its intention to withdraw from the European Union, as the UK has done, that member state is free to revoke unilaterally that notification.

That possibility exists for as long as a withdrawal agreement concluded between the EU and that member state has not entered into force or, if no such agreement has been concluded, for as long as the two-year period from the date of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU, and any possible extension, has not expired.

The revocation must be decided following a democratic process in accordance with national constitutional requirements. This unequivocal and unconditional decision must be communicated in writing to the European council.

Such a revocation confirms the EU membership of the member state concerned under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a member state and brings the withdrawal procedure to an end.

And here is the first reaction from the government. Michael Gove, the environment secretary, told the Today programme that the ruling did not matter because the UK was leaving anyway. He said:

Well, we don’t want to stay in the EU. We voted very clearly, 17.4m people sent a clear message that we want to leave the European Union. And that means also leaving the jurisdiction of the European court of justice. So, this case is all very well, but it doesn’t alter either the referendum vote or the clear intention of the government to make sure that we leave on March 29.

In his interview he also insisted that tomorrow’s vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal will go ahead. I will post more from his interview soon.

Here is the agenda for the day.

11am: Downing Street lobby briefing.

After 3.30pm: David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, opens day four of the Commons debate on Theresa May’s Brexit deal.

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, although I will mostly be focusing on Brexit.

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
People are just discovering the truth about why turkey eggs are nowhere to be found
Have you ever wondered why turkey eggs aren’t a common sight in grocery stores, despite the bird’s huge popularity for meat, especially around holiday seasons like Thanksgiving and Christmas. You see chicken eggs everywhere, and even duck eggs pop up sometimes, but turkey eggs? Never.
The Mary Sue
The Mary Sue
I Had No Idea Kylie Jenner Blew Every Dollar She’d Earned On KUWTK (But It All Worked Out)
Easy come, easy go.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
RaKai banned from Twitch streaming again for 30 days after livestream accidentally reveals NBA star LaMelo Ball phone number
Streamer RaKai has been banned from Twitch for 30 days after revealing NBA star LaMelo Ball’s phone number during a livestream. The clip spread quickly online and led Twitch to suspend his channel for sharing private information. The incident adds to RaKai’s past bans, including a June 2025 suspension linked…
The Times of India
The Times of India
Harry Styles addresses ‘queerbaiting’ criticism in SNL opening monologue
Singer hosted the long-running variety show following the release of his new album
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
So, what happens during a gas crisis, anyway? Your older relatives have a reason to bring up what could come next
With gas prices up 11%, rationing being debated in California, and a dozen countries already restricting fuel, the 1970s playbook is back. Here's what it looked like then, and what it could look like now.
Fortune
Fortune
‘Small, plump, gooey … marvellous’: the best supermarket tortilla, tasted and rated
Which supermarket Spanish omelette seems as if it’s served plump from the pan, and which is a soggy flop?
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play