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

Brexit: May tells Tory MPs to back amendment to replace backstop – as it happened

Theresa May leaving Number 10 this afternoon on her way to address Conservative MPs in the Commons.
Theresa May leaving Number 10 this afternoon on her way to address Conservative MPs in the Commons. Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/PA

Closing summary

We’re going to close down this live blog now, so thanks for reading – and for all the comments. Here’s a summary of the day’s events:

  • The prime minister, Theresa May, told her MPs she wanted them to vote for an amendment that would push through her deal but replace the backstop with “alternative arrangements”. The amendment was tabled by the party chair, Graham Brady, and some have identified it as a means for parliament to indicate to the European Union what a majority of MPs could be persuaded to accept, if not the deal May and EU leaders have thrashed out. The theory goes that political leaders on the continent might then relent in order to avoid a no-deal Brexit. It was indicated on Monday evening that the Tories would whip their MPs to vote for the amendment.
  • It was unclear, however, whether that would be enough to force it through, with a significant number of May’s own MPs indicating they were unlikely to follow those instructions. The hard Brexit-supporting ERG said it would not support the amendment and reiterated that opposition, even after it emerged the party would go so far as to whip MPs.
  • The EU was not following the Brady script, with one of the most senior officials working on the Brexit deal saying the negotiations with the UK could not be reopened. Sabine Weyand, the EU’s deputy chief Brexit negotiator, said there was a “very high risk of a crash out not by design, but by accident”.
  • Labour performed a late U-turn after coming in for serious criticism over its initial intention to instruct its MPs to abstain on the immigration bill. The party released a statement saying it opposed the bill but wanted to amend it at the next stage of its passage through Parliament, rather than actively oppose it now. Later, it said it would issue a single-line whip, indicating to MPs who do vote that they should vote against – while not actually requiring them to vote.
  • The former head of MI5 Lady Manningham-Buller said the UK would be “less safe” if it left the EU without a deal. She said that she was “very concerned” about the loss of access to things such as the Europol database and that there were a whole range of security issues which were “dealt with better in a European context than not”.

For those wanting to read yet more, my colleagues Jessica Elgot and Heather Stewart have the full story on the Tories’ manoeuvring today:

Updated

It’s perhaps worth noting that Labour appears to have issued a single-line whip, meaning it’s indicating its general position on the issue but does not necessarily expect its MPs to turn up and vote – in this case, against the bill.

The SNP’s Stewart McDonald is unimpressed by the manoeuvre:

Some Labour MPs, however, are indicating they plan to vote against – in some cases, regardless of what the party’s official position was:

Updated

Labour U-turn over immigration bill vote

It seems Labour MPs will now be asked to vote against the immigration bill tonight. The party had previously said it did not support the bill’s aims, but would ask MPs to abstain (see 4.42pm).

Updated

HuffPost UK’s Paul Waugh has a little more detail on the possible timing of the vote:

This afternoon, the health secrerary Matt Hancock told a Parliamentary committee that “medicines will be prioritised [over food] in the event of a no-deal Brexit”. The shadow health secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, has said:

The fact that the health secretary is forced to make decisions over whether to prioritise medicine over food in the event of a Tory no-deal Brexit is simply astonishing.

And it’s all the more irresponsible that Theresa May stubbornly refuses to rule out no deal. Playing Russian roulette with the national interest and putting peoples’ health at risk like this is shameful and scandalous.

Updated

Earlier, it was reported that two MPs were planning to withdraw their amendments, making it more likely the Speaker, John Bercow, would call the Brady one. That’s now been confirmed.

John Baron, who tabled another of the amendments, has said:

I urge fellow Conservatives to support [the Brady amendment]. This stands the best chance of uniting the party, getting the DUP on board, and sending a clear message to the EU that the backstop is the key problem – without a majority tomorrow, the EU could conclude the backstop is not important.

Updated

The BBC’s Iain Watson has some more on the government’s thinking. As previously noted, the level of government support for the amendment may go some way to determining the actions of opposition parties.

It may not be a government amendment but, with Theresa May choosing to whip the vote, will opposition MPs see a practical difference?

Some more detail from Brandon Lewis, who has said:

It (the Brady amendment) allows the prime minister to give a very clear message around what Parliament wants, where the party is. And actually that is quite a strong position to be in.

I would hope the ERG, when they look at this and actually look through the detail of what this gives the PM tomorrow, in terms of a meaningful vote that will come back later, [see)] it is about giving a message to Europe about what can go through Parliament in terms of dealing with the backstop issue and why that matters.

Graham Brady said he was “delighted” the government would whip in support of his amendment as he left the meeting this evening.

There are also now reports suggesting the new vote will be held within three weeks, leaving only sightly more than six weeks between it and Brexit itself on 29 March:

May to officially back Brady amendment

It appears we now have confirmation that Tory MPs will be whipped to vote for the Brady amendment. There had been some confusion over exactly how far she would go in supporting it.

The questions now are: Firstly, how many of her hard Brexit-supporting MPs can she take with her? The rightwing ERG has already said it will not back Brady and, according to the Telegraph’s Steven Swinford, has restated that position in light of the news it will be a whipped vote.

Secondly, how will the other parties react now the amendment has government support?

Updated

Here is more on the PM’s meeting with Tory MPs.

From ITV’s Robert Peston

From the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn

From BuzzFeed’s Alex Wickham

From CityAM’s Owen Bennett

That’s all from me. My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is now taking over.

More from the PM’s meeting with Tory MPs.

From the Guardian’s Dan Sabbagh

From Sky’s Aubrey Allegretti

From the BBC’s Ross Hawkins

From the Spectator’s James Forsyth

From ITV’s Robert Peston

From the BBC’s Vicki Young

The Conservative MPs Andrew Murrison and John Baron, who have also tabled anti backstop amendments in addition to the one known as the Graham Brady amendment (which is technically an Andrew Murrison amendment too, but never mind - see 9.22am), are going to withdraw their amendments, the Telegraph’s Christopher Hope reports.

Withdrawing those amendments would increase the chances of John Bercow, the speaker, calling the Brady one. Given all the attention it is receiving, you would expect Bercow to call it anyway, but Number 10 see him as unhelpful and unpredictable, and are clearly taking no chances.

Updated

This, from my colleague Dan Sabbagh, sums up the problem rather well.

We’re getting confusing messages from the PM’s meeting with Conservative MPs.

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

But this is from my colleague Jessica Elgot.

And this is from my colleague Dan Sabbagh.

May urges Tory MPs to back Brady amendment saying backstop should be replaced

Theresa May is urging Conservative MPs to back the Graham Brady amendment (see 9.22am), ITV’s Robert Peston reports.

Given that the European Research Group, the most powerful caucus in the parliamentary Conservative party, has come out against Brady (see 5.03pm), this seems to be what civil servants would call a “courageous” move by May. She has just backed an amendment that seems likely to fail - not least because if May is backing Brady, Labour Brexiters will think twice about voting for what will be seen as a de facto government amendment.

Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister, could not get into the meeting for Conservative MPs with Theresa May, Sky’s Kate McCann reports.

Theresa May has just arrived for her meeting with Conservative MPs in one of the committee rooms at parliament, ITV’s Daniel Hewitt reports.

Key Corbyn ally expressed doubts about Labour backing Cooper's anti no deal amendment

Labour’s backing for Yvette Cooper’s anti no-deal Brexit amendment has been thrown into doubt, after a shadow cabinet ally of Jeremy Corbyn warned that supporting it would smack of “ignoring the views of millions of ordinary folk”, my colleague Heather Stewart reports. Labour had been widely expected to whip its MPs to support the amendment, tabled by Cooper and former Conservative minister Nick Boles, which paves the way for a backbench bill mandating the government to seek a nine-month extension to article 50. But Jon Trickett, the shadow cabinet office minister, told the Guardian voters in his constituency would regard support for the measure on Tuesday as a failure to respect the result of the 2016 referendum.

Heather’s full story is here.

Jon Trickett
Jon Trickett Photograph: Chris J Ratcliffe/AFP/Getty Images

And this is from my colleague Jessica Elgot, who has been outside the meeting where the European Research Group, which represents the more hardline Tory Brexiters, have been discussing tomorrow’s votes.

This is from the Telegraph’s Steven Swinford, on the prospects of the Yvette Cooper amendment passing tomorrow.

Here is more on what Sabine Weyand, the EU’s deputy chief Brexit negotiator, was saying at the European Policy Centre conference in Brussels this afternoon.

These are from the Sun’s Nick Gutteridge.

ITV’s Robert Peston says most Tory Brexiters in European Research Group will not vote for the Graham Brady amendment tomorrow.

Labour has issued a statement explaining its decision to abstain at the second reading of the immigration bill tonight. (See 3.48pm and 3.54pm.)

Labour does not support the intentions contained in this bill and will therefore be seeking to amend this Bill substantially at committee stage.

Our immigration system must be ready post-Brexit, and for that reason we need an immigration bill.

But Labour totally opposes the Tories’ disgraceful hostile environment policy, their terrible treatment of EU and UK citizens, their persistent anti-migrant campaign and their shameful labelling of workers earning less than £30,000 as low-skilled.

Labour has set out our proposed immigration system that supports the needs of our economy and treats people fairly. We will introduce a work visa for all those we need to fill skills and labour shortages across a range of professions we need to come here – based on the needs of our economy, not a false distinction between high and low skilled workers based on their salary.

Downing Street is now saying the government might table its own amendment ahead of tomorrow’s debate, the Telegraph’s Gordon Rayner reports.

Updated

Facebook will tackle political misinformation in the run-up to the EU elections this May with a new “war room” based in Dublin, the company’s incoming communications chief, Nick Clegg, has announced. My colleague Alex Hearn has the full story here.

And, while we’re on the subject of the immigration bill (see 3.48pm), the Lib Dems have sent out an unusually pithy press release about the subject.

Lib Dem press release
Lib Dem press release Photograph: Lib Dem/Lib Dems

Labour criticised for abstaining on immigration bill

MPs will debate the second reading of the immigration bill this afternoon (or the immigration and social security coordination [EU withdrawal] bill, to give it its full title). This is the legislation that will bring EU nationals under UK immigration law after Brexit. Labour will abstain when it comes to the vote.

Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister and SNP leader, has criticised the decision.

LabourRichard is Richard Leonard, the Scottish Labour leader.

Anna Soubry, the Tory pro-European, says she is voting against.

And the Labour MP Chris Leslie (a frequent critic of the Jeremy Corbyn’s) is voting against it too.

Labour has not responded to a question about why it is abstaining. But the party has accepted the case for ending freedom of movement after Brexit, while it has been highly critical of the government’s specific plans for migration controls on EU nationals after Brexit, and so perhaps its position is no great surprise.

Updated

Former MI5 chief backs Yvette Cooper bill to rule out no-deal Brexit

Lady Manningham-Buller, the former head of MI5, told the World at One that the UK would be “less safe” if it left the EU without a deal. She said that she was “very concerned” about the loss of access to things like the Europol database and that there were a whole range of security issues which were “dealt with better in a European context than not”. She told the programme:

If we leave without a deal we are going to be less safe ...

I am pretty queasy that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is so in favour of Brexit – I think that should give us all pause.

She also said that she was “more than sympathetic” to the Yvette Cooper bill designed to stop the government taking the UK out of the EU without a deal.

When it was put to her that it was unconstitutional (because Cooper has a plan to allow her bill to be debated without government approval), Manningham-Buller did not accept that. She went on:

It seems to me there’s an irony here. The Brexiters - and I’m not one of them - argue that it’s about taking back parliamentary sovereignty. If it’s about about taking back parliamentary sovereignty, parliament is sovereign. And I think no deal, and the uncertainties of no deal ... [are] to be avoided at all costs.

Former MI5 chief Eliza Manningham-Buller
Former MI5 chief Eliza Manningham-Buller Photograph: D Dudley/Pacific/Barcroft

This is from BuzzFeed’s Alex Wickham, quoting an unnamed ERG member explaining why they are sceptical about the Graham Brady amendment. This argument matches the one used by Boris Johnson in his Telegraph column this morning. See 9.59am.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative MP and chair of the European Research Group, which represents Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, has played down reports that the ERG is split over whether or not to back the Graham Brady amendment. This is from the BBC’s Norman Smith.

DUP urges May to exploit 'real chaos' in Brussels and Dublin in Brexit talks

Sammy Wilson, the DUP’s Brexit spokesman, has issued a statement urging the government to be “tough” in the Brexit talks and exploit what he claims is the “real chaos” in Brussels and Dublin.

What he is saying will surprise observers who might assume that, if you are looking for a place mired in Brexit chaos, another capital might make a better candidate ...

Updated

Theresa May is meeting Conservative MP this evening to discuss Brexit, the BBC’s Iain Watson reports.

Risk of no-deal Brexit now 'very high', says top EU official

Sabine Weyand, the EU’s deputy chief Brexit negotiator, has been speaking at an event in Brussels. The Sun’s Nick Gutteridge has posted some quotes from her opening remarks, and they are unusually blunt.

  • Weyand says it is “a big challenge” to see how the UK will secure a majority for any Brexit deal.
  • She seems to rule out the EU reopening the negotiation with the UK, saying it’s over.
  • She accuses the UK of “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory”, saying the backstop was a much better for the UK than people assume.
  • She insists that the EU has already firmly rejected calls for the backstop to be time-limited.
  • She implies some British MPs are ignorant of what is in the withdrawal agreement.
  • She says there is a “very high risk” of a no-deal Brexit.

Updated

Here is the letter from supermarket bosses to MPs warning about the consequences of a no-deal Brexit.

For our Future’s Sake (FFS), the student-led anti-Brexit campaign, has released some polling from Opinium suggesting young people are losing faith in Jeremy Corbyn’s handling of Brexit. “In just 6 months, 18-34-year-old’s approval of how Corbyn is responding to Brexit has plummeted 27 percentage points, from +13% in July to -14% this week,” it says. Kira Lewis, an FFS activist, said:

Unfortunately, over the last 6 months, there’s been a massive drop in young people’s approval of how Jeremy Corbyn in handling Brexit. The reason for this is painfully clear - the overwhelming majority of Corbyn supporters, like myself, want Labour to back a People’s Vote on the Brexit deal, but if Labour and him enable Brexit, they are at risk of losing young supporters.

It is quite possible that all the Brexit amendments called tomorrow will be voted down, the Times’ Henry Zeffman argues.

The BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg thinks this is quite likely too.

Here are some more clues as to what Tory Brexiters think about the Graham Brady amendment.

From the Daily Mirror’s Pippa Crerar

From the Sun’s Steve Hawkes

Supermarkets could run out of food and be forced to raise prices under a no-deal Brexit, the British Retail Consortium has told MPs in a letter. The BBC has further details.

The Graham Brady amendment seems to be losing Brexiter supporter. A prominent Tory Brexiter called me earlier (about something else) and complained that the Brady amendment was “too vague”. Other colleagues are picking up the same reservations.

This is from the Telegraph’s Steven Swinford.

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

And this is from the Guardian’s Jessica Elgot.

Downing Street lobby briefing - Summary

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

  • Downing Street said explicitly that the Brexit withdrawal deal would have to change. (See 12.31pm.)
  • The prime minister’s spokesman suggested that, despite EU claims that the withdrawal agreement could not be renegotiated (repeated this morning - see 12.31pm), the EU would have to compromise. Asked about EU objections to a renegotiation, he said:

What we have consistently heard from European leaders is that they want the United Kingdom to leave with a deal. There’s a recognition that the United Kingdom leaving with a deal is in their best interests, as well as those of the UK. The deal which has been agreed was defeated by parliament. Therefore, if we are going to leave with a deal, clearly we are going to need to make some changes in order to win parliamentary support.

  • The spokesman said that May wanted to hold another vote in the Commons to agree a revised Brexit deal “as soon as possible”. This is what Number 10 refer to as “the second meaningful vote”. But the spokesman would not give any further guidance as to when this might be. He said the talks with MPs intended to find out what might be acceptable to parliament were still going on - today May has meetings with Tory MPs and MEPs - but he would not say when this process was due to end.
  • The spokesman implied that MPs worried about a no-deal Brexit did not have to vote tomorrow night to try to stop this. Referring to the “second meaningful vote”, he said the motion would be amendable - meaning that MPs might have another chance to vote on a no-deal amendment at a later stage.
  • The spokesman refused to commit the government to complying with all the amendments that might be passed tomorrow. Asked if the government would respect the wishes of parliament whatever was decided tomorrow, the spokesman would not answer directly, saying at this stage it was not clear what amendments would be put to a vote, but he went on to say that “as a statement of fact” some of the amendments were not legally binding. In fact, most of them are not legally binding. The only ones with practical force (as opposed to political force) are those that would change the rules of the Commons, and one of those, the Yvette Cooper one, is intended to make time for a bill that would impose a specific legal requirement on the prime minister (to seek an extension of article 50 if there is no Brexit deal by 26 February).
  • May will close the Brexit debate tomorrow night, Number 10 said. That means she will speak in the final half hour before the vote at 7pm. Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, will open the debate.
  • The spokesman urged John Bercow, the speaker, to select a wide variety of amendments tomorrow. Amendments are only put to a vote if they are selected. The spokesman said the choice of amendments was entirely a matter for Bercow. But he added:

I’m sure he will want to make sure that a wide range of views from across the House are considered.

  • The spokesman would not say whether government MPs will be asked to back the Graham Brady amendment, saying it was too soon to comment because the speaker has not decided yet which amendments he will call. That decision will only be taken at a speaker’s meeting tomorrow morning.
  • The spokesman distanced May from the anti-German language that the Tory MP Mark Francois used last week to describe Tom Enders, the German Airbus boss who issued a warning about a no-deal Brexit. Asked about what Francois said, the spokesman said:

They are not things that I would expect [May] to say.

But the spokesman refused an invitation to say whether May was worried about the impact comments like this might have on Germans considering doing business with the UK.

Updated

EU says withdrawal agreement 'not open for renegotiation', as No 10 says deal must change

The European commission hold a daily press briefing which takes place at the same time as Downing Street’s. And, just as Number 10 was saying that the withdrawal deal would have to change (although not necessarily the text of the withdrawal agreement - see 11.57am), Brussels said it was the withdrawal agreement would not be reopened. Margaritis Schinas, the commission’s spokesman, told journalists:

We have a unanimous EU27 position on the withdrawal agreement which reflects the common EU position. This withdrawal agreement has been agreed with the UK government, it is endorsed by leaders and is not open for renegotiation.

Asked if that position would change if MPs vote to demand changes to the Irish backstop, Schinas said:

The only thing I have to say is that we shall wait for the result of the vote of the Commons tomorrow. Then we will wait for the government to tell us what are the next steps. That’s how it’s going to work.

Brussels’ senior officials will consider the latest “Brexit preparedness and contingency” measures at this week’s college of commissioners meeting on Wednesday.

Margaritis Schinas
Margaritis Schinas Photograph: Yves Herman/Reuters

Updated

Brexit withdrawal deal will have to be changed, No 10 tells EU

I’m just back from the lobby briefing, and Number 10 is now explicitly saying that the EU will have to agree to changes to the Brexit deal. This is not much more than a statement of the obvious, and it was implicit in what Theresa May said in her Commons statement last week following the defeat of her deal, but on that occasion May was careful to avoid anything that sounded like an ultimatum to the EU. Now Number 10 is saying directly that the deal will have to be changed.

  • Number 10 has said the withdrawal deal will have to change. In a message that makes an attempt to renegotiate the deal with the EU, at least to some extent, the prime minister’s spokesman told journalists:

We reached an agreement with the European Union in relation to the withdrawal agreement and the future partnership. That was put to a vote of MPs, and MPs rejected that deal, including the withdrawal agreement, by 230 votes. The prime minister is absolutely committed to leaving the EU with a deal, but clearly if we are to obtain parliamentary support for that deal, some changes will have to be made.

But the spokesman would not be drawn on whether “some changes” meant the text of the withdrawal agreement itself would have to change (as Boris Johnson is demanding - see 9.59am), or whether some form of addendum (like Graham Brady’s codicil - see 9.59am) might do the trick.

I will post more from the briefing shortly.

Updated

My colleague Matthew d’Ancona has a good column today explaining why, as someone with centre-right politics, he can now no longer identify with the Conservative party. It is “morphing into something I find alien and repellent”, he says.

In an article for Prospect, the Conservative pro-European Dominic Grieve makes a similarish argument, in slightly more diplomatic terms. Here’s an excerpt.

So it is impossible to look at what we have done over Brexit without astonishment. In the three years since David Cameron started the 2016 referendum process, we have taken our country on a path of revolutionary upheaval ... It is small wonder that all this has produced both chaos and paralysis in government and parliament ...

Our ability as a party to get through this crisis will determine our future fortunes. As a Conservative MP it is my duty to listen to colleagues and to try and find a way through. But we will not find one unless we remember that, historically, the secret of our success as a party has been our ability to provide hope, confidence and leadership for a much wider group of electoral supporters than our membership. Streams of emails may only be the roughest of guides, but I am struck by the numbers who write to me who once gave us their support and now do not. Unless we reassure them of our ability to deliver the quiet stable government they desire, our relevance to promoting the wellbeing of our country must be in question.

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

Boris Johnson waters down full scale of his opposition to Brexit withdrawal agreement

It is also worth noting that, in his Telegraph column today (paywall), Boris Johnson strikes a rather different tone on Theresa May’s Brexit deal from the one he adopted when he resigned last summer.

Today he implies that, provided May is able to get rid of the backstop, he will enthusiastically back her plan. He says:

If we mean it, if we really try, I have no doubt that the EU will give us the freedom clause we need. So now is the time to stiffen the sinews and summon up the blood and get on that trusty BAE 146 and go back to Brussels and get it.

And if the PM secures that change – a proper UK-sized perforation in the fabric of the backstop itself - I have no doubt that she will have the whole country full-throatedly behind her.

But, when he resigned from cabinet last summer, in his resignation letter Johnson did not even mention the backstop. Instead, he condemned the whole thrust of May’s plan for a future UK-EU trade deal. He said:

The British government has spent decades arguing against this or that EU directive, on the grounds that it was too burdensome or ill-thought out. We are now in the ludicrous position of asserting that we must accept huge amounts of precisely such EU law, without changing an iota, because it is essential for our economic health - and when we no longer have any ability to influence these laws as they are made.

In that respect we are truly headed for the status of colony - and many will struggle to see the economic or political advantages of that particular arrangement.

To be fair, at that point there was no withdrawal agreement; Johnson was attacking the Chequers plan, which in some respects has been superseded by the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration. But, after the withdrawal agreement, Johnson continued to condemn it severely, and not just for its backstop plan. This is what he said in a Telegraph column (paywall) shortly before the vote on the plan earlier this month.

This deal would still make it impossible to do big free-trade deals – as the US ambassador has correctly pointed out. It would prevent us from engaging in the kind of regulatory divergence – control of our own laws – that people voted for.

And since not a dot or a comma of this deal has changed in the past month, it still means that we are set to hand over £39bn for nothing, and with no guarantees about our future relationship.

This deal is still the worst of both worlds, by which we somehow leave the EU but end up being run by the EU. It is still a complete stinker, and so no – I can’t tell exactly what will happen on Tuesday. But I cannot believe that it has much of a chance of getting past the House of Commons.

Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

It is worth pointing out that Sir Graham Brady and Boris Johnson, although both Brexiters and both demanding a replacement to the backstop, have set slightly different red lines.

On the BBC’s Westminster Hour last night Brady said that the demand set out in his amendment (see 9.22am) would not necessarily require the withdrawal agreement to be rewritten. He explained:

You wouldn’t have to open up the withdrawal agreement. You could do it through a legally binding codicil to the withdrawal agreement ...

I think the crucial thing is a legally binding change that makes it clear that the United Kingdom can never be trapped in the backstop in perpetuity.

But Johnson implies that a codicil, or some other form of legally-binding addendum to the withdrawal agreement, would not be enough. He says the withdrawal agreement would have to be re-opened, to allow the insertion of what he calls his “freedom clause”. (See 9.22am.) In his Telegraph column (paywall) he says:

If she can put in that freedom clause or clauses – and be in no doubt, this means reopening the text of the Treaty itself – then we have defused the booby-trap. We have opened a hole at the bottom of the lobster pot. We will have a way out, and we will be able to negotiate the next phase – the future partnership – without having our hands fettered by the EU, and do the Canada-style free trade deal that will maximise the long term opportunities of Brexit.

For the record, this is what Theresa May said in her statement to the Commons last Monday about her plans to get further assurances on the backstop.

With regard to the backstop, despite the changes we have previously agreed, there remain two core issues: the fear that we could be trapped in it permanently; and concerns over its potential impact on our Union if Northern Ireland is treated differently from the rest of the UK.

So I will be talking further this week to colleagues - including in the DUP – to consider how we might meet our obligations to the people of Northern Ireland and Ireland in a way that can command the greatest possible support in the House.

And I will then take the conclusions of those discussion back to the EU.

Theresa May will commit to insisting EU replace Brexit backstop, leading Tories suggest

Tomorrow there will be a debate in the Commons that may start to give the UK a Brexit policy - something that has been conspicuously absent since Theresa May’s plan was rejected by MPs earlier this month in the most crushing government defeat in UK politics in the democratic era. There is a guide to what is coming up here, and there is particularly interest in what is being referred to as the Graham Brady amendment, which says:

At end, add “and requires the Northern Ireland backstop to be replaced with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border; supports leaving the European Union with a deal and would therefore support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change.”.

(Technically it should be known as the Andrew Murrison amendment, because Murrison is the MP who tabled it, but he is primarily associated with another one. For the sake of simplicity, we’ll keep calling it Brady’s.)

Downing Street has not said yet how it will instruct government MPs to vote on this amendment. If Theresa May were to formally endorse it, that would amount to the government saying it now wants to replace the backstop that it signed up to only at the end of last year. But May has admitted that there will have to be changes to the backstop for the deal to pass parliament, and if the Brady amendment were pass with a majority, she would be able to go back to Brussels and explain that this was the change necessary to get the withdrawal agreement through parliament.

This morning Brady, who as chair of the Conservative 1922 committee serves as the shop steward for Tory backbenchers, said he thought the government would support his amendment. Asked if it has government backing, Brady, who voted leave in the referendum, told the Today programme:

I hope so ... I don’t know so. The amendment was born out of a number of conversations I had with colleagues including members of the government, including the prime minister.

I had also spoken to people in the DUP too and I’m hoping that the way in which the amendment is crafted can attract that very broad support and if we can win the vote on my amendment then I think it gives the prime minister enormous firepower.

And this morning Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, has used his Telegraph column (paywall) to say that May is also now committed to getting rid of the backstop. He said:

I have heard it from the lips of very senior sources in government – speaking with the authority, it is claimed, of the prime minister herself – that this country is about to seek proper binding legal change to the current lamentable withdrawal agreement.

The PM wants to get rid of the backstop; that is, she wants to change the text so as to insert either a sunset clause or a mechanism for the UK to escape without reference to the EU. She is going to fight for a freedom clause – right there in article 185 of the protocol or thereabouts – that would finally give us the keys to our own future. If she can change the backstop, then yes, we would be able to do free trade deals, and yes, we would be able to vary our regulation, and yes, the whole of the UK would be able to leave the EU – proud and intact – without leaving Northern Ireland a perpetual hostage.

Here is the agenda for the day.

11am: Downing Street lobby briefing.

4pm: Matt Hancock, the health secretary, gives evidence to the Commons health committee.

4pm: Sir Mark Sedwill, the national security adviser and cabinet secretary, gives evidence to the joint national security committee.

As usual, I will also be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web, but I expect to be focusing mostly on Brexit. I plan to post a summary at lunchtime and another when I finish, at around 6pm.

You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments BTL but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply ATL, although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.

Updated

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
Nearly half of Americans unaware of link between eating processed meat and colorectal cancer
Colorectal cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer deaths in the US
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
“A historically significant instrument directly tied to the evolution of modern funk”: The bass Bootsy Collins used to record a James Brown anthem has been listed on eBay
The Fender Jazz Bass bought at auction for $40,000, has now been listed on eBay for almost twice as much. But you’ll have to bid an extra $299 if you want the original strings
Guitar World
Guitar World
“When you've been in a band you’re always, in the back of your head, thinking, 'Well, maybe this is it.' And I don't mind that feeling. I don't see it as a sad thing”: Mike Patton on feeling closure at the end of Faith No More
Band haven’t played live since 2016
MusicRadar
MusicRadar
“He picks it up, hits the corner of a stone table and puts a huge ding in it”: When Jeff Beck damaged an impossibly rare vintage Stratocaster – while he and Dweezil Zappa were at a party dressed as knights
This Fender once belonged to Steve Marriott or something… But Beck? He wasn’t too fussed. People pay for these dings nowadays!
Guitar World
Guitar World
‘It’s Actually Really Sexy’: Amanda Seyfried Gushed About Kissing Megan Fox In Jennifer’s Body
What a cult classic.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Starlight warped in the fabric of spacetime could help us find hidden black holes dancing together
Flashes of gravitationally lensed starlight could act as cosmic lighthouses revealing the presence of binary supermassive black holes in close orbit.
Space
Space
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play