Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Patrick Greenfield (now) & Andrew Sparrow (earlier)

Brexit: MPs rail against backstop plans in second day of debate on May's deal – Politics live

Prime Minister Theresa May speaking at PMQs
Prime Minister Theresa May speaking at PMQs Photograph: Mark Duffy/AFP/Getty Images

Day two of Brexit debate finishes

We’re done for the day. But don’t worry, we’ll do it all again tomorrow.

Read back through the live blog to relive today’s developments.

  • The Unite general secretary Len McCluskey has told Labour MPs he has severe reservations about backing a second referendum.
  • Theresa May is trying to woo Brexiteer MPs with a “parliamentary lock” on the backstop agreement before it can be implemented as she fights to save her deal with the EU.
  • Sajid Javid has warned that voting down the prime minister’s Brexit plan would pose security risks to the country.

Have a peaceful evening.

Thursday’s front pages have started to appear.

Updated

Britain has done more for the security of Europe than any other country, continues Jeremy Hunt. He says the deal allows the EU and the UK to join forces when our interests combine in matters of international security.

Jeremy Hunt starts by addressing the conflicts between country, party and government that the deal presents for MPs. The foreign secretary says ignoring leave voters would be “dangerous”, also dismissing the idea of a second referendum and says it would “not settle the issue”.

Shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry is addressing the chamber. “Our place in the world is not strengthened, but diminished, when we cut ourselves off from Europe,” she says.

Thornberry says the deal threatens the UK’s place in the world, does not keep the country safe and might leave British citizens at risk if they get into trouble abroad.

The foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt is about to respond.

This update previously misquoted Emily Thornberry and has now been rectified.

Updated

Darren Jones, the Labour MP for Bristol north west, is on his feet in the chamber eloquently laying out why he supports a second Brexit referendum. He says the UK needs to avoid another era of “self-inflicted populist decline”.

Meanwhile, the FT’s Jim Pickard is reporting that members of the privy council have been invited to a briefing on the consequences of a no-deal Brexit by the Cabinet Office.

And this from the BBC’s Iain Watson.

Updated

Back in the chamber, Scottish conservative John Lamont is addressing an increasingly sparse parliament.

Updated

Unite leader warns Labour against backing second EU referendum

The Unite general secretary, Len McCluskey, has privately told Labour MPs the party should have severe reservations about backing a second referendum on leaving the European Union, write the Guardian’s Jessica Elgot and Rajeev Syal.

Read the full story below.

Back in the House of Commons, Leave supporter Zac Goldsmith says he hopes and expects Theresa May’s deal to be voted down by MPs next week so it can be renegotiated with the EU. But the former conservative candidate for mayor of London warned that a second Brexit vote could lead to the rise of far-right parties in the UK.

Reports: DUP to support government in confidence vote if deal is voted down

Here’s some important news from the ERG meeting that’s currently taking place.

The chief whip Julian Smith is set to speak at the ERG meeting later.

Updated

Good evening to everybody reading and thanks to my colleague Andrew Sparrow. I’ll be updating the live blog on the latest Brexit developments throughout the evening.

One person who doesn’t have much to say about day two of parliament’s Brexit debate is our former prime minister David Cameron.

Meanwhile, the frantic behind-the-scenes lobbying continues.

David Miliband, the Labour former foreign secretary, told LBC’s Eddie Mair show this afternoon that not holding a referendum on the Brexit deal would be a threat to the health of our democracy. Labour should embrace the idea, he said. He explained:

I think that the movement inside the Labour party, amongst membership, is very strongly to say that the democratic health of the country, as well as its economic health, depends on getting this decision right. If we really want to settle this for decades to come, then we need to make sure that, whether or not you’re on the leave side or the remain side, what’s been voted for was anticipated, and therefore we embrace the trade-offs that are involved in it.

I’ve heard people say, ‘Oh no, it would be anti-democratic to have a further referendum.’ I actually think the opposite. I actually think the danger now is that, since the deal on offer is neither one that leavers want nor that remainers want, the greatest threat to our democratic health is that no one gets what they want. That is, I think, very very damaging.

That’s all from me for today.

My colleague, Patrick Greenfield, is now taking over.

The BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg has been interviewing Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary and leading Brexiter.

John McTernan, a former adviser to Tony Blair, wonders whether Boris Johnson is preparing for another U-turn.

Former Tory leader Michael Howard says he cannot support May's deal

Michael Howard, the former Conservative leader, told the House of Lords in their Brexit debate that he could not support Theresa May’s deal. He said

I am not a natural rebel.

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that I have rebelled against my party in the 35 years during which I have had the privilege of serving in parliament and all of those were matters of hugely less importance.

So I rise to make this speech with a heavy heart. But I was one of the 17.4m people who voted to leave the European Union and I did so because I wanted my country and its parliament to take back control over our nation’s future and its destiny.

I am afraid that the agreement before us today does the opposite of that.

Here is Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, on the attorney general’s Brexit legal advice.

An anti Brexit campaigner holding an EU umbrella outside the Houses of Parliament this afternoon.
An anti Brexit campaigner holding an EU umbrella outside the Houses of Parliament this afternoon. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Ivan Lewis, who was elected as a Labour MP but who is currently suspended over misconduct allegations, is speaking in the Commons now. He says he is very sceptical about holding a second referendum. Those in the Labour party who are pushing the idea now and the same people who opposed the idea of having a referendum when Labour was considering whether to promise one in the 2015 manifesto, he says.

He says he favours a Norway plus as the way forward.

The Commons Hansard for today’s debate is available online here. It has everything said in the debate, up until about two hours ago, but it is being updated all the time.

Lords committee says joint committee what would oversee withdrawal agreement too secretive

The Lords EU committee has published an 80-page report (pdf) on the withdrawal agreement. Among other concerns, it says that the joint committee that would oversee the agreement is too secretive. It says:

The joint committee will be critical in ensuring the smooth working of the Withdrawal Agreement. It will be a uniquely powerful and influential body. Decisions adopted by the joint committee would be binding on the EU and the UK and would have the same legal effect as the withdrawal agreement.

In particular, during the transition and for a period of four years thereafter, article 164 of the withdrawal agreement provides that the joint committee would have power to amend aspects of the agreement to take account of errors, omissions and deficiencies, and to address unforeseen situations. Even though changes that “amend the essential elements” of the agreement are excluded, this is a widely drawn power, and is not subject to clear scrutiny procedures or parliamentary oversight.

Nor does it appear that the joint committee will operate in an open and transparent way. The relevant rules suggest that meetings would be confidential, decisions might not be published, and even summary minutes might not be made publicly available. This is an unsatisfactory state of affairs, given the significant role that the joint committee will play.

In the Commons Nigel Evans, a Tory Brexiter, is speaking now. He says the UK is a leave country with a remain parliament. MPs should not tell the public that they must think again. That would generate real anger, he says.

But he says he has concerns about the deal. He was opposed to the backstop, and has become even more hostile to it since he read the attorney general’s legal advice, he says.

He also says that he he has heard talk that Theresa May could offer MPs a vote on whether the UK were to enter the backstop (as opposed to extending the transition - the other option available to the UK, under the withdrawal agreement, if a hard border in Ireland cannot be avoided by new customs rules.) See 1.23pm. But Evans says he does not want a vote on being able to enter the backstop; what matters is being able to get out of it, he says.

Scottish parliament backs motion opposing May's Brexit deal

The Scottish parliament has overwhelmingly supported a motion expressing Holyrood’s opposition both to May’s Brexit deal a no deal Brexit.

Following a similar vote in the Welsh assembly on Tuesday night, Holyrood voted by 92 to 25 to support the cross-party motion supported by the SNP, Labour, Lib Dems and Greens. The result was greeted by applause across the chamber.

While Scottish Conservative speakers accused the SNP of trying to “weaponise” Brexit for their own pro-independence purposes, while attacking Labour and the Lib Dems for “caving in” to the nationalist agenda, the Scottish Greens co-convener Patrick Harvie suggested that the Tory opposition had more concern for the politics of the debate than the content of the deal.

The Scottish government’s Brexit secretary Michael Russell said the motion was the result of a “unique collaboration” between four of the five parties in the Scottish parliament, and insisted that remaining a member of the EU is “still achievable”.

Scottish Tories’ constitutional spokesperson Adam Tomkins argued that May’s deal would free Scottish fishermen from “the hated CFP [common fisheries policy]”, and repeated the assurances made by David Lidington to a Holyrood committee last week – seemingly contrary to the government’s just-released legal advice - that if the Northern Irish backstop came into force, it would be for the whole of the UK, and that there would be no disadvantage to Scottish business.

Mike Russell in the Scottish parliament this afternoon.
Mike Russell in the Scottish parliament this afternoon. Photograph: Jane Barlow/PA

Tory Brexiter says Grieve amendment shows 'game is up' for his side because most MPs now against leaving

John Redwood, the Tory Brexiter, has just finished his speech in the debate. The most interesting bit probably came when he took an intervention from Sir Desmond Swayne, a fellow Brexiter. Swayne said that, now that MPs have passed the Grieve amendment, the game was up for Brexiters. He said:

Does [Redwood] not accept that the majority for [the Grieve amendment] yesterday shows that the game is up, and that there is now a majority in this House against leaving the European Union? And the game for us must be to find some orderly way round that, irrespective of the majority now against us.

Redwood said he hoped all MPs would agree that the referendum result should be implemented.

There was some speculation last night that the passing of the Grieve amendment might make hardline Brexiters more likely to vote for Theresa May’s deal, because it would remove the prospect of the UK leaving without a deal, leaving Brexiters with a choice between May’s deal, a softer Brexit, or a referendum. As a theory it seems a little shaky (not least because the Grieve amendment may turn out to be not quite as consequential as some suppose - see 9.28am, 9.38am, and 10.33am), but Swayne’s comment suggests that at least some Brexiters are starting to think like this.

Desmond Swayne
Desmond Swayne Photograph: Parliament TV

Updated

Mark Harper, the Conservative former chief whip, is speaking in the debate now. In an article in the Daily Telegraph this morning he said that he would not support the deal, primarily because of the backstop. He wrote:

The prime minister said that the EU’s [original backstop] proposal would “undermine the UK common market and threaten the constitutional integrity of the UK by creating a customs and regulatory border down the Irish Sea, and no UK prime minster could ever agree to it”. However, regrettably, the withdrawal agreement that is currently in front of us does exactly this.

Personally, I don’t think any UK prime minister should agree to such an arrangement, and I am not prepared to do so.

This not only compromises the integrity of our country, but also breaches a promise in the Conservative manifesto, that the Conservative party would “ensure that as we leave the EU no new barriers to living and doing business within our own union are created.”

Harper tells MPs that he is not an expert. He is just a “humble accountant”. But he says the full text of the attorney general’s legal advice to cabinet, released this morning, show that he is right to worry about new regulatory boundaries going up between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. He refers to this passage in the legal advice.

Like Michael Fallon (see 3.50pm), he says May should go back to the EU and renegotiate the backstop.

He also said that, even if the deal were to pass, the Conservatives would no longer be able to govern, because they would not have the support of the DUP and they would not be able to get their business through the Commons.

Mark Harper
Mark Harper Photograph: Parliament TV

Updated

With Fallon calling for changes to the backstop provisions (see 3.50pm), it is worth flagging up this Twitter thread from the Telegraph’s Europe editor, Peter Foster, explaining why he thinks the EU would never agree to change it. The thread starts here.

Sir Michael Fallon, the Conservative former defence secretary, is speaking in the Commons now. He has already spoken out strongly against the deal, and today he is saying it needs to change in various ways to make it acceptable. One of his demands is for a change to the backstop, with the insertion of a fixed end-date.

Without changes, backing the deal would be “a risk too far”, he says.

If we are to surrender our vote, our voice and our veto then we need to have a deal that’s worth all the risks of not knowing how it’s going to work out, and we do not have that at the moment.

This so-called deal is a gamble - we put all our cards and all our money on the table and then wait for another two years for the EU to set the rules of the game and that is a risk too far.

Updated

In the Commons Grant Shapps, the former Conservative chairman, told MPs that he was still “contemplating” how to vote on Tuesday and that he was “currently minded to vote against”.

Archbishop of Canterbury says second referendum not 'immediately preferable', but could end up being needed

Peers have also been debating Brexit today. They started at 11am and the opening speeches are already up on the Lords Hansard website.

Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, was one of the early speakers. He called for national reconciliation, and said that a second referendum might end up being one way in which this could be achieved. He said:

Whichever way we go there is a requirement for national reconciliation.

The negative impact of the previous referendum is why I see another one as a possible, but not immediately preferable, choice - and then only if parliament has failed in its responsibilities.

Reconciliation is an area for civil society, for faith groups, but is also largely the responsibility of any government.

We have heard much about its need but nothing about its methods.

The full text of his speech is here.

Updated

As promised, here are extracts from the two frontbench speeches in the Commons Brexit debate.

Sajid Javid, the home secretary, said there could be some “indefinite” loss of security capability under a no deal Brexit. He said:

[A no deal Brexit] would mean an immediate and probably indefinite loss of some security capability which, despite our best efforts, would likely cause some operational disruption when we leave ...

There would be unhelpful implications for our law enforcement agencies and border guards.

There would be disruption and they would have less information available to do their jobs.

They would have fewer options for pursuing criminals across borders, as we would lose our efforts through Europol and Eurojust, and it would take longer to track, arrest and bring to justice those who commit crimes internationally.

And Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said May’s deal was “almost as bad” as no deal for security. She said:

At best you can say it’s a blindfold Brexit but at worst it may be leading us off a cliff on security arrangements.

If you go through this deal you’ll see there would appear to be a trade-off between security and the government’s deal.

This is because in order to achieve a seamless transition on a range of security, policing and justice needs and to have the current level of cooperation it would require a new security treaty between the UK and the EU - yet there’s no expressed aim to move towards that in the exit documents.

Yvette Cooper, the Labour chair of the home affairs committee, is speaking in the Commons debate now. She says this deal would make the UK less safe, and that MPs should not be voting to make the country less safe.

Under the plans the UK will not have access to ECRIS (a criminal records database) and SIS II (a border security database), she says. In response to a question from Labour’s Hilary Benn, she says her understanding is that the UK pushed for the UK to remain part of SIS II, but failed.

There is no security backstop, she says.

Perhaps the most troubling thing of all is there is no security backstop in this deal.

Unlike for Northern Ireland, unlike for trade, there is no backstop to continue security cooperation until a future security treaty or overarching treaty is agreed, so if the transition period runs out, and we have not got these things agreed, we will lose these vital capabilities.

And she says, if Theresa May loses the vote next week, she should go to Brussels and ask for an extension of article 50.

I know extending this process is painful for all sides and no-one wants to be the person calling for it. But I think we have to be honest that this process is going to carry on regardless and we have to start behaving like grown-ups on this and recognise the serious things we’re going to have to do.

There is going to need to be time to build consensus around any possible way forward, I think it’s possible to do but I recognise there are hugely different views in this place and also across the country.

Updated

Justine Greening, the Conservative former education secretary who is campaigning for a second referendum, is speaking in the debate now. She says Theresa May’s deal will do nothing to heal the divisions in the country. It just kicks all the main problems down the road, she says.

If this was anything else comparable, for example a big infrastructure project, we’d have a national policy statement that might be a thousand pages of detail for the House to consider.

Here we’ve got just 26 pages, a proposed deal on leaving the European union is perhaps the ultimate national policy statement, yet we’ve virtually nothing, it’s the political equivalent of being asked to jump out of a plane without knowing if your parachute is there and attached, it’s like agreeing to move out of your house without knowing where your going to live next or not even having agreed the sales price but selling out and signing a contract anyway.

None of us would do this in our own lives, yet this withdrawal agreement and political declaration asks us to do it on behalf of our country.

Updated

Gyimah says UK will have to pay whatever price EU asks to get out of backstop

Here are extracts from what Sam Gyimah, the Conservative former universities minister, said in his speech in the Brexit debate. He said the election of new MEPs to the European parliament this year, and the appointment of a new commission, meant that in practice, by the time they were in place, there would only be about a year for the UK to negotiate its trade deal. It was likely that in the summer of 2020 the UK would need a new transition period, he said.

The UK would have to pay “a significant amount of money” for that, he said. He went on:

And what that means is that we will then go into the second [transition] with a general election on the horizon, a Northern Ireland backstop that no one in this House wants, and yes, whatever assurances we are given, it is in all likelihood that we will pay any price the EU asks of us in order to get out of that backstop.

He said that, although the deal had been described as remain-flavoured, it did not appeal to him as a remain voter.

The deal has been described as having a remain flavour, even as a remainer it became quite clear to me that this deal is not politically or practically deliverable, that it will make us poorer and also risk the union.

And he said that all the big issues had been postponed.

All the big issues - whether on security, home affairs, on agriculture, on fishing, our independent trading policy, on friction-less trade - have been kicked into the long grass.

So while the public is being told this is almost like the end of the process, we’re actually just finishing one process and about to begin on another long and arduous process - but we’ll be doing that at a time when we have given up our vote, our veto and our voice and would have no leverage whatsoever.

The ultimate fallback position in this deal is the Northern Ireland backstop, so we will be negotiating with a clock against us, with a fallback position which is existential for us, not existential for the EU, and we will be expected to get the best deal for Britain - I doubt that very much.

Sam Gyimah
Sam Gyimah Photograph: Parliament TV

Updated

Here is my colleague Dan Sabbagh on the significance of the text of the full Brexit legal advice released today. “The clear-cut language ... will reinforce all the concerns the hard Brexit Conservatives and the DUP have about the Northern Ireland backstop,” he writes.

Sam Gyimah, who resigned as universities minister last week because of his opposition to Theresa May’s Brexit deal, is speaking now in the debate. He set out his case against the deal at length in an article, which is here on his Facebook page.

Sajid Javid, the home secretary, faced repeated questions during his speech opening today’s Brexit debate about the immigration white paper. It has been repeatedly delayed, and the government now admits it will not be published before next week’s vote. Labour’s Yvette Cooper asked him if he could promise it would be published in December. Javid said it was “my intention” to publish it in December - implying that, if it does not come until 2019, that would because of an intervention from 2019.

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, is speaking now. She started her speech with a tribute to Tony Benn. This is from the New Statesman’s Stephen Bush.

I will post more quotes from the Javid and Abbott speeches later.

My colleague Graeme Wearden is covering Philip Hammond at the Treasury committee in detail on his business live blog. You can follow it here.

Philip Hammond is giving evidence about Brexit to the Commons Treasury committee. Here are some highlights, from my colleague Richard Partington and from CityAM’s Owen Bennett.

DUP says Brexit legal advice shows backstop would be ‘totally unacceptable and economically mad'

Here are some extracts from the DUP’s comment on what the full Brexit legal advice reveals.

  • The DUP says the legal advice confirms that the backstop would be ‘totally unacceptable and economically mad” because of its impact on Northern Ireland. It says:

Northern Ireland remains in the EU’s customs union and will apply the whole of the EU’s customs acquis and the commission and the European court of justice will continue to have jurisdiction over its compliance with those rules. Therefore, goods passing from GB to NI will be subject to a declaration process.

Northern Ireland will remain in the single market for goods and the EU’s customs regime and will be required to apply and comply with the relevant rules and standards. Herein opens up regulatory divergence in the future.

The implication, as outlined by the attorney general, of NI remaining in the EU single market for goods while GB does not is that for regulatory purposes GB is“essentially treated as a third country by NI for goods passing from GB into NI”. This is totally unacceptable and economically mad in that it will be erecting internal economic and trade barriers within the United Kingdom.

  • The DUP says the legal advice shows the backstop “will not be temporary in nature”. (See 11.55am.)
  • The DUP says the legal advice confirms that Northern Ireland could get stuck in the backstop while Great Britain leaves.

In paragraph 26 it appears possible that the EU could apply that the protocol is no longer necessary “in whole or in part” and consequently it is possible that the GB elements of the customs union could fall away leaving only Northern Ireland in the EU customs territory as the minimum necessary.

DUP politicians (left to right): Jeffrey Donaldson, Nigel Dodds, Arlene Foster and Sammy Wilson
DUP politicians (left to right): Jeffrey Donaldson, Nigel Dodds, Arlene Foster and Sammy Wilson Photograph: BBC

Downing Street sources have not denied reports the government is considering what fresh reassurances it can provide to backbenchers anxious about the Irish backstop.

Speaking to journalists after PMQs, they cited Theresa May’s remarks in the Brexit debate on Tuesday, that she understood MPs’ concerns and was having discussions with colleagues and considering further options.

ITV’s Paul Brand has suggested MPs could be promised a “parliamentary lock”, before the backstop was invoked. (See 1.08pm.)

Government sources stressed that any compromise measure could not involve reopening the withdrawal agreement, which May has repeatedly said risks a worse outcome.

And they said May’s meetings with MPs would continue in the run-up to next week’s meaningful vote.

This is what May said on this in the debate last night.

So the backstop is not a trick to trap us in the EU. It actually gives us some important benefits of access to the EU’s market without many of the obligations. And this is not something the EU will want to let happen - let alone persist for a long time.

But Mr Speaker, despite all of this, I know there are members of this House who remain concerned. I have listened to those concerns. I want us to consider how we could go further. And I will be continuing to meet colleagues to find an acceptable solution.

Updated

MPs resume debate on Brexit deal

In the Commons MPs have just started day two of the debate on the Brexit deal. Sajid Javid, the home secretary, is opening for the government.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, intervenes. Citing the full legal advice published today, he says this shows that under Theresa May’s plan Northern Ireland could remain bound by EU law.

The DUP has set out in full its comments on the legal advice here.

From the Press Association’s Ian Jones

This is from ITV’s Paul Brand.

May accused of 'misleading' MPs after government finally publishes full Brexit legal advice

Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader at Westminster, used his first question at PMQs to accuse May of “concealing the facts on her Brexit deal”. Referring to the full Brexit legal advice published today, he said:

Is it time that the prime minister took responsibility for concealing the facts on her Brexit deal from members in this House and the public? Will she take responsibility?

As the Press Association reports, May rejected the claim, and said the full legal advice they were forced to publish today was the same as the shortened statement the government made earlier this week.

Blackford called that an “incredibly disappointing response”, and then went on to suggest May had “inadvertently” misled the House of Commons on the Irish backstop. He said:

Since the prime minister returned from Brussels she has been misleading the House, inadvertently or otherwise.

This prompted protests from Tories. Under Commons rules, MPs are not meant to accuse each other of saying things that are misleading.

John Bercow, the speaker, said there could be no “ambiguity” in Blackford’s suggestion that the PM had purposefully misled the House, which led the MP to alter his comment to saying the she had done it “perhaps inadvertently”. As the Press Association reports, this failed to dampen the Tory jeers, and Bercow asked him to “rephrase” his argument, but Blackford continued.

In reply, May said the copy of the full legal advice Blackford was holding was “no different” to the statement the attorney general made on Monday.

Updated

After PMQs Anna Soubry, the Tory MP, raises a point of order. She says that, when Bercow introduced Sammy Woodhouse, Tory MPs did not applaud even thought Labour MPs applauded because they were obeying the convention of the House that clapping is not allowed. It was not a sign of disrespect, she says.

The Labour MP Louise Haigh asks about Sammy Woodhouse, the rape victim who spoke publicly about how a council was trying to give parental rights to the rapist father. As John Bercow said at the beginning of the session, Woodhouse is in the public gallery.

May praises Woodhouse for speaking out, and urges Haigh to carry on pursuing this matter with the Ministry of Justice with view to getting the law changed.

Mark Francois, a Conservative, says the witch hunt against soldiers accused of crimes during the Troubles is getting worse. He says a Chelsea Pensioner is now being investigated. This nonsense must stop, he says.

May says there has been a “disproportionate emphasis” on investigating soldiers. She says she wants terrorist attacks to be investigated too. She says she is aware of the concerns about this, and the government is still considering the way forward.

Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader at Westminster, says yesterday the Welsh assembly became the first parliament in the UK to reject May’s Brexit deal.

May says there is no better place for the Holocaust memorial and learning centre to go than next to parliament.

The DUP’s Gregory Campbell says today’s legal advice says the backstop will endure indefinitely. (Actually, it says it could endure indefinitely - see 11.55am). He asks why the UK has allowed the EU to use this as a negotiating ploy.

May says there would be various ways out of the backstop. But people need to know that there is a firm commitment to avoiding a hard border in Ireland.

Vicky Ford, a Conservative, asks May about the importance of early years education. May says the fact that 95% of providers are good or outstanding is to be welcomed.

Nick Smith, a Labour MP, says a constituent lost thousands of pounds through a rogue financial advice. The Financial Conduct Authority does not have enough power, he says.

May says the government will look at this.

Derek Thomas, a Conservative, asks May if she will seek talks with the EU to address the concerns of MPs if the Commons votes down her deal next week.

May says she is continuing to listen to colleagues and considering the way forward.

May says the backstop will not be attractive to the EU. The UK would not be paying the EU, and it would only have light-touch regulatory obligations. The EU will not want the UK to be in it for long.

Joanna Cherry, the SNP MP, says the government has lost three times in the article 50 case. Why has the government fought this so hard?

May says the government will not revoke article 50. If the advice of the advocate general is taken by the ECJ, the court will rule that the UK can revoke article 50. But that would not be to extend it. It would be to cancel Brexit. The government will not do that, she says.

Rachel Maclean, a Conservative, says voters are concerned about pot holes. Some £6m has been allocated for her constituency. How quickly can it be spent?

May says the money is available, and it should be spent now.

Julie Cooper, the Labour MP, says provision for autistic children is a national scandal.

May says every child deserves the right eduction. Steps have been taken to improve provision for autistic children. Provision varies, she says. But she says she recognises that there are parents of children with special educational needs who feel that they are constantly battling bureaucracy.

Responding to Sir Bill Cash, the Tory Brexiter, May says that when the EU Withdrawal Act was passed, repealing the European Communities Act, and taking away the jurisdiction of the ECJ, it was always clear that, if there was going to be a transition, the EU Withdrawal Act would have to be amended.

PMQs - Snap verdict

PMQs - Snap verdict: That was probably the only May/Corbyn TV debate we will get before next week’s Brexit vote, and many viewers might conclude that that was enough. Corbyn devoted all his questions to poverty issues, and not for the first time he raised the report from the UN’s special rapporteur (a truly damning report, which is well worth reading in full). This is a subject on which Corbyn is most comfortable and at his best and he managed quite successfully to discomfort May. It wasn’t a knock-out win, but his comeback about how the advance payments are just loans that have to be repaid worked well, and his observation about how food banks are not just there to provide photo opportunities for Tory MPs had enough truth in it for it to hurt. But he never quite threw May off her stride - mostly because, as usual, he did not interrogate her case forensically. Perhaps May was relieved to spend 10 minutes talking about something other than Brexit, but her responses did not go much beyond bromide talking points and resorting to jibes about Labour’s pre-2010 economic record (against Corbyn, of all people!) sounds increasingly lame. It seemed to work for her MPs, but it wasn’t impressive. If this is what a Sunday night TV debate would have been like, we’ve all had a blessed escape.

Corbyn says the Bank of England’s chief economist described the last decade as a lost decade for wages. He says May is laughing at this, but this is the reality of people’s lives. He says two years ago a UN committee found this government’s policies towards disabled people was a grave abuse of their rights. Has that system improved?

May says the government is committed to getting more disabled people into the workplace. She praises the “Disability Confident” programme. Difficult decisions have had to be taken over the last decade. They were taken because of Labour’s mismanagement of the economy. Remember the “no money left” letter?

Corbyn says, when he hears a PM talking about difficult decisions, the poorest lose out. He says the government labelled disabled people scroungers, and called those unable to work skivers. He says the government also created a hostile environment for the Windrush generation. The UN rapporteur said compassion for people had been replaced “punitive, mean-spirited and callous approach”. He could not have summed up this “contemptible” government better.

May says the poor lose out when a Labour government comes in. The government has taken millions of people out of paying tax. Every Labour government loses office with unemployment higher than when it takes office. Employment is up, investment is rising, and the NHS is getting more money.

Corbyn says a Trussell Trust report said, if the five-week wait for UC is not reduced, the only way to stop demand for food banks increasing would be to halt the UC roll-out. People risk being left with no money at Christmas. If May won’t halt the roll-out, will she end the five-week wait.

May says Corbyn does not understand how the system operates. No one has to wait for money if they need it. We have made it easier for people to get advances, she says. She says you can get 100% of payments up front. And the seven-day waiting period has been scrapped.

Corbyn says it is loan that is offered for some people. Food banks face record demands. He says food banks “are not just a photo opportunity for Conservative MPs, all of whom supported the cuts in benefits” that have created poverty. He asks what is so wrong with our economy that our pay growth is so much worse than other countries in the G20.

May says wages are growing faster than in the past. Corbyn wants to reverse UC. That system left more than 1m kept on benefits, and effective 90% tax rates.

Jeremy Corbyn says while we debate Brexit, we must not ignore the plight facing people in Britain. Last week he wrote to Theresa May about the report from Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur, about poverty in the UK. What shocked her most about the report.

May say she does not agree with the report. In the UK poverty is at a record low.

Corbyn says Alston described universal credit as universal discredit. When will the government halt its roll out?

May says they have discussed this before. The government has made changes to UC. Labour won’t support those changes.

Here is a link to the full legal advice.

Philip Dunne, a Conservative, asks Theresa May if the life science sector’s investment in the NHS for genomics shows the importance of life sciences to the UK after Brexit.

May says this £1bn investment is significant. It will support 650 jobs.

From HuffPost’s Paul Waugh

Two quick takes on the legal advice.

From the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg

From my colleague Rafael Behr

More from the legal advice.

PMQs

PMQs is about to start.

Here is the list of MPs down to speak.

PMQs
PMQs Photograph: Parliament

Cox told cabinet backstop could last 'indefinitely'

Here are some extracts from the full Brexit legal advice, as tweeted out by Caroline Lucas.

  • Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, says the backstop could last “indefinitely”.

Despite statements in the protocol [the backstop] that it is not intended to be permanent, and the clear intention of the parties that it should be replaced by alternative, permanent arrangements, in international law the protocol would endure indefinitely until a superseding agreement took its place.

  • He says the backstop would carry on “even when negotiations have clearly broken down.”
  • He says there is a risk that the UK could become involved in “protracted and repeating rounds of negotiations” if it tries to leave the backstop.

In the absence of a right of termination, there is a legal risk that the United Kingdom might become subject to protracted and repeating rounds of negotiations.

Labour whips have put extracts from the full legal advice on Twitter.

The Green MP Caroline Lucas is tweeting extracts from the full Brexit legal advice.

This is from the Labour whips.

Labour says full Brexit legal advice reveals 'central weaknesses' in May's deal

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, seems to have read the full Brexit legal advice, even though the rest of us have not seen it yet.

Updated

My colleague Rafael Behr has written a column today celebrating the implication of the Commons votes yesterday. This is how it starts.

It’s coming home, it’s co-ming … politics is coming home. The seizure of initiative by parliament on Tuesday night is a repatriation of power worth cheering. For two years Brexit has been a performance of bluster and bluff in public. Theresa May hammered out the terms in private and in Brussels. Now the House of Commons, the home ground of British democracy, is taking back control. May’s fragile administration suffered three defeats, including a contempt motion, extracting the attorney general’s legal advice on the deal from between gritted ministerial teeth.

And here is the full column.

My colleague Lisa O’Carroll has been listening to Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, at the Commons international trade committee this morning. Here are some of the highlights.

Letwin claims there is cross-party majority for 'Norway plus'

Sir Oliver Letwin, the Conservative former cabinet minister who, despite being an instinctive loyalist, voted against the government for the Dominic Grieve amendment last night, told the Today programme that he expected Theresa May’s deal, and all the amendments, to be defeated in the Commons next week.

If that happened, MPs had to unite around a “sensible proposition”, he said. But he claimed that that was “perfectly doable” and that the Grieve amendment meant that MPs would be able to vote for an alternative. He went on:

We need to make sure the majority is in place and we need to make sure it’s a majority for something real, ie something the EU will accept and that fulfils the referendum mandate ...

I do believe, because they have said so repeatedly, that they would accept a Norway plus solution. I do believe there is a cross-party majority for that solution in the House of Commons. There is now a mechanism to ensure that that can be put in place. And I think therefore that the sensible thing, if the deal fails, is for the government to move to that position, either immediately or gradually.

Norway, as a member of the European Economic Area, is in the single market. By “Norway plus”, people mean the option of the UK staying in the single market and the customs union (which Norway is not in). Critics would say that it would amount to being a non-voting member of the EU.

The one problem with Letwin’s plan is that May has repeatedly said said that she would find this unacceptable, because it would involve accepting free movement. It would also contradict the 2017 Conservative manifesto, which said: “As we leave the European Union, we will no longer be members of the single market or customs union.”

And Labour does not back Norway plus either, partly because of the free movement issue, and partly because Jeremy Corbyn is concerned about EU state aid rules constrain the policy options of a future Labour government.

Oliver Letwin
Oliver Letwin Photograph: Matt Dunham/AP

Chris Skidmore appointed universities minister

Chris Skidmore has been appointed to replace Sam Gyimah as universities minister. Gyimah resigned last week because he is opposed to the Brexit deal.

Skidmore, who was a Cabinet Office minister until he lost his job in the reshuffle in January this year, should go down well with the vice chancellors. He is a serious historian, specialising in the Tudors.

Katya Adler, the BBC’s Europe editor, has a useful Twitter thread summarising what EU leaders think about the UK’s Brexit agonies. Apart from the EU being mystified about how divorced from reality the entire British debate is, the key points she makes are: a) that the EU is not going to agree to anything other than cosmetic changes to the withdrawal agreement, and b) that in the (very unlikely) event of Theresa May asking for article 50 to be suspended, she would not get an immediate response.

The thread starts here.

Fewer than four in 10 Britons (38%) now think the UK was right to vote for Brexit, while almost half (49%) believe it was the wrong decision, the Press Association reports. The 11% gap is the widest recorded by pollsters YouGov in a regular series of monthly surveys for the Times, while the number believing Brexit was right is at its lowest and those seeing it as wrong at its highest. Virtually every poll in the sequence since the summer of 2017 has found a majority believing that the wrong decision was made in the EU referendum of 2016.

Justine Greening, the Conservative former cabinet minister who is now campaigning for a second referendum on Brexit, was also on the Today programme this morning. If MPs fail to pass a deal by January, then the Dominic Grieve amendment passed yesterday means that MPs could vote for a “plan B” option - which could conceivably involve a second referendum.

But Greening’s interview highlighted two of the difficulties with this potential scenario.

  • Greening said that she would not be willing to vote with Labour on a no confidence motion to secure a government committed to a second referendum. Given that it is hard (but not entirely impossible) to imagine Theresa May or any other Conservative leader backing a second referendum, people have been speculating about the possibility of a Labour government pushing it through. With DUP support, Labour could defeat May in a confidence motion. (See here for the numbers.) But if the DUP were to stick with May, then Labour would need the support of some Tories, like Greening perhaps, who would rather bring down their own government than see the UK leave the EU with no deal. But Greening said this morning she would not be willing to do that. She said:

I won’t support a no confidence motion, which is what Labour would need in order to get into government. I think in all party’s it’s time to show more leadership from the front benches and do what we need to do in the national interest.

  • She admitted that, for a second referendum to happen, there would have to be a PM in place willing to make it happen. She said:

I think when parliament finally takes its head out of the sand, as does government, and recognises that we are in gridlock, yes, we will have to have a government in place with a prime minister that can deliver on that second referendum.

But her answer to the no confidence vote question illustrated why this may never happen.

Justine Greening (right) with fellow People’s Vote campaigners Chuka Umunna and Caroline Lucas delivering a petition to Number 10 calling for a second referendum.
Justine Greening (right) with fellow People’s Vote campaigners Chuka Umunna and Caroline Lucas delivering a petition to Number 10 calling for a second referendum. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

UK service sector growth has fallen to near-stagnation, with business confidence weakest since Brexit vote, my colleague Graeme Wearden reports on his business live blog.

Raab says only legislation can stop Brexit

Dominic Raab, the former government lawyer who resigned from his post as Brexit secretary over his opposition to Theresa May’s deal, made the same argument as Andrea Leadsom (see 9.28am) when he was interviewed by the Today programme this morning. Asked about the Dominic Grieve amendment, he said:

I think the Grieve amendment was predictable but what we need to understand is that resolutions of Parliament pass as politically have some impact, but they are not legally binding.

And therefore if the deal is voted down on Tuesday I think what will matter most of all will not be what parliament says in a motion - it will need legislation to stop Brexit - what will matter is the will and resolve in Number 10 Downing Street.

Dominic Raab
Dominic Raab Photograph: François Lenoir/Reuters

Leadsom says Grieve amendment will not give MPs power to block no deal Brexit

Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons and a prominent Brexiter, has been giving a series of interviews this morning. Here are the key points.

  • Leadsom said that the Dominic Grieve amendment passed yesterday, giving MPs the chance to vote on a “plan B” proposal if nothing has been agreed by January, did not mean that MPs could block a no deal Brexit. When asked about this on the Today programme, Leadsom said that Grieve himself had admitted as much. She said it was up to the government to pass legislation. Justin Webb, the presenter, then pressed her further, and the exchange went like this.

JW: Are you saying that parliament could say, as a majority of parliament would, we don’t want to go out with no deal, but the government could say, ‘Sorry, that’s what’s going to happen’, and it would then happen.

AL: Parliament can certainly say that. But the issue is that the government is committed to leaving the European Union in line with the referendum and unless government were to do something completely different to change tack, or indeed to pass this deal, then we will be leaving the EU on 29 March next year without a deal.

JW: What MPs think is that they now have the power to stop it defaulting to no deal. And you’re saying, no they don’t.

AL: Well, I can’t see that they do. And I think that the issue is that the default position is no deal.

And this is the quote from Grieve that Leadsom was referring to. He told Sky News last night: “It [the passing of his amendment] doesn’t mean no deal is off the table — I can’t guarantee that.”

  • Leadsom said the government would publish the full legal advice about the Brexit deal, that was shown to cabinet, at around 11.30am.
  • She said Labour would regret passing the motion forcing the government to release the legal advice in full. She said:

Going forward, not only will government ministers be very careful about what they ask law officers to give advice on, but law officers themselves will be very reluctant to give any advice to government that they might then see published on the front pages of the newspapers, so it’s the principle of the thing.

And frankly I think any parliamentarian who wants at some point in the future to be in government is going to live to regret their vote last night.

  • She said May was the right person to be prime minister “at the moment”. This is from Sky’s Tamara Cohen.
  • She would not says whether she expected May to stay on as PM if she loses the vote next week. This is from the Telegraph’s Jack Maidment.

Among those predicting that May will resign next week is Damian McBride, Gordon Brown’s former communications chief who is now a Labour adviser. After May’s speech in the Commons McBride posted this on Twitter.

Andrea Leadsom, leader of the Commons, sitting in the chamber yesterday alongside Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general.
Andrea Leadsom, leader of the Commons, sitting in the chamber yesterday alongside Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general. Photograph: HO/AFP/Getty Images

Updated

Shami Chakrabarti, the shadow attorney general, was also on the Today programme this morning. She said Labour would not rule out extending article 50. Asked about the prospect, she said:

It can’t be ruled out because the clock is ticking ... I think there would be time if Mrs May heard what happened in the House of Commons last night and decided to think again and go back to her European colleagues right now and not wait until next week.

Jeremy Corbyn says that, if Theresa May cannot get her deal through the Commons, she should make way for Labour so that it can negotiate a better one, and for that to happen article 50 would probably have to happen anyway. Chakrabarti was just accepting something implicit in the Labour position.

We’re awash with Brexit news today, but probably the most striking to emerge from all the broadcast interviews this morning is this, from Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons.

  • Leadsom says the government will publish the full Brexit legal advice, that was shown to cabinet, at around 11.30am this morning.

That is what Leadsom told the Today programme this morning. She was also very interesting on the whole issue of whether the Grieve amendment passed yesterday, against the government’s wishes, removes the chance of the UK having a no deal Brexit, as some remainers hope. It doesn’t, she claims. I will post more on this soon.

Here is our overnight story with a summary of what happened yesterday.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, gives evidence to the Commons international trade committee.

11am: Peers begin their three-day debate on the Brexit deal.

Around 11.30am: The government publishes the full Brexit legal advice that was shown to the cabinet.

12pm: Theresa May faces Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs.

1pm: Philip Hammond, the chancellor, gives evidence to the Commons Treasury committee about Brexit.

Around 1pm: Sajid Javid, the home secretary, opens day two of the Commons Brexit debate.

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 be focusing almost exclusively 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
Footage Of Christopher Nolan At Universal CityWalk Hollywood Is Going Viral, And The Context Is Even Better
He wasn't there for the Voodoo Doughnuts.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Do Not Try This Egg Trend USDA and FDA Warn It Could Make You Sick
Social media platforms are filled with creative cooking hacks. Users share fast recipes and unique visual tricks to make meal prep entertaining. Sometimes these viral trends cross the line into dangerous territory. A recent breakfast trend is gaining millions of views online. Parents are freezing raw eggs in the shell…
Grocery Coupon Guide
Grocery Coupon Guide
Woman has parallel parking anxiety when she notices what all the men around her are doing: ‘My worst fear’
Ugh, we'd be mortified.
We Got This Covered
We Got This Covered
Amazon Nearly Made Eric Kripke Pull An Episode Of The Boys Last Season. So, What Happened?
This story is wild.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Whale watchers delighted as never seen before orcas arrive in Seattle
The visiting orcas have something that local whales don’t: circular scars left by cookie-cutter sharks, which latch on to larger animals and slice a chunk off them
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Kelly Osbourne fuels fresh romance speculation after sharing images of Kiinicki on social media
After her split from fiancé Sid Wilson, Kelly Osbourne has fuelled fresh romance speculation after sharing images of Kiinicki on social media.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play