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

May suffers three defeats in Lords over Brexit – as it happened

The House of Lords, where the government suffered a big defeat as peers voted to keep most of the EU charter of fundamental rights in domestic law
The House of Lords, where the government suffered a big defeat as peers voted to keep most of the EU charter of fundamental rights in domestic law Photograph: HO/AFP/Getty Images

Evening summary

  • Theresa May has suffered three defeats on the EU withdrawal bill in the House of Lords. The most significant came when peers voted by a majority of 71 to keep most of the EU charter of fundamental rights in domestic law after Brexit. They backed an amendment tabled by the crossbencher Lord Pannick which was supported by Labour and the Lib Dems. Proposing his amendment, Pannick said that to exclude a number of important EU rights from domestic law would lead to a lack of certainty and continuity, providing a “recipe for confusion” after Brexit. He went on:

I fear the government is seeking to make an exception for rights under the charter because the government is suspicious of the very concept of fundamental rights ... This bill should not be used as an excuse to reduce the legal rights which we all enjoy against the state.

The government then suffered two further defeats, by majorities of 50 and 57, as peers voted to retain the right of action in domestic law after Brexit in the event of failure to comply with the general principles of EU law.

That’s all from me for tonight.

Thanks for the comments.

Here is how Labour is explaining the impact of the two Beith/Pannick amendments.

Government loses third vote of the night in Lords on EU withdrawal bill

The government has suffered its third defeat of the night in the Lords on the EU withdrawal bill. Amendment 19 (see 7.02pm) was approved by 280 votes to 223 - a majority of 57.

Peers are now voting on a third amendment. This is amendment 19, another tabled by the crossbencher Lord Pannick and the Lib Dem Lord Beith. It backs up amendment 18 (see 6.48pm) by removing a paragraph from the bill clarifying the terms under which the bill would let ministers make regulations specifying in what circumstances retained EU law could be challenged in court after Brexit.

You can read all the bill documents, including the text of the bill and the wording of all amendments, here.

Government loses second vote in Lords on EU withdrawal bill

The government has been defeated again. The Beith amendment (see 6.48pm) was passed by 285 votes to 235 - a majority of 50.

Updated

Peers are now voting on another amendment to the EU withdrawal bill. It is amendment 18, tabled by the Lib Dem peer Lord Beith and by Lord Pannick, the cross-bencher. It would remove a section from the bill giving ministers the power to make regulations specifying in what circumstances retained EU law can be challenged in court after Brexit.

This is from HuffPost’s Paul Waugh.

Here are the voting figures in the Lords division. There were 10 Conservative rebels.

How peers voted in charter of fundamental rights division
How peers voted in charter of fundamental rights division Photograph: House of Lords

Amber Rudd's Windrush statement - Key extracts

Here are the key extracts from Amber Rudd’s statement in the Commons about the Windrush migrants.

  • Rudd, the home secretary, explained the measures she was taking to guarantee Windrush migrants cost-free British citizenship.

I want to enable the Windrush generation to acquire the status that they deserve – British citizenship – quickly, at no cost and with proactive assistance through the process.

First, I will waive the citizenship fee for anyone in the Windrush generation who wishes to apply for citizenship. This applies to those who have no current documentation, and also to those who have it.

Second, I will waive the requirement to carry out a Knowledge of Language and Life in the UK test.

Third, the children of the Windrush generation who are in the UK will in most cases are British citizens. However, where that is not the case and they need to apply for naturalisation, I shall waive the fee.

Fourth, I will ensure that those who made their lives here but have now retired to their country of origin, are able to come back to the UK. Again, I will waive the cost of any fees associated with this process and will work with our embassies and High Commissions to make sure people can easily access this offer.

In effect this means anyone from the Windrush generation who now wants to become a British citizen will be able to do so.

  • She said the Home Office would pay compensation to those people who have suffered loss.

The state has let these people down. Travel documents denied, exclusions from returning to the UK, benefits cut, even threats of removal. This, to a group of people who came to help build this country. People who should be thanked.

This has happened for some time. I will put this right and where people have suffered loss, they will be compensated.

The Home Office will be setting up a new scheme to deliver this which will be run by an independent person.

I will set out further details around its scope and how people will be able to access it in the coming weeks.

  • She said officials would take a “generous” approach to help people get the documentation they needed.

My officials are helping those concerned to prove their residence and they are taking a proactive and generous approach so they can easily establish their rights.

We do not need to see definitive documentary proof of date of entry or of continuous residence. This is why the debate about registration slips and landing cards is misleading. Instead the caseworker will make a judgement based on all the circumstances of the case and on the balance of probabilities.

Previously the burden of proof on some of the Windrush generation to evidence their legal rights was too much on the individual. And now we are working with this group in a much more proactive and personable way in order to help them.

  • She said that a review of more than 4,000 cases had not found any evidence of anyone being wrongly deported and that another 4,000-odd cases are still being checked.

The 1971 Immigration Act provides protection for this group if they have lived here for more than five years if they arrived in the country before 1973.

And I am now checking all Home Office records going back to 2002 to verify that no one has been deported, in breach of this policy.

This is a complex piece of work that involves manually checking thousands of records.

So far, 4,200 records have been reviewed out of nearly 8000, which date back to 2002, and no cases have been identified which breach the protection granted under the 1971 Act.

This is an ongoing piece of work and I want to be absolutely certain of the facts before I draw any conclusions. I will ensure the House is informed of any updates and I intend to have this data independently audited once my department has completed its work to ensure transparency.

  • She claimed that the current problems facing Windrush migrants were caused by decisions taken by successive governments going back nearly 40 years.

The Immigration Act 1971 provided that those here before it came into force should be treated as having been given indefinite leave to enter or remain in the UK, as well as retaining a right of abode for certain Commonwealth citizens.

Although HMS Windrush docked in the Port of Tilbury in 1948, it is therefore everyone that arrived in the UK before 1973 who were given settlement rights and not required to get any specific documentation to prove these rights.

Since 1973 many of this Windrush generation would have obtained documentation confirming their status or would have applied for citizenship and then a British passport.

From the 1980s successive governments have introduced measures to combat illegal immigration. The first NHS treatment charges for overseas visitors and illegal migrants were introduced in 1982. Checks by employers on someone’s right to work were first introduced in 1997, measures on access to benefits in 1999, civil penalties for employing illegal migrants in 2008, and the most recent measures in the Immigration Acts of 2014 and 2016 introduced checks by landlords before property is rented and checks by banks on account holders.

  • She paid tribute to the contribution of the Windrush generation.

From the late 1940s to the early 1970s, many people came to this country from around the Commonwealth to make their lives here and help rebuild Britain after the war.

All members of this House will have seen the recent heartbreaking stories of individuals who have been in this country for decades struggling to navigate an immigration system in a way they never, ever should have been.

These people worked here for decades. In many cases they helped establish the National Health Service. They paid their taxes, enriched our culture. They are British in all but legal status and this should never have been allowed to happen.

Both the Prime Minister and I have apologised to those affected and I am personally committed to resolving this situation with urgency and purpose.

Government suffers big defeat on EU withdrawal bill as peers vote to keep EU rights charter in domestic law

The government has just lost the EU withdrawal vote in the House of Lords. Peers voted by 316 votes to 245 - a majority of 71 - to keep most of EU charter of fundamental rights in domestic law.

This is from Dawn Butler, the shadow equalities minister. She is highlighting the demands she was making last week, including for Windrush generation migrants affected by the scandal to have their full British citizenship assured.

In the Lords peers are now voting keeping the EU charter of fundamental rights as part of domestic law. (See 4.13pm.)

This is from the BBC’s Esther Webber.

Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader at Westminster, asks at what point this level of complacency becomes institutional racism.

Rudd says she is sorry Roberts is interpreting this in that way.

Labour’s Maria Eagle asks if people will still be required to produce four pieces of documentary evidence for every year they have been in the UK.

Rudd says they won’t be. And she says that was not even the requirement before her announcement. She says, on a visit to the Croydon immigration centre, she asked staff if they previously required that level of documentation. And they said they didn’t, she says.

These are from my colleague Amelia Gentleman, who broke the story about the scandal affecting the Windrush generation and who has led the reporting on this issue.

This is from Satbir Singh, chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants.

Labour’s Fiona Onasanya asks Rudd to confirm that the compensation scheme will cover loss of earnings, loss of benefits, legal fees, Home Office application fees, air fares and other costs.

Rudd says there will be a consultation on what the compensation scheme should cover.

Anna Soubry, a Conservative, says the Labour party as a whole did not vote against the Immigration Act. She acknowledges that Diane Abbott did, but the party as a whole did not, she says. She suggests that Labour is not being honest; these problems would have arisen whichever party was in charge, she suggests.

In response, Rudd says she wants to be clear that she is not blaming anyone else.

Updated

Philip Hollobone, a Conservative, says his constituents in Kettering respect the contribution of the Windrush generation but do want the government to keep cracking down on illegal immigration. Will Rudd assure him that she will continue to press on with that.

Rudd says she will. She says the Labour party once produced mugs to show its commitment to curbing immigration.

(That was before the 2015 general election. Under Jeremy Corbyn, the party’s approach has been different.)

Yvette Cooper, the Labour chair of the Commons home affairs committee, says she spoke to someone today turned away by the Home Office because they were from Kenya, not a Windrush migrant.

There is widespread concern that there is cultural disbelief in the Home Office. People there do not accept that there is a link with the net migration target. Will Rudd get rid of that target?

Rudd says she wants to help all Commonwealth migrants.

As for the target, Rudd says she is going to resist the temptation to talk about that at the moment.

The key point is the distinction between legal and illegal, she says. She says the problem here is that people here legally have been affected.

The Labour MP David Lammy says everyone in the Caribbean because the British empire and others took them there under slavery.

And he says that he and his parents have been in this country as British citizens.

He says, when Amber Rudd says people can get British citizenship, she ignores the fact that they are citizens already.

There are many other people in the same category, born under empire, he says.

If the Commonwealth is to mean anything, it must mean that - common wealth.

Rudd thanks Lammy for the work he has done on this issue. She appreciates it, she says.

She says, as home secretary, she has to address the point about people’s legal status.

She says the steps she is taking will affect all citizens from the Commonwealth.

The SNP’s justice and home affairs spokeswoman Joanna Cherry says the problem was caused by the government’s “ludicrous immigration target” and its decision to create a hostile environment for immigrants.

She says Rudd should not let Theresa May use her as a human shield. She urges Rudd to reject May’s approach, or to resign.

Rudd says the problem has built over over successive governments.

She defends the government’s decision to take action against illegal immigrants.

The Labour MP David Lammy, one of the leading figures in the campaign for the rights of the Windrush generation, has posted this response on Twitter.

Abbott urges government to go further and repeal Immigration Act provisions that penalise Windrush generation

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, is responding now.

She says this has been one of the biggest scandals in home affairs for years.

She says Rudd said this should not have been allowed to happen. But Rudd allowed it to happen.

The home secretary has to understand that ultimately the buck stops with her.

Abbott says this was forceable and it was foreseen. MPs tried to draw the government’s attention to it. The real problem was the 2014 Immigration Act. She and MPs like Jeremy Corbyn and David Lammy spoke and voted against this. The Act removed the exemption of Commonwealth migrants from deportation, she says.

She says people who deprived of their family and friends.

People were expected to produce four pieces of documentation for every year they were in the country. Who could have thought that was fair, she asks.

She says some elements in the statement are welcome, like the waiving of fees and the waiving of the requirement to pass the citizenship test, even though some of these people would pass that test with flying colours.

She says it would be easy to extend the protection that applied to Commonwealth citizens that existed before 2014.

She says the compensation must not just be a token sum of money. It must properly compensate for the loss suffered.

She asks where the extra staff for the Home Office unit will come from. Will they be new staff?

She says, coming up behind the Windrush cohort, is a cohort from South Asia. They will be asked for four pieces of data too, and subject to the same amount of humiliation.

Abbott says 500 people attended a meeting on this issue organised in the Commons last week.

Rudd must understand how upset people from this generation feel. They feel it says something about how the government views this entire community.

As a few MPs heckle, Abbott says some of them are saying “rubbish”. She says her parents’ generation had unparalleled commitment to his country. Some never took a day off work, she says.

Rudd says none of these measures can undo the pain endured.

But she says she hopes she can put things right.

Home Office to set up independently-run compensation scheme for those adversely affected, Rudd says

Rudd is now addressing compensation.

Those affected must get the documents they need.

But compensation must be addressed to.

Some of these cases are “harrowing”, she says.

The state has let these people down.

Labour MPs shout: “You.”

She says, where people have suffered loss, they will be compensated.

  • The Home Office will set up a new scheme to pay compensation to those who have lost out, she says. It will be independently run.

Rudd says she will consider if further measures need to be taken.

Rudd says 4,200 cases have been reviewed.

So far, no cases have come to light of people being unfairly deported, she says.

But further cases are being reviewed. There are around 8,000 in total to be considered, she says. They are being manually checked. And she says she wants the process to be audited.

Rudd says the Home Office is a great office of state.

She says caseworkers will adopt a balance of probability test when deciding these cases.

Rudd says Windrush generation migrants to be given British citizenship at no cost

Rudd says these steps intended to combat illegal immigration have an an “unintended and sometimes devastating” effect on some Windrush migrants.

Successive governments are to blame, she says.

This provokes some jeering.

She says some people just have indefinite leave to remain. That means, if they leave, they can be refused entry.

  • Rudd says citizenship fee will be waived for anyone from Windrush generation who wants to apply for citizenship.
  • The requirement to pass the citizenship test will be waived, she says.
  • She says she will waive the fee for the naturalisation process.

Rudd says she wants to explain how this happened.

Everyone who arrived before 1973 given settlement rights did not require specific documentation.

Since then many of these people would have applied for documentation.

She says since the 1980s successive governments have introduced measures to combat illegal immigration. She lists several of them, starting with rules introduced in 1982.

Amber Rudd's Commons statement on Windrush generation

Amber Rudd, the home secretary, is giving her statement on the Windrush generation now.

She says these people are British in all but legal status. The current situation should never have been allowed to happen, she says.

She says she and Theresa May have apologised.

May announces an annual Stephen Lawrence day on 22 April

Theresa May has announced that there will be an annual commemoration of the life of Stephen Lawrence on 22 April, known as Stephen Lawrence day. This is what she said at the service this afternoon to mark the 25th anniversary of his murder on 22 April 1993.

For the past 25 years, Doreen and Neville have fought heroically to ensure that their son’s life and death will never be forgotten.

Their dignity, their courage and their sheer determination are an inspiration to us all.

We are privileged to be here today at this special final anniversary service to commemorate Stephen.

But it is right that Stephen’s name and legacy lives on. In the run up to this service, I have spoken with Baroness Lawrence about how best to achieve this.

And so, today, with Baroness Lawrence’s blessing, I can announce that the government will work with the Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust to establish a national, annual commemoration of Stephen’s life and legacy, to take place on the 22nd of April each year: Stephen Lawrence Day.

We will use this day to encourage and support young people in achieving their dreams, and to reflect on Stephen’s life, death and the positive change he has inspired.

Lady Lawrence (right) and her son Stuart with Prime Minister Theresa May before a memorial service at St Martin-in-the-Fields in Trafalgar Square, London, to mark the 25th anniversary of the murder of Stephen Lawrence.
Lady Lawrence (right) and her son Stuart with Prime Minister Theresa May before a memorial service at St Martin-in-the-Fields in Trafalgar Square, London, to mark the 25th anniversary of the murder of Stephen Lawrence. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA

Updated

Peers begin debating keeping EU charter of fundamental rights in domestic law

In the House of Lords peers have started debating amendment 15 to the EU withdrawal bill. A vote is due later this afternoon, and the government is expected to lose.

This amendment, and some associated amendments, would ensure that most of the EU charter of fundamental rights remains part of domestic law after Brexit. They have been tabled by Lord Pannick, a crossbencher and barrister, Lord Goldsmith, the Labour former attorney general, Lady Ludford, a Lib Dem Brexit spokeswoman and Lord Deben (John Gummer), the Conservative former cabinet minister

This is from the BBC’s Esther Webber.

Cat Smith, the shadow minister for voter engagement, is responding to Chloe Smith’s statement.

She says the voter ID pilots in England are unlike the system operating in Northern Ireland.

Referring to the concerns about the policy raised by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (see yesterday’s Observer), she asks if the pilots are compliant with human rights law.

She asks for an assurance that none of the Windrush-generation migrants will be disenfranchised by the new system.

And she urges the government to drop the pilots.

Smith responds. She says she has replied to the EHRC, and she says the pilot scheme does comply with the European convention on human rights.

She says the Windrush generation are not being disenfranchised. But she says there will be a statement on Windrush later, and so she will not say more now.

She says she thinks Labour are implying that electoral fraud is not worth tackling.

Quoting a letter written to her local paper, she says Labour are concerned about losing votes.

Chloe Smith, the Cabinet Office minister, is now responding to the urgent question about the voter ID pilots at the local elections. (See 12.44pm.)

She says electoral fraud is not a victimless crime. People’s votes get stolen, she says. She says people get asked for ID in other circumstances, such as when they collect a parcel, and that it is reasonable to ask for ID when people vote.

Voter ID rules have been introduced in Northern Ireland. There was no evidence turnout fell, she says. But there is evidence that electoral fraud fell sharply.

She says it was Labour that introduced voter ID requirements in Northern Ireland.

She says the government does not want to see democracy dumbed down.

The Times’ Patrick Kidd has suggested a possible explanation for John Bercow’s decision to let defence questions over-run. (See 3.25pm.)

This is from the Press Association’s Ian Jones.

This is the cryptic comment that John Bercow, the Commons speaker, came out with a moment ago. (See 3.25pm.)

Colleagues needn’t worry. Their questions will be reached. But the chair has to react to the development of events, to which I and some colleagues are privy, and others are not. And if you weren’t already confused, you will now be.

John Bercow, the Speaker, has just assured MPs trying to ask a question at defence questions that they will get their chance. He will let the session run beyond 3.30pm, he implied. Then he said something cryptic about he and other MPs being privy to some knowledge that other people did not know about. Perhaps he was just referring to the fact that the minister responding to the urgent question is running late? Or perhaps something else is afoot? We’ll find out soon.

Updated

NFU Scotland has put out a statement saying it is disappointed to see that the government is continuing to rule out staying in the customs union. (See 12.39pm.) Scott Walker, its chief executive, said:

Trade with Europe is important to us, as are the trade agreements that Europe already has in place with countries around the world.

Continued membership of the customs union would allow us to keep frictionless free trade with Europe while allowing us access to important world markets on terms that recognise the importance of maintaining domestic food production.

Australia, New Zealand and the USA are all countries that the UK government has indicated as post-Brexit target markets for free trade agreements and all will wish increased market access for their food producers on their terms. Farming in this country must not be sold out for an ideological view.

We remain adamant that any Brexit outcome that results in the UK importing cheaper food would be hugely damaging to the farming, food and drinks sectors of Scotland and the UK. Sucking in food imports also means exporting jobs and incomes in the domestic farming and food supply chain, as well as animal welfare and environmental responsibilities beyond our shores.

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, will be responding to the Amber Rudd statement, which is now due at about 4.15pm (because of the urgent question coming first).

With the government committed to offering victims of the Windrush generation some compensation, Abbott expresses scepticism about how effective this will be.

On her Twitter feed Abbott also points out that she was warning about the impact of tighter immigration controls on Windrush-generation migrants who are in the UK legally four years ago. She was one of only a handful of Labour MPs who voted against May’s immigration bill in 2014. (Jeremy Corbyn was another.)

And the Financial Times columnist Gideon Rachman has written a good column about the customs union issue too (paywall). The best bit comes at the end.

It is this situation [the refusal of leading Tory Brexiters to accept compromise on the customs union] that led one leading British political analyst to predict to me recently that Brexit will not happen because “there is no version of Brexit that can get a parliamentary majority”.

Yet similarly informed people looking at the same facts come to very different conclusions. Charles Grant, head of the Centre for European Reform, a think-tank, reckons the chances of stopping Brexit are now less than 5 per cent. A couple of prominent remainer MPs with whom I’ve discussed the issue put the odds of stopping Brexit at between 20 per cent and 40 per cent. With so many informed people arriving at such wildly divergent conclusions, my own conclusion is that nobody really knows. There are just too many uncertainties.

So hardline remainers should not give up yet. The whole situation reminds me of an old joke about a horse-trainer serving a mad Russian tsar. One day the tsar insists that the trainer must make his favourite horse talk within the year — or face execution. The trainer instantly agrees to make the horse talk. When his friends warn him that he has taken on an impossible task, he replies: “A lot can happen in a year — the tsar might die, I might die, the horse might die. Or the horse might talk.”

It is just under a year until Brexit. Remainers should not give up hope. The horse might talk.

This is from Sky’s Darren McCaffrey.

Dominic Grieve, of course, is the Conservative former attorney general and one of the Tories who has signed an amendment to the trade bill saying staying in the customs union should be an objective of government policy.

The BBC’s political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, has written a useful blog unpicking the ‘customs union/confidence vote’ kerfuffle. “Lots of things can be true at the same time, even though they seem to contradict each other,” she writes - a helpful maxim for journalists everywhere. Here is an excerpt.

Yes, it is true that a powerful group of Brexiteers believe that they have been told by No 10, that any effort to water down the government’s position on the Customs Union would be treated as a vote of confidence, to bring rebel Remainers to heel.

This is in the context not of this week’s vote, which would not have any power to force a change of heart, but a vote that will have that authority next month.

It is also true that those potential rebel Remainers believe they have been assured by the government that they would NOT turn a vote on the customs union into a vote of confidence. They think they can try to shift Theresa May’s position without collapsing the government, indeed they say the chatter about a confidence vote is a ‘ruse’ by the Brexiteers.

Downing Street says publicly that no such decision has been made. It’s not surprising that in uncharted territory they don’t want to be bound to one position now over a vote that’s not for another month.

On her campaign visit to the West Midlands this morning, Theresa May restated her determination to leave the customs union. She said:

Coming out of the customs union means that we will be free to have those deals - deals that suit the UK. But I also recognise the importance to businesses like this [a furniture firm - see 12.53pm] of being able to have as frictionless a border as possible into the European Union.

Tories warn of vacuum in Welsh politics after Carwyn Jones' announcement about standing down

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives has warned that Wales faces a period of “rudderless leadership” if the process to select Carwyn Jones’ replacement drags on until the end of the year.

Jones announced at the weekend that he was stepping down as first minister in the autumn during the Welsh Labour conference at the weekend and said his successor would be in place by December.

Andrew RT Davies, leader of the Tories in Wales, has called for swift action to replace the first minister, and for the election of a new leader “within weeks – not months”. He said:

The first minister’s decision to stand down has created an immediate vacuum at the heart of Welsh politics, and we now face a period of rudderless leadership whilst the Labour party works out how to elect his replacement.

They need to get a move on, for the sake of our public services and public confidence in devolution.

Welsh NHS waiting lists are spiralling, we have a teacher recruitment crisis, and take-home pay is the lowest in any part of the UK. It is simply unacceptable for the country to be left in limbo until the end of the year.

A row is brewing over the method of electing a new Labour leader – and thus first minister in Wales.

Shortly before Jones announced he was stepping down, the Swansea East MP Carolyn Harris won the Welsh Labour deputy leadership election through an electoral college system – rather than one member, one vote. Many within the party in Wales believe that the new leader should be elected on a one member one vote system.

Davies said:

Frankly, the majority of the public are unconcerned by the mechanism used to determine Carwyn’s replacement, but we need to see a new first minister with a mandate to take Wales forward in the coming weeks – not months.

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew RT Davies on his fam near St Hilary, South Wales
The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew RT Davies on his farm near St Hilary, South Wales
 Photograph: Adrian Sherratt for the Guardian

As Anne Perkins and Amelia Gentleman report in today’s Guardian splash, Mike Freer, a government whip, sent out an email saying the Windrush scandal has “absolutely nothing” to do with policies implemented while Theresa May was home secretary.

Freer subsequently issued a statement clarifying his position. In it he said:

As the prime minister and home secretary have said, the situation that some members of the Windrush generation have found themselves in is unacceptable, and that’s why it’s right that the government has apologised and is offering help to those affected.

The point I was making in constituency correspondence was that some have deliberately sought to conflate this with measures to counter illegal immigration, which we know is a matter of public concern - and that the decision to destroy landing card documents was taken for the first time in 2009.

Theresa May poses for a selfie with upholsterer Derek Whitehouse as West Midlands mayor Andy Street looks on during a visit to Boss Design in Dudley
Theresa May poses for a selfie with upholsterer Derek Whitehouse as West Midlands mayor Andy Street looks on during a visit to Boss Design in Dudley Photograph: Darren Staples/PA

Theresa May visited a furniture company in the West Midlands as part of the Tories’ local election campaign. As the Press Association reports, May met machinists and other workers at Boss Design, posing for a selfie with technician upholsterer Derek Whitehouse at the company’s factory in Dudley, West Midlands. Boss Design manufactures and supplies furniture for commercial use in the overseas and home markets, including the presenters’ seats currently used on the set of Match Of The Day.

Around 4,400 council seats will be up for grabs on May 3, with elections being held in 150 local authority areas across England. Polls are also taking place to elect mayors in the London boroughs of Hackney, Lewisham, Newham and Tower Hamlets, the borough of Watford, and in the Sheffield city region.

Theresa May speaking to a worker during a visit to Boss Design in Dudley as part of the Conservative Party’s local election campaign
Theresa May speaking to a worker during a visit to Boss Design in Dudley as part of the Conservative Party’s local election campaign Photograph: Darren Staples/PA

Before the Amber Rudd Windrush statement, there will be an urgent question on voter ID pilots taking place at the local elections.

That may have been prompted by this story in Sunday’s Observer.

This is how it starts.

Government plans that will force people to prove their identities at polling stations in May’s local elections risk disenfranchising members of ethnic minority communities, according to a leaked letter to ministers from the equality and human rights watchdog.

In a move that will fuel controversy over the treatment of migrants in the UK following the Windrush scandal, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has written to the Cabinet Office minister David Lidington, raising its serious concern that the checks will deter immigrants and others from participating in the democratic process.

Downing Street lobby briefing - Summary

Here are the main points from the Number 10 lobby briefing.

  • Amber Rudd, the home secretary, will make a statement to MPs this afternoon setting out further measures to address the Windrush generation scandal, the prime minister’s spokesman revealed. He would not give details of what Rudd would say, but he reminded reporters that Theresa May said on Friday that compensation for victims was one issue being considered.
  • The spokesman played down reports that senior cabinet ministers want to drop one of the two options put forward by the government for post-Brexit customs arrangements. Referring to the Times splash (see 10.58am), the spokesman said the government was still looking at both options. He refused to say whether one option was favoured by Theresa May.
  • The spokesman dismissed the claim from David Jones, the former Brexit minister (see 10.58am), that the government’s customs partnership proposal would lead to the UK eventually staying in the customs union. That was not the case, the spokesman said. “We are absolutely clear that we are leaving the customs union.”
  • The spokesman said that the government thought it could get new customs arrangements in place by the end of the transition period, which concludes at the end of 2020. Experts are very sceptical about this. When it was put to the spokesman said that May herself suggested in her evidence to the Commons liaison committee that more time might be needed, the spokesman suggested her words had been misinterpreted.
  • The spokesman was unable to identify any outside experts who have described the customs partnership proposal as viable. Some policy makers have described it as a fantasy option. Asked about this, the spokesman said the government thought it was a viable option, but could not cite third-party authorities backing this up.
  • The spokesman said that BBC reports this morning saying the government was going to make the vote on staying in the customs union due later this spring a matter of confidence were “an absolute mystery”. Those reports were subsequently dropped, he noted. (9.05am.)
  • May will attend a service this afternoon to mark the 25th anniversary of the murder of Stephen Lawrence, the spokesman said.
10 Downing Street
10 Downing Street Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Updated

Jeremy Corbyn has launched a fresh attack on the privatisation of Royal Mail, saying hundreds of millions of pounds have been “siphoned off” to shareholders, while workers and consumers have lost out. As the Press Association reports, Corbyn told the Communication Workers Union in Bournemouth that Labour would renationalise the Royal Mail if it won the next election.

He said that, despite claims by the coalition government that privatisation would lead to investment in services, prices had increased and staff were losing out on pay and conditions. He said:

It was totally wrong to sell off such a precious national asset ...

Between 2013 and 2017 £800m has been paid to shareholders, £626m of which went to non-employees. Over the last eight years dividends paid by private companies in Britain previously in public ownership totalled £37bn.

Just think what could be done with £37bn for infrastructure, housing, health and education. It is a vast sum of money.

Jeremy Corbyn speaking at the CWU conference in Bournemouth.
Jeremy Corbyn speaking at the CWU conference in Bournemouth. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/PA

Amber Rudd to use Commons statement to announce new measures to help Windrush generation

I’m just back from the Number 10 lobby briefing. It did not really take us on at all, although it sounds as if the Amber Rudd statement on Windrush this afternoon (see 9.31am) will be quite meaty.

I will post a summary soon.

Updated

The government has put forward two options for customs arrangements with the EU after Brexit. They were set out in a position paper (pdf) last year. Here is an excerpt.

The Government believes that there are two broad approaches the UK could adopt to meet these objectives. These approaches represent different choices about the nature of our relationship with the EU and countries around the world, but in either option the UK would seek to pursue its independent trade policy objectives.

● A highly streamlined customs arrangement between the UK and the EU, streamlining and simplifying requirements, leaving as few additional requirements on EU trade as possible. This would aim to: continue some of the existing arrangements between the UK and the EU; put in place new negotiated and potentially unilateral facilitations to reduce and remove barriers to trade; and implement technology-based solutions to make it easier to comply with customs procedures. This approach involves utilising the UK’s existing tried and trusted third country processes for UK-EU trade, building on EU and international precedents, and developing new innovative facilitations to deliver as frictionless a customs border as possible.

● A new customs partnership with the EU, aligning our approach to the customs border in a way that removes the need for a UK-EU customs border. One potential approach would involve the UK mirroring the EU’s requirements for imports from the rest of the world where their final destination is the EU. This is of course unprecedented as an approach and could be challenging to implement and we will look to explore the principles of this with business and the EU.

Officially the government has not said which of these two options - the “highly-streamlined customs arrangement”, or the “customs partnership” - it prefers.

Yesterday, in an article for the Mail on Sunday, David Jones, a Conservative former Brexit minister and a Brexit enthusiast, said the “customs partnership” idea was unacceptable. He explained:

The ingenious plan goes like this: the UK would indeed quit the customs union and be able to sign post-Brexit free-trade deals with countries around the globe.

As the Leave side promised in the referendum campaign, we would be free to set our own, lower tariffs on imports. But to avoid a hard Irish border, the UK would take on the role of the EU’s tax collector.

We would impose the full tariffs on products destined for the Continent and pass the money on to Brussels. Importers of goods staying in the UK would receive a rebate. Et voilà! No need for customs posts in Ireland and full steam ahead for post-Brexit free-trade deals.

But sadly, this is nothing more than a Byzantine scheme designed first to slow down Brexit and then to strangle it.

And today, in the Times’ splash (paywall), Francis Elliott says other Brexiters are also urging Theresa May to drop this proposal. He says:

Theresa May will face calls from senior Brexit-supporting ministers to ditch her favoured option for a customs deal with the EU at a meeting this week.

David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson are to press the prime minister to abandon the plan as fears grow that she is paving the way for a compromise on the issue.

They will confront her at a meeting of the cabinet’s Brexit sub-committee, scheduled for Wednesday. The ministers believe that the so-called customs partnership is unworkable and is encouraging Brussels to press for Britain to stay in a customs union after Brexit ...

The Brexiteers, however, will press Mrs May to focus on the second option, known in Whitehall as “max-fac” or “maximum facilitation”, which aims to minimise but not eliminate checks. Critics say that this option would cost businesses more and make it impossible for Britain to honour its commitment to avoid a hard border with Ireland.

And what are Number 10 saying? I’m just off to the lobby briefing to find out.

I will post again after 11.30am.

Here is Stephen Clarke, a senior economic analyst at the Resolution Foundation thinktank, on today’s zero-hours contract figures. (See 10.23am.)

The use of zero hours contracts increased rapidly in the wake of the financial crisis but our tightening labour market has curbed their growth.

Nonetheless, around 900,000 workers are on a zero hours contract, including one in twelve young people. And while some workers appreciate the flexibility they bring, for others they bring insecurity and lower pay.

The government can help both of these groups by providing a right to guaranteed hours for anyone who has in practice been doing regular hours on a zero hours contract for at least three months.

Number of zero-hours contracts rises to 1.8m

The number of zero-hours contracts in the UK has increased to 1.8m over the past year, new figures show. As the Press Association reports, the total, in the year to last November, increased from 1.7m in the previous year, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The number of contracts not guaranteeing regular hours represents 6% of all contracts, unchanged from the previous figure. The ONS has previously reported that 901,000 workers are on zero hours contracts.

Updated

Here is some comment from Labour parliamentarians on the ‘making customs union vote a confidence issue’ kerfuffle.

From Chris Bryant MP

From Chuka Umunna MP

From Angela Smith, the Labour leader in the Lords.

For an alternative view, here is the start of a thread from Christopher Montgomery, a Tory aide working with the European Research Group, who are pushing for a harder Brexit.

I think Montgomery misses the point. A government can, I suppose, treat any vote it likes as a matter of confidence. But before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, that had consequence. A prime minister could say, if he or she lost, that would trigger a general election. John Major used this tactic to reverse a defeat on the Maastricht bill.

But this option is not open to Theresa May. If she is lost a customs union vote and wanted to hold a general election, under the FTPA she would have to table another vote calling for an election, or table a no confidence motion in her own government.

What is true, though, is that May could treat a vote on the customs union as a personal resigning matter. She could threaten to resign as prime minister if she lost, triggering a Conservative leadership context. This could lead to a range of potential outcomes, some of which would be very unpalatable to either Tory Brexiters or remainers.

It is also conceivable that, using some form of confidence argument, the Tories could threaten to withdraw the party whip from MPs who voted against the government on the customs union. This would up the stakes considerably - MPs who are suspended cannot stand again for election as Conservative candidates - but if the rebels ignored the ultimatum, and May was then forced to follow through on her threat and remove the whip from several Tory MPs, she could wipe out her own Tory/DUP majority overnight.

Updated

Amber Rudd, the home secretary, is making a Commons statement on the Windrush scandal at 3.30pm, the Labour whips are saying.

No 10 rejects claims customs union vote to be made a confidence issue

Ian Aitken, the great political reporter who recently died, had a law of journalism that went something like this: there are some stories that, by the act of getting published, automatically become true; and then there are other stories that, by the act of getting published, automatically make themselves untrue. This weekend Brexit and the customs union have given us a terrific example.

Yesterday the Sunday Times published a story (paywall) by Tim Shipman and Caroline Wheeler saying that, although Theresa May is officially committed to taking the UK out of the customs union when it leaves the EU, in private she is preparing to back down on this point.

Theresa May’s team has privately admitted she may have to accept permanent membership of a European customs union, after a secret wargaming exercise concluded that even Brexiteers such as Michael Gove and David Davis would not resign in protest.

The prime minister has insisted that the UK will leave the common tariff area so it can pursue free trade deals outside the EU. But one of May’s political team told a meeting on March 20 that she and senior aides “will not be crying into our beer” if parliament forces the government’s hand — a position that will enrage some Brexiteers.

Twenty four hours later the prospect of a voluntary climbdown over the customs union seems to have vanished, or at least got a lot, lot smaller. (That may have been intention of the person briefing the Sunday Times, but that’s another issue.) Even if May was anticipating such a U-turn, in response to the Sunday Times story she has had to assure people that it will not happen. A Downing Street briefing to that effect was leading the BBC news last night.

This morning someone seems to have gone even further. At 8am the BBC was reporting that May planned to make next month’s vote on the customs union a matter of confidence. This was obviously a nonsense - a vote on an amendment to legislation is not a vote of confidence in the government, and the days when a prime minister could treat it as such, by threatening to resign and trigger a general election in the event of a defeat, have gone thanks to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act - and Downing Street sources are now saying that, on the confidence issue point, the BBC bulletin was wrong.

Still, it all shows how feverish this is all getting. We’ll hear more from Number 10 later.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: Jeremy Corbyn gives a speech at the Communication Workers’ Union conference.

11am: Downing Street lobby briefing.

2pm: Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, gives a speech at the City Week conference.

After 3.30pm: Peers renew their debate on the EU withdrawal bill. Later there will be a vote on keeping the EU’s charter of fundamental rights in UK law which the government is expected to lose.

4pm: Sir Tom Scholar, permanent secretary at the Treasury, gives evidence to the Commons public accounts committee about the Brexit financial settlement.

As usual, I will 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 at the end of the day.

You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.

Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news from Jack Blanchard. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’ 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
30 years later, we're still quoting these iconic 'Happy Gilmore' lines
Adam Sandler’s golf classic remains the ultimate proof that the Sandman is a comedy god
Tom’s Guide
Tom’s Guide
Kevin Hart Dropped Plenty Of F-Bombs (And A Big Promise) While Talking Up His Netflix Roast
This is some big talk.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
The Truth About Kelly Osbourne: TV Star Addresses 'Scary' Look and 'Overdose' Rumours While Supporting Charity
Kelly Osbourne rebuffs weight loss and overdose rumours while launching a £4.5m Centrepoint drive with Sharon, turning grief over Ozzy's death and online scrutiny into youth homelessness action.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
California women try to hit on men by sending them hashbrowns at London restaurant. It doesn’t go as planned:‘Yeah you can’t really do that in London’
Sending someone restaurant food is a pretty common flirting tactic in the U.S. However, as one TikToker found out, the same can’t be said for the U.K.
The Mary Sue
The Mary Sue
The Hidden Effects of Screen Time on Children's Health, Sleep, and Development
Discover how excessive screen time affects children's health, sleep, and development, and learn practical tips to manage digital habits for healthier, balanced growth.
Medical Daily
Medical Daily
Barry Keoghan: 'There’s a lot of hate online. It’s a lot of abuse of how I look'
Barry Keoghan has considered quitting acting due to abuse over his looks and says he finds it hard to deal with the comments.
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