Afternoon summary
- Tory backbenchers have urged the government to slow down the roll out of universal credit. The new all-in-one benefit, which replaces six existing benefits, is being introduced gradually, but in areas where it has been implemented there have been multiple complaints about people being impoverished by having to wait for money. In an interview on the World at One, Nigel Mills said:
If you have any doubts that we can make it work for these volumes, let’s slow down. Let’s not get this wrong for the sake of sticking to a timetable.
Another Tory backbencher, Johnny Mercer, said UC was “politically undeliverable” in his Devon constituency, and called for a planned increase in income tax thresholds to be scrapped in order to make the benefit more generous. The MPs spoke out as Esther McVey, the work and pensions secretary, said some claimants would be worse off under UC, despite Downing Street saying otherwise. (See 4.59pm and 5.04pm.)
- David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, has said the threat of a Corbyn premiership will ensure the DUP do not bring down the government over Brexit. Speaking after a meeting of the joint ministerial council, which includes ministers from the devolved administrations, he said:
We’re in an on-going dialogue with the DUP, who are forthright and very experienced in tough negotiations. I’m sure they too will be persuaded the alternatives - of no deal or potentially a Corbyn government - would not be of benefit to them or Northern Ireland.
- Theresa May is meeting some senior cabinet ministers in Downing Street now to review progress in the Brexit talks. According to the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn, there is not much progress to discuss.
I am told that no Brexit deal proposal is being put to the mini-Cabinet meeting now, as there is still no agreement in Brussels. Not as much progress has been made as was hoped by now.
— Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) October 11, 2018
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
Downing Street has distanced itself from comments made by Esther McVey, insisting the work and pensions secretary was referring to new claimants who may not be paid as much as they would have been in previous years. (See 2.15pm.)
McVey was actually asked about statistics she had given to a cabinet meeting that some claimants could lose as much as £200 a month as a result of the switch to universal credit. Attempting some damage control, a Number 10 spokeswoman said no current claimants would lose out. The spokeswoman said:
UC is replacing an out-of-date complex benefits system which disincentivised work and it is being rolled out successfully with over a million people already claiming through the new system.
But, in terms of people moving across, the PM made it really clear that when people move across onto UC as part of managed migration, there is not going to be a reduction in their benefits. That’s because we’ve put £3m of transitional protections in.
At the same time there are people who are making a new claim or who have had a change in their circumstances and their payment will reflect their new circumstances, as you would expect. We are making sure work pays, that is what the system is doing.
My colleague Jennifer Rankin has written up a story about Sir Ivan Rogers, the UK’s former ambassador to the EU, and his latest critique of the “fantasy island” Brexiters in government.
She has also posted an extract.
Ivan Rogers’ lecture is an utterly damning indictment of cabinet ministers he served until recently - extract here (my bold).
— Jennifer Rankin (@JenniferMerode) October 11, 2018
In Brussels I’ve already heard it described as brilliant and saying everything that needs to be said. pic.twitter.com/cvZLDKd5Pa
And here is a link to the full text.
It is also a great read - Brexit retold as French Revolution - guess who might be one of the “pinstriped Robespierres”.
— Jennifer Rankin (@JenniferMerode) October 11, 2018
Read it in full - the link is herehttps://t.co/EL2lcABpqk
UPDATE: Jennifer refers to this quote in the Rogers’ speech.
Whether we have reached the point where Mr Gove and acolytes get condemned by the pinstriped Robespierres of the Committee of Public Safety – or is it the European Research Group? – for insufficient revolutionary fervour, and being, like some latter day Danton, in the pay of foreign powers, I do not know.
That sounds like a reference to Jacob Rees-Mogg. But, if it is intended as such, it is a rare example of Rogers getting it wrong. Rees-Mogg has in the past complained that people assume he wears pinstriped suits. But he doesn’t; he wears double breasted suits, which are also a bit stuffy, but which are not the same.
Updated
And on the subject of Brexit and growth, Nicky Morgan, the Conservative chair of the Commons Treasury committee, has written to Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England, asking him to provide MPs with a “full and frank” economic assessment of the various Brexit options before the Commons votes on any deal negotiated by Theresa May later this year. As PoliticsHome reports, Morgan said in the letter:
Parliament must be provided with a full and frank assessment of the consequences of implementing the withdrawal agreement and future relationship with the EU before it comes to vote. Without such analysis, any vote cannot be considered meaningful.
When negotiations between the government and the European Commission have concluded, the committee has asked the Bank and the FCA [Financial Conduct Authority] to publish its analysis in good time before any parliamentary votes on the withdrawal agreement and future relationship.
The Bank and the FCA should provide analysis of any deal agreed, and of a ‘no deal’ scenario, in the event of a breakdown in negotiations or a parliamentary vote against the withdrawal agreement. They should also consider providing analysis for the scenario in which the UK leaves the EU with no trade agreement at the end of a transition period.
This analysis will ensure that parliament’s decisions are based on the best possible evidence.
Earlier I mentioned the Office for Budget Responsibility report (pdf) out today on Brexit and its economic forecasts. (See 2.15pm.) Here’s a chart from that report showing what has happened to UK growth since the referendum result in 2016.
Work has started to enable a motorway to be turned into a car park to deal with a no-deal Brexit, the Press Association reports. On Wednesday night Highways England began preparations for the M26 in Kent to be used as a holding area for lorries if there is gridlock. There is concern there could be delays at the nearby port of Dover if the UK withdraws from the EU without an agreement. There will be overnight closures on the motorway until Monday and in the run up to Christmas between November 19 and December 21 while the work is carried out. Diversions will be in place via the M25 and M20.
Tom Tugendhat, the Conservative MP for Tonbridge and Malling, raised the issue in the Commons during transport questions this morning, complaining locals had not been consulted. He said:
It’s come to a pretty pass when a member finds out that works have begun on a motorway to turn that motorway into a parking lot without consultation either with the local community or with surrounding members.
Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, said he did not think any of the contingencies being put in place for Brexit would be needed.
Why is McVey saying some people will be worse off under universal credit, when No 10 says they won't?
Esther McVey, the work and pensions secretary, says some people will be worse off under universal credit. (See 2.15pm.) But Number 10 says they won’t. How can the two statements be squared?
It might be tempting to conclude that one side is simply not telling the truth, but the better explanation is that they are using different definitions of “lose out”. The Number 10/official government one is narrower.
Number 10 is referring to “transitional protection”. This is a system in place designed to ensure that, when people transfer from their existing benefits to universal credit (the new all-in-one benefit replacing six), they don’t receive less money. In that sense, people don’t lose out.
But the protection is limited, as this extract from a House of Commons library briefing note (pdf) explains. It says:
Where claimants moved to UC [universal credit] via managed migration are entitled to less support than they were receiving through legacy benefits and tax credits, they may be entitled to a top-up payment so that they do not lose out in cash terms at the point of transfer. This “transitional protection” will continue (in cash terms, i.e. without any annual uprating) until either the claimant’s circumstances change significantly, or their UC award “catches up” (e.g. due to annual upratings).
A “significant change” could include:
a partner leaving or joining the household;
a sustained (three-month) earnings drop beneath the level of work that is expected according to their claimant commitment;
the UC award ending; and/or
one (or both) members of the household stopping work.
Transitional protection will only apply to families moved over onto universal credit as part of the managed migration – i.e. families on benefits/tax credits whose situation has not changed, where DWP initiates the transfer to UC at some point after July 2019. For families moving onto universal credit before then – by making a new claim or as a result of “natural migration” following a change in their circumstances – there is no such protection.
Taking a wider view, people do lost out - because under UC some claimants receive less than they would have done if they had carried on claiming under the predecessor benefits. There have been numerous reports looking at this. One of the most quoted figures comes from this study (pdf) from the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying up to 3m families with children on tax credits will be on average £2,500 a year worse off under universal credit. For an overview, it is probably hard to beat the Office for Budget Responsibility’s welfare trends report (pdf) from January this year, which looks at UC costs in detail. It says by 2022-23 spending on UC will be £10.7bn lower than it would have been if previous benefits had been maintained, although that figure does not take into account the amount spent on transitional protection. Once that has been included, the saving by 2022-23 is only about £1bn. But, of course, transitional protection will eventually fade away, meaning that in the long term the savings will be higher.
Updated
According to Michael Russell, the Scottish government’s constitutional relations secretary, this morning’s meeting of the joint ministerial committee - the one where UK ministers discuss Brexit with ministers from the devolved assemblies - got rather heated. He tweeted this afterwards.
Angry discussion of migration at today’s JMC in Whitehall. Tories absolutely determined to impose draconian migration cuts and repressive rules despite clear evidence of the huge economic & social damage it will do & the fact that “hostile environment” policy is plain wrong
— Michael Russell (@Feorlean) October 11, 2018
Jeremy Corbyn has announced proposals to increase the amount of black history taught in schools, along with the history of the British empire, colonialism and slavery, Pippa Crerar reports.
HMRC boss says he received death threats after revealing £20bn cost of Brexiters' favoured customs plan
The head of HM Revenue and Customs reported two death threats to the police after disclosing that a post-Brexit customs option preferred by Brexiters would cost up to £20bn.
Jon Thompson, the UK’s most senior tax official, said today he has been forced to change his personal security and routes to work after telling MPs about HMRC’s appraisal of ‘maximum facilitation’ proposals.
Speaking at the Institute for Government on Thursday, Thompson said disclosing the figures in evidence to the Treasury select committee in May had led to “very significant personal consequences”. He said:
We have had to literally change how I travel and what my personal security is. We have had two death threats investigated by the Metropolitan Police for speaking truth unto power about Brexit.
Those are real situations. I’m still not going to back away from [telling the truth] if I think something’s not going to work - it’s incumbent on me.
We live in a democracy so in the end, it’s for governments to decide, ministers to decide what they want to implement. But our role as civil servants is to act with integrity and to give them our best advice.
Thompson’s comments on the cost of max fac arrangements, which would mean the UK would not have to follow EU rules on goods, were seized upon by remain campaigners as evidence that the cost of leaving the EU single market and customs unions were too high.
The Conservative MP Johnny Mercer says, unless more money is invested in making universal credit more generous, he won’t be able to support it.
Ester’s in a tough spot here. It’s not her fault; Universal Credit was designed so that no-one would be worse off. Stop the tax-free allowance rise and re-invest into UC, or I can’t support it. Not politically deliverable in Plymouth I’m afraid. https://t.co/oQtCa9sZGA
— Johnny Mercer MP (@JohnnyMercerUK) October 11, 2018
Lunchtime summary
- Esther McVey, the work and pensions secretary, has admitted that some people will be worse off under universal credit - contrary to claims made by Number 10 and cabinet colleagues In a BBC interview she also refused to deny a Times story from last week (paywall) saying she recently told a cabinet meeting that “half of lone parents and about two thirds of working-age couples with children would lose the equivalent of £2,400 a year” as universal credit is rolled out. Asked about this, she said she would not comment on what she told cabinet. She went on:
What I will say is I had a very open conversation with my colleagues about how we support people. So actually 1m disabled people will get significantly more on universal credit.
When asked again about claims that 3m people will be worse off under universal credit, she replied:
I’ve said we made tough decisions. Some people will be worse off. But ... under the old system 700,000 people didn’t get £285 a month, so they didn’t get the money they were owed. Under the old system the most vulnerable in society weren’t getting as much money as we are now going to give them.
McVey’s comment contradicts what Downing Street has been saying about universal credit this week. Asked about the Times story on Monday, the prime minister’s spokesman said that no one would lose out as they moved on to universal credit (although there are different ways of defining “lose out”). And this morning, during business questions, Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, told MPs no one would lose benefits when moving on to universal credit. Asked about the Times story, she replied:
I would encourage [Valerie Vaz, her Labour shadow] not to believe everything she sees in the press. As [McVey] has made clear, we are making sure no-one sees a reduction in their benefits when we move them on to universal credit. There is £3.1bn of transitional protections being provided.
McVey was speaking after Sir John Major, the former Conservative prime minister, urged the Tories to rethink universal credit, saying many voters would regard it as unfair.
Some "could be worse off" under universal credit, admits Esther McVey - but Work and Pensions Secretary says benefits changes are helping more people into work
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) October 11, 2018
More: https://t.co/WvzqDbh8oQ pic.twitter.com/n3F2DNN252
- Jeremy Corbyn has called for radical changes to universal credit, claiming that most people on it end up “considerably worse off”. Speaking on a visit to Bristol he said:
Three million families are going to be worse off by about 50 per week from universal credit, 2.7 more million families are going to be forced into universal credit next year.
So immediately we will say ‘we will stop this process’ and we would make sure that nobody is worse-off under universal credit.
The experience of universal credit has been that the majority of people are considerably worse-off. Many forced into debt because of delayed payments and many - particularly those in the private rental sector - [their] property or home is put at risk as a result of it ...
I think the system has to change dramatically and we will be proposing a more comprehensive system on this. But essentially, our benchmarks will be that nobody should be worse-off and nobody should have their homes put at risk because of universal credit.
- Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative former work and pensions secretary, has said an extra £2bn needs to be spent on universal credit to make it operate as planned. He told the Today programme:
We should direct the money back into universal credit exactly as it was originally planned to be rolled out ... The reality is £2n was taken out.
- Esther McVey has also refused to explicitly back Theresa May’s Chequers plan for Brexit in a BBC interview. Like fellow cabinet Brexiter Penny Mordaunt in a speech on Tuesday, McVey said that she backed May, but refused to say explicitly that she supported Chequers.
Another cabinet minister @EstherMcVey1 takes a body swerve over Chequers .... #bbcnewsroomLIVE pic.twitter.com/DxJQXzBMyg
— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) October 11, 2018
- The Office for Budget Responsibility has said that the UK’s economy and public finances are likely to be weaker as a result of the Brexit vote than they would have been if the country have decided to stay in the EU. In a report (pdf), it also indicated that a no deal Brexit could have a “severe short-term impact” on the economy and potentially lead to a sharp fall in asset prices. As the Press Association reports, the OBR paper says:
We cannot know for sure what would have happened had the vote gone the other way, but it seems likely that the economy and public finances have been weaker than they otherwise would have been.
The OBR notes that academic studies attempting to compare the UK economy following the Brexit vote with countries which had a similar profile in the years before 2016, indicated “output in mid-2018 is around 2% to 2.5% lower than it would have been in the absence of the referendum”.
- Tony Blair, the former Labour prime minister, has said that, if the UK were to hold a second referendum, the EU would make a “much more attractive offer” to persuade people to vote remain. (See 11.08am.)
Updated
Clegg says EU leaders becoming 'much more open' to reforming freedom of movement rules
Tony Blair said this morning that he thought the EU would make the UK a “much more attractive offer” if the government were to hold a second referendum. (See 11.08am.) On ITV’s Peston last night Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem deputy prime minister, said much the same. He said:
The most interesting thing I have discovered perhaps in speaking to folk in Euro capitals is that they, not least because their own electorates, have become more and more unsettled by the mass movement of people into the European Union and across it. They are much much more open, and they speak actively and have developed thoughts and plans about, how to introduce further reforms, an emergency brake in effect on freedom of movement.
British ministers know about this. I know for a fact that British ministers know about this.
Labour has criticised the government over the announcement it will sell off another tranche of the student loan book debt to private investors, saying the last such sale cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds, and claiming the news had been quietly “snuck out”.
In a written statement on Wednesday the Department for Education said it would sell a second tranche of the pre-2012 student loan book for England, which has a book value of £3.9bn.
The shadow education secretary, Angela Rayner, secured an urgent question on the sale this morning. She pointed to a highly critical National Audit Office report from July which said the way the sale of the first tranche of loans was handled may have led to more than £600m in future repayments being overlooked.
Asking for the department to publish its calculations on how to price the next lot of loans, Rayner said:
Can the secretary of state give us any justification for this policy, other than selling off an asset to flatter this government’s terrible position on national debt?
In short, just how much public money do we have to lose before the education ministers start learning their own lessons?
Sam Gyimah, the higher education minister, insisted the plan was good value for money, and “an opportunity for the government to guarantee money upfront today rather than fluctuating an uncertain payments over a longer period of time”.
Investors who bough the loans would have no right to change any of the repayment policies or to directly contact borrowers, he added.
Leadsom won't tell MPs what's scheduled beyond next Thursday in Commons because 'a week changes a lot'
Labour has criticised the government after it emerged just four more days of parliamentary business has been scheduled, leading to questions about what the government plans to bring the the House of Commons in the coming weeks. Normally, in the business statement on a Thursday, Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, announces the business for the week ahead, and provisional business for the week after that.
Today, announcing the agenda just until Thursday next week, Leadsom told MPs that no more days could be scheduled because “a week changes a lot.”
Shadow leader of the House Valerie Vaz said the government was keeping MPs in the dark about forthcoming business, speculating that it could mean a forthcoming election.
“If this was an exam, the government would have F for fail,” she told the House of Commons. “I don’t know if the leader knows something that we don’t ... I don’t know she means the business of the house or if the prime minister would lead her party into the next election.”
Leadsom said it was “an extraordinary difficult and delicate time in the Brexit negotiations”.
The next four days in the Commons laid out by Leadsom, up until next Thursday, make no mention of Brexit, but include opposition and backbench debates on universal credit and social care funding, as well as motions supermarket supply change and world menopause day. The crucial European Council summit takes place next Thursday, with a dinner of EU27 leaders the previous evening.
The business for next week will include: pic.twitter.com/LytVinTdKV
— Leader's Office (@CommonsLeader) October 11, 2018
Grayling offers MPs 'categorical assurance' that planes will not be grounded after Brexit
Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, has given MPs a “categorical assurance” that planes will not be grounded post-Brexit. As the Press Association reports, his statement came despite warnings from Whitehall two weeks ago that passengers could face flight disruption in the event of a no deal Brexit, and similar warnings from the Irish aviation chief. He was speaking during transport questions in the Commons and responding to the Labour MP Lilian Greenwood who claimed there was a “real possibility” planes might be grounded after Brexit.
Grayling said she had “got this completely wrong” and planes would still take off after Brexit. He went on:
There is nothing the government has said or done to imply that planes will be grounded or there will be no flights after we leave the EU. I give this House categorical assurance flights are going to continue.
Grayling also attacked Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary, who has repeatedly warned of flights being grounded if an aviation deal is not reached. He told MPs:
Interestingly, those in the aviation industry who have been most vociferous about the risk of flights being grounded are now selling tickets for next summer and expanding the number of routes from the UK to the EU next summer.
Tony Blair's Q&A - Summary
Here are the main points from Tony Blair’s Reuters Q&A.
- Blair, the former Labour prime minister, said that, if the UK were to hold a second referendum, the EU would make a “much more attractive offer” to persuade people to vote remain. He said:
If [Theresa May] actually decided that, in the event of this being paralysed in parliament, she was going to put it back to the people, then I think one other thing would happen, which would be really interesting. I think if she did that, in my view Europe would step forward and would be prepared to negotiate a much more attractive offer for Britain staying.
Blair was not pressed on what this might be, or why he was so confident, but he seemed to be referring to changes to the free movement rules that might allow the UK government to take a tougher stance on immigration. He has said before that he thinks EU leaders might be willing to change immigration rules to keep the UK in the union, but today he sounded more confident than he has done in the past that such an offer would be forthcoming.
My colleague Pippa Crerar points out that Boris Johnson used to think something similar, before he came out as a fully-committed Brexiter.
This was exactly what Boris Johnson used to say, before he was convinced of all the benefits of supporting Leave. https://t.co/rGxyI89EbM
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) October 11, 2018
- Blair said that holding a second referendum would actually help Theresa May, because otherwise the divisions in her party on Brexit are unreconcilable. He said:
What I would do is get into a situation where you can put it back to the people, and where people are going to say, you’ve got no option so we agree with that. The curious thing is it’s the one thing in my view that would save her own position.
- He said Labour MPs should vote against the Brexit deal May brings back from Brussels. He said he did not expected a Commons vote against the deal to lead to a general election, because he thought the government would win a confidence vote. But at that point Labour, and some Tories, would back a second referendum, he said. Asked what Labour MPs should do, he replied:
I would advise them to hold firm against Brexit because either of these choices are unpalatable.
If there is no way round this dilemma then you are going to come back with a deal that is going to be unpalatable for one of two reasons - either because people will say ‘what on earth is the point of having Brexit if you are still bound by the rules?’
On the other hand, if you come back with what is essentially a Canada-style free-trade agreement that is going to do immense damage because you are going to have to recreate and restructure your relationships.
The Conservative MP Mark Pritchard has reignited speculation that some of his colleagues want to remove Theresa May as prime minister by posting a tweet this morning arguing that, if there had to be a leadership contest, it would not necessarily take long.
Lots of wild and loose talk about leadership moves. There is no vacancy. However, on a technical point, if a vacancy did arise process need not take more than 2 working weeks - 4 days in Commons (if needed) and 6 days with membership - does not need to be an overly long process
— Mark Pritchard MP (@MPritchardUK) October 11, 2018
In public most of the hardline Tory Brexiters claim that they don’t want to get rid of May, and that they just want her to change policy. On Sky’s All Out Politics a few minutes ago Mark Francois, a vice chair of the European Research Group, the caucus pushing for a harder Brexit, insisted that, although the ERG would never back May’s Chequers plan for Brexit, voting down her plan would not necessarily cause a general election and that what mattered to them was changing the policy, not the prime minister.
UPDATE: Here’s a clip.
Tory MP Mark Francois says he will not vote for Chequers in the House of Commons, insisting that a general election is an "incredible threat".
— Sky News Politics (@SkyNewsPolitics) October 11, 2018
Read the latest on #Brexit here: https://t.co/CdmKb5efwD pic.twitter.com/TwlaJKjHp4
Updated
The chair reminds Blair that he delivered his “feral beasts” speech about the media at this venue. Has social media made it worse?
Yes, says Blair. He says it fuels a permanent sense of grievance.
He says the media today is “literally two camps”. He says that “demolishes” the politics he stands for, which is all about building bridges.
That building bridges politics is way out of fashion today.
There is a risk to democracy if you have two sides that don’t like each other and don’t talk each other, and perhaps won’t even accept each other as legitimate, he says.
And that’s it. The Q&A is over.
Blair says, if Brexit takes place, the priority of the government will be protecting the economy.
He says that will make sustainability harder.
Q: What makes you think that the EU would come forward with a better offer? And why should a second referendum be definitive. People thought the 2016 one was.
Blair said it was. But since then it has become clear that the negotiation has failed, and people know the options. There is no unified position that parliament could support.
Blair does not answer the first part of the question, about what he thinks the EU would improve its offer to the UK.
Q: Who would you like to see as the next PM? For the sake of balance, you can choose someone Labour and someone Tory?
Blair says, for the sake of wisdom, he is not going to answer.
Q: If the UK leaves in March, it will be on the basis of a vote including 900,000 people who are now dead. Isn’t that unfair?
Blair says you cannot say young people’s votes count more than older people’s. But older people should think about the interests of their children.
Q: Do you feel at all responsible for either Jeremy Corbyn or Brexit. Corbyn because people voted for him to take Labour back to its roots. And Brexit because people were reacting against mass EU immigration that you allowed.
Blair says he knows people want to blame him for everything. But he opposed Brexit, and Corbyn.
He will take responsibility for what he did as PM. But not for what happened afterwards.
In 2004 the UK was in a different economic position. People came because the economy needed them. And if he had still been in office in 2009, when problem emerged, he would have dealt with them.
Governments did not. That was partly because stopping a Polish guy from working in London is not going to help someone in the north east get a job.
He says there are things the government could have done, such as stopping firms bringing over workers to undercut British labour. But governments did not do that.
He says, if he has been in power, he would have acted. He favoured identity cards. That would have helped, he says.
Q: Could Jeremy Corbyn be prime minister?
Of course, says Blair.
Q: What should be on the ballot paper in a second referendum?
Blair says you could not have a sensible vote without remain being an option. That would be a ballot on two options, neither of which could command a majority in the Commons.
There is a case for a three-option question, he says. But it would be complicated.
He says it should be easy to establish, through polling, which two options are most popular.
Blair is now taking questions from the audience. (Previously the questions were posed by a Reuters editor.)
Q: I agree with everything you said, apart from one point. I don’t see why you think the Commons will vote for a second referendum. The Tory Brexiters are quite happy to leave without a deal, and Labour does not want a second referendum.
Blair says if a deal gets voted down, there will be a no confidence motion. Tories won’t back that. So at that point Labour will call for a second referendum. And there are some Tory MPs who will support it, he says.
He says around 90% of Labour members back that.
Q: How serious is the situation with Saudi Arabia and the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi who has allegedly been murdered?
Blair says this is extremely serious. It must be investigated.
Q: What does this say about Mohammed bin Salman’s modernisation programme?
Blair says that programme is extremely important. That is what what happened has to be investigated.
Blair says it is hard to have a rational discussion about the Trump administration.
There is so much concentration on what he calls “the stuff” that it is easy to ignore the policy.
He says raising how much Nato members spend on defence is not wrong, and raising trade imbalances with China is not wrong either.
Q: Who is in charge of the world order?
It is still America, says Blair.
He says, if he was back in government today, a large part of what he would be doing would be looking at defence capabilities.
He says he knows the Chinese leadership. He hopes they will be benign, but they are going to be powerful. The west must be powerful too, he says.
He says, regardless of President Trump’s rhetoric on Nato, America is stepping up its defence involvement in Europe.
Blair says Brexit is going to make it harder to deal with all the problems that contributed to people wanting to vote for Brexit.
He cites the report his institute has published today on the impact of Brexit on services.
He says Boris Johnson has published proposals for the future. But there is nothing in what he is proposing that the UK could not do in the EU.
It is a myth to say that governments don’t have freedom and choices within the EU, he says.
He says a government run by Jacob Rees-Mogg would not be the same as one run by Jeremy Corbyn.
And in 1983, when he was first elected, Michael Foot was not the same as Margaret Thatcher. He says he found it hard to support some aspects of the Labour manifesto.
To make the point, he refers to Johnson’s resignation letter. People should read it, he says. Giving examples of why the EU was so bad, the only thing Johnson could come up with was a claim that the EU had stopped the UK changing the law on truck windows, in a way that might protect cyclists. And even that was wrong, says Blair, although that is par for the course with Johnson, he says.
Q: What do you make of Theresa May’s pitch for the centre-ground vote, as demonstrated by her article in the Observer on Sunday?
Blair says it is not going to work, partly because of Brexit. It is not convincing to back Brexit and then say you want European-style social protection.
Updated
Q: Did the party conference season make you more keen on setting up a new, centrist bloc?
Blair says he is not involved in setting up a new centrist bloc.
He says the Labour conference showed the party has moved more to the left.
It is always worth looking at the applause lines. He says, at Labour, having people calling for a general strike, or applauding Militant in Liverpool in the 1980s, was “troubling”.
And the Conservative conference showed it has become the Brexit party.
But people are attached to political parties, he says.
Q: You seem to be resigned to the fact that it won’t happen?
Blair says he has never said a new centre party can’t happen.
He is not involved in organising it.
But if, over time, you leave a big enough space, someone will move into it.
The centre ground is full of very capable people, he says. They don’t articulate their feelings like people on the right and the left. But they are there.
Asked about polling evidence suggesting there has been little change in public opinion on Brexit, Blair says there has been a shift towards remain.
He says, if the UK voted a second time for Brexit, he would accept that. Everyone would have to get behind it to try to make it work.
Blair says he is not surprised by the DUP’s stance. They are asking for things that are incompatible - a hard Brexit, no hard border, and ongoing regulatory alignment with Great Britain.
Blair says, if UK were to hold second referendum, EU would make 'much more attractive offer'
Blair says the problem with the negotiation is not that the government does not have skilled negotiators. He says Dominic Raab, the relatively new Brexit secretary, seems able and highly intelligent. The problem is that there are no solutions, he says.
He says putting the question back to the people is “the one thing that would save her position”.
If May can get a deal that commands a parliamentary majority, Brexit will happen, he says. He says he thinks that would be terrible.
But he says, if May were to put it to the people, Europe would step forward and come up with a “much more attractive offer”.
- Blair says, if UK were to hold a second referendum, the EU would make “a much more attractive offer”.
Tony Blair's Q&A
The Tony Blair Reuters Q&A is here.
Blair is restating his call for MPs to vote down the Brexit deal, so that the options can be put to the people in a referendum.
He says there would be three options if MPs were to vote down the Brexit deal: going back to Brussels to renegotiate, which he says would be unlikely to work; holding an election, which the Tories would not want; and a referendum.
John Major says Tory rebels threatening May are even worse than his 'bastards'
When Sir John Major was prime minister, he spent much of his time fending off rebellions staged by people we then called Eurosceptics (many of whom are still in parliament, where they have morphed into Brexiters). He once famously called some of them “bastards”. But, according to an interview he has given to the BBC’s Nick Robinson for the Political Thinking podcast, they have nothing on the Tories currently challenging Theresa May.
Major told Robinson that the way May was being treated by some of her colleagues was “absolutely outrageous”. He went on:
The people in parliament who are undermining the prime minister by saying ‘We are going to have 40-odd signatures for a leadership election tomorrow’, and then saying ‘Unless the prime minister does this thing or that thing, we are going to vote against it’, that’s an intolerable way to treat a prime minister who is in the middle of negotiations.
When Robinson raised Major’s decision to call the Eurosceptics “bastards” 25 years ago, Major said that that was a private comment. He apologised for it, “even though it was true”, he said. Then he added:
Their behaviour was pretty intolerable, but not nearly as intolerable as the way the present prime minister is being treated.
In the interview Major also said universal credit could cause as much trouble for the Tories as the poll tax.
It is a day for former prime ministers. Tony Blair has just started a live Q&A, which is being live streamed here.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: Tony Blair, the former Labour prime minister, takes part in a Reuters Q&A. Today he has published a report saying Brexit will inflict long-lasting pain on Britain’s service sector.
10am: David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, chairs a meeting of the joint ministerial committee, with ministers from the devolved authoritiies.
10.30am: Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, takes business questions in the Commons.
5pm: Theresa May holds a meeting with some cabinet ministers to update them on the Brexit talks.
As usual, I will also be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary at lunchtime and another when I finish, at about 5pm.
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
