Summary
The final day the Commons sits before a Christmas or summer recess is always a busy day for political journalists, because of the large number of government announcements that come out, but even allowing for that today has been remarkable.
There have been 36 written statements (formal government news announcements) from ministers. There have been two much more important announcements, about local government spending and Lords reform, that were accompanied by oral statements to the Commons. An important government quango, the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, has published its annual report. And plenty more reports and documents have been issued too. According to the gov.uk website, government departments have put out 424 publications today - and the number still seems to be going up.
At Westminster it’s known as “burying bad news” or, after the same practice featured in an episode of West Wing, “taking out the trash” day. Government spin doctors know that if they release a vast amount of potentially embarrassing news on the same day, they will limit the negative publicity. In an ideal world the Number 10 communications chief would also arrange for someone like José Mourinho to get sacked, but there are limits to the powers of Craig Oliver and so it’s best to put that one down to luck.
Some of the information released today came under the heading of “transparency” and Matthew Hancock, the Cabinet Office minister, said in a statement that “enhancing transparency and accountability continues to be at the heart of our approach to government”. That is hard to square with an approach to news management that seems intended to minimise scrutiny. The prime minister’s spokesman said the government was having to put out so much news today because it had “a big agenda” , an equally tenuous claim.
Announcements are made on the day before recess because many ministerial declarations have to be made to parliament. Some of the items released today are genuinely awkward or embarrassing for ministers. But others are more innocuous, and they may have been held back not as part of a quasi cover-up, but simply as a result of inertia and Whitehall’s innate reluctance to publish almost anything.
We have not read all 424 documents out today. But here are 30 of the announcements that have come out that the government seem to want you to overlook.
1 - A local government spending settlement involving cuts worth billions.
4 - The list of government special advisers, and figures showing how much they are paid.
5- The list of ministerial interests.
6 - Information about David Cameron’s ministerial gifts, hospitality, travel and meetings.
7 - A list of receptions held at Downing Street.
8 - A list of government officials earning more than £150,000.
10 - A plan to curb the powers of the House of Lords that has been criticised by opposition parties and by constitutional reformers.
11 - Cuts to solar panel subsidies.
12 - Homelessness figures showing a 45% increase in the number of families living in emergency B&Bs.
13 - An official Department for Work and Pensions report on the bedroom tax saying that three-quarters of those affected have cut back on food and that the impact on downsizing has been limited.
15 - An air quality action plan that has been criticised as too lax by environmental campaigners.
16 - A report into failings at the Southern Health NHS foundation trust.
17 - A range of court fee increases.
18 - A statement saying 177 service personnel are embedded with other nations’ armed forces.
19 - Police funding figures for 2016-17.
20 - Charts setting out how much money is spent on ministerial cars.
21 - Suspension of a badger vaccination programme.
22 - The allocation of onshore gas and oil exploration licences that would pave the way for fracking.
23 - An evaluation of a pilot relating to the use of independent child trafficking advocates.
24 - Data about the number of quangos funded by the government.
25 - The government’s response to the Harris review on self-inflicted deaths in custody.
26 - A report on the needs of ex-service personnel in the criminal justice system.
27 - The government’s sports strategy.
28 - A long-term walking and cycling investment strategy.
29 - A consultation on reform on the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
30 - A list of guests who have visited Chequers.
That’s all from me for today - and for the rest of the year.
I hope you all have Happy Christmas (we’ve got to keep the PM happy) and a Happy New Year. Thank you for reading, and thank you for your comments, which contribute enormously to the quality of the blog.
And I look forward to engaging with you all again in 2016.
Updated
The special adviser figures published today (see 12.42pm) show that George Osborne has responded to his election victory by appointing three additional political aides - and giving the woman behind his new image a 42% pay increase, Bloomberg’s Rob Hutton reports.
The Department for Work and Pensions has published an evaluation of the bedroom tax (pdf) - or RSRS (the removal of the spare room subsidy), as it calls it in the report.
One of the aims of the bedroom tax was to encourage people in social accommodation with more rooms than they needed to downsize, freeing up space for larger families. But the report says this only happened to a limited extent. It says:
One of the aims of the RSRS was to increase mobility within the social housing sector leading to more effective use of the housing stock with households in more suitable sized accommodation, reducing waiting lists for social housing. Overall, the research estimated that around 24,000 RSRS-affected households had downsized within social housing by autumn 2013, rising to approximately 45,000 by autumn 2014 (with 471,887 households still being affected by the RSRS). Larger numbers were registered for moves than had managed to move by autumn 2014. Most claimants affected by the RSRS initially had said that they did not want to move and this remained the case in 2014. Reasons included proximity to family, schools, work and support services.
Commenting on it, Alison Garnham of the Child Poverty Action Group said:
The DWP’s own evaluation finds that the ‘bedroom tax’ is not only pushing families into hardship but it’s also failing to free up more accommodation for families, the key argument ministers used to justify this controversial policy. This is a long and deep look at a hugely controversial policy – it really should not have been released just as MPs rise for Christmas.
Few of those no longer affected by the bedroom cap cited moving to different accommodation as the reason why they were no longer affected. Only one in nine escaped the ‘bedroom tax’ by moving to a different property. The vast majority of those affected were still affected nine months later. Nearly half of the households who were no longer affected by the bedroom tax, had fallen out of its scope because of changes in the number and ages of people in the household and a fifth because of increased income.
For families with children, moving children out of their current school was the biggest barrier to moving.
That helps explain why so few of those currently affected are looking to move. The research shows what anyone working with families already knows: the bedroom tax is forcing people to cut back on the basics of living – food, clothing and footwear.
Tory lead over Labour falls 7 points, says ComRes
But, alongside Ipsos MORI (see 1.34pm), there is some good news for Labour. A ComRes poll for the Daily Mail gives the Tories a four-point lead over Labour, down seven points from the 11-point lead they had in November.
Reaction to the Strathclyde review
Here is some reaction to the Strathclyde plans to limit the powers of the House of Lords over secondary legislation. (See 11am.)
From Chris Bryant, the shadow leader of the Commons (speaking in the Commons chamber)
I’m afraid this has all the hallmarks of Government by fit of pique. You [Chris Grayling, the leader of the Commons] say this review was set up ‘after constitutional questions were raised about the primacy of this elected House of Commons’. What utter tosh. The only people who were raising constitutional questions were the prime minister and the chancellor and you, who were stamping their little feet because they hadn’t got their way. There were protests, oh yes there were, but they weren’t protests against the Lords, they were protesting against the Government’s miserly attempt to cut working tax credits.
From Tom Brake, the Lib Dem Cabinet Office spokesman
The Lib Dems have always called for reform of the House of Lords. We gave Cameron the chance to have an elected second chamber and the Tories threw it away. Now that decision has come back to bite him.
Today’s announcement is the Conservative Party at its worst. As soon as things don’t go their way they act like bullies and try to change the rules. This is another pathetic attempt by the Government to silence their critics.
From Katie Ghose, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society
Scrapping the Lords’ veto over secondary legislation was rarely mentioned before the Lords voted against the Government’s tax credits proposal in October, yet suddenly it is all the rage. We cannot make piecemeal changes to the Lords’ powers every time there is a disagreement between the two Houses.
If the Government accept the recommendations of Lord Strathclyde, they will be scrambling in response to the politics of the day, rather than implementing real, lasting and democratic changes.
From Professor Meg Russell, director of the Constitution Unit
The Strathclyde report sets out ambitious proposals to reduce the House of Lords’ powers. This would be the first such reduction since 1949, and Strathclyde’s preferred option can only be achieved through legislation – which the House of Lords itself will be reluctant to agree. But peers want change too. There is widespread concern inside the Lords about the chamber’s growing size, caused by excessive prime ministerial appointments. There may hence now be a deal to be struck.
The opposition holds the key to what happens on the Strathclyde proposals. The government holds the key on appointments to the Lords. A bill to implement a cut in powers could have a very rough ride through parliament, with significant disruption to the government’s programme. But if a deal could be struck with the opposition on a fair appointments formula, the Lords would get something it wants in return. A package comprising regulated appointments plus an agreed reduction in powers could be both attractive and very sensible, bringing an end to two long-running and bitter controversies at once.
From Alexandra Runswick, director of Unlock Democracy
This review of the Lords is a blatant power grab by David Cameron. It will hand power to the government, not the House of Commons and certainly not to voters. The government should not be able to rush through major changes to the law without proper scrutiny.
The only way to fix the Lords is to elect it. The Lords does important work improving legislation but it is held back by its undemocratic, unaccountable nature. The real solution to unchecked government power is a second chamber elected using a fairer voting system. An elected Lords would have a clear mandate to hold the government to account.
Matteo Renzi, the Italian prime minister, has told Sky News in Brussels that a deal over the EU renegotiation could take “months”.
If by “months” he means two months, that would be no great surprise. Downing Street is assuming that it will be able to clinch a deal at the EU summit planned for February. But if Renzi means more than two months, then the Number 10 timetable would have to slip.
Exclusive @SkyNews iv with Italian PM @matteorenzi coming up NOW on @skynews... Praises @david_cameron but says EU deal will take "months":
— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) December 17, 2015
Reaction to the local government settlement
Here is some reaction to the local government settlement. (See 12.37pm.)
From Jon Trickett, the shadow communities secretary
The message of this settlement is the same as every other one under the Tories: cuts, cuts and more cuts.
This settlement reduces the central government grant to local government by more than half and doesn’t acknowledge the additional spending pressures on Local government finances which amount to double the total amount Local Government is to receive from Whitehall.
These cuts are a political choice and not an economic necessity. The House of Commons Library have calculated that if the central government grant was maintained at the same level throughout this parliament the government would still be running a surplus of £4bn in 2019/2020. Therefore there is no fiscal need for these cuts.
Also, local authorities in deprived areas have seen cuts of £220 per head, compared to £40 per head in more affluent areas. It is clear that the Tory’s ideology is to hit the worse off hardest.
From Simon Parker, director of the New Local Government Network
This settlement offers local government jam tomorrow, when the crisis is today. The pain is spelled out in black and white, while the gains are based on long term estimates and heroic assumptions.
Greg Clark’s devolution agenda is genuinely radical, and the offer of four year budgets is very welcome. But if devolution is going to work, then we need genuine fiscal devolution that gives councils full control of their local taxes, rather than ring fenced and regulated pots of money.
Ministers must do more to address the social care crisis. An additional £3.5 billion in funding is a good start, but the full amount will not be available for years, and will only ever be realised if councils are prepared to raise taxes at a level far higher than in the recent past.
David Cameron has arrived in Brussels for the EU summit.
He claimed he would be “battling hard for Britain right through the night” (which is a bit odd because no one is expecting the talks to go on all night - it’s just a dinner).
He also indicated that he was not expecting a full deal to be agreed tonight. Instead he was just “pushing for real momentum”, he said. (Perhaps Corbynism is catching.)
Cameron said:
Tonight here in Brussels, we are going to have a conversation dedicated to Britain’s renegotiation of its position in Europe, and I want to see real progress on all the four areas I have mentioned.
We are not pushing for a deal but we are pushing for real momentum. I am going to be battling hard for Britain right through the night. I think we will be getting a good deal.
The Home Office has published a review saying the government should scrap tied visas for domestic workers coming to the UK - the rule that says visas are issued on condition that people work for a specific employer. Since this regime was introduced in 2012, there have been complaints that it effectively licences “modern slavery”. But the government has resisted calls for the rule to be abolished.
The report (pdf), by James Ewins, says:
On the balance of the evidence currently available, this review finds that the existence of a tie to a specific employer and the absence of a universal right to change employer and apply for extensions of the visa are incompatible with the reasonable protection of overseas domestic workers while in the UK.
Lord Bates, a Home Office minister, said in a written ministerial statement that the government would consider the recommendations “carefully” and respond in due course.
Corbyn's approval rating fell sharply in November, says Ipsos MORI
Ipsos MORI has published its political monitor for December.
It found that only 9% of people think air strikes against Islamic State (Isis) in Syria will make Britain safer.
The figures also suggest that the last month has not been good for Jeremy Corbyn’s reputation, because his approval ratings are falling.
Ipsos MORI’s long-term satisfaction ratings with the leaders show little change for David Cameron, but a fall for Jeremy Corbyn (both receive negative net ratings overall). Four in ten (41%) say they are satisfied with David Cameron’s job as prime minister (up one point) and 55% are dissatisfied (no change). One in three (33%) are satisfied with how Jeremy Corbyn is doing his job as Labour leader (down four points) and 50% are dissatisfied (down ten points). Amongst their party supporters David Cameron performs better than Jeremy Corbyn with 81% of Conservatives satisfied with his performance while 56% of Labour supporters are satisfied with Mr Corbyn.
This is not worded very clearly, because Corbyn’s 50% dissatisfaction rating is down 10 points in the sense that it was at 40% last month, not in the sense that it was 60% last month.
Another way of looking at it would be to say that Cameron’s net rating was -15 in November, and has now gone up to -14. Corbyn’s was -3 in November, and has fallen to -17.
Homelessness is rising, Labour says. The party has highlighted figures showing that 55,710 household were accepted as homeless in the third quarter of 2015, up 4% on the same quarter in 2014. Over the last five years statutory homelessness has risen 36%, Labour says. John Healey, the shadow housing minister, says ministers should be “ashamed”.
Dave Prentis has been re-elected as Unison general secretary, the union announced today. He beat three other candidates, getting 66,155 votes (49% of the total), with Heather Wakefield on 26% his closest rival.
Truss publishes air quality strategy
Liz Truss, the environment secretary, has also published an air quality strategy. In a written ministerial statement, she says that “clean air zones” will be introduced in five cities.
In order to bring the UK into legal compliance and to reduce concentrations of nitrogen dioxide below 40 µg/m3 Clean Air Zones will be introduced in five cities. These Zones will reduce the pollution in city centres and encourage the replacement of old, polluting vehicles with modern, cleaner vehicles. Similar zones in Germany and Denmark have been shown to improve air quality.
These Zones will target air quality hot spots. Following scoping studies, which Government will provide funding for, Councils will consult on the details on these Zones.
In Birmingham, Leeds, Southampton, Nottingham and Derby, these Zones will cover old diesel buses, coaches, taxis and lorries. Newer vehicles that meet the latest emissions standards will not need to pay and, under this Plan, no private car will have to pay. The local authorities will have to set charges at levels designed to reduce pollution, not to raise revenue (beyond recovering the costs of the scheme).
No 10 has also published its list of all senior government and quango officials earning more than £15,000 a year (pdf).
No 10 publishes list of special advisers
Downing Street has published the list of government special advisers (pdf). It includes the pay of those above a certain grade.
Overall the pay bill for special advisers in 2015-16 is £8.4m. Downing Street says it was £9.2m in 2014-15, but that figure included Lib Dem special advisers. Now, for obvious reasons, they are all Tories.
Clark offers councils a four-year spending settlement
Greg Clark, the communities secretary, has announced the local government spending settlement this afternoon.
Here are the key points.
- Councils have been given a four-year settlement for the first time. Clark said this would give them “financial certainty” up to 2020, when councils will get 100% control over business rates.
- An extra £3.5bn will be available for social care. Up to £2bn will come from the 2% precept on council tax bills, and another £1.5bn will be available to help councils work with the NHS to ensure that care is available for older people coming out of hospital.
Clarke said:
This is an historic settlement for local government. It makes local councils fully responsible to local people for their financing – rather than central government – something that local government has been campaigning for over a number of decades. In doing so it protects the resources available to councils over the next 4 years, puts more money into the agreed priority of caring for elderly people, and offers councils the certainty of a 4-year budget.
Updated
Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, has also been speaking to reporters in Brussels. He sounded hopeful of a compromise deal over the EU renegotiation - but less optimistic that Jean-Claude Juncker. (See 11.26am.) Tusk said:
The consultations I have led with all member states shows goodwill of all the parties involved, but it doesn’t change the fact that some parts of the British proposal [ie, Cameron’s call for a four-year ban on EU migrants claiming in-work benefits in the UK] seem unacceptable.
However, if prime minister Cameron persuades leaders tonight that we can work together to find solutions regarding all four baskets then we will have a real chance to strike a deal in February.
Earlier this week my colleague Robert Booth revealed that the Prince of Wales gets to see all cabinet papers. He found this out after winning a long Freedom of Information battle to get hold of the Cabinet Office’s “precedent book”.
Here he has written up some of the other items in the 200-page document.
The government has suspended the badger vaccination programme it has been carrying out as part of its programme to combat bovine TB, Liz Truss, the environment secretary, says in a written ministerial statement. She says that’s because there is a global shortage of the vaccine.
You can find links to all the written ministerial statements coming out today here.
Report finds no evidence to justify banning Muslim Brotherhood, No 10 says
David Cameron has published the conclusions from the government’s review of the Muslim Brotherhood in a written ministerial statement.
The review concluded that some of the Muslim Brotherhood’s members “have a highly ambiguous relationship with violent extremism” but that there was not enough evidence to justify the organisation being banned.
Cameron said the government would continue to keep it under review, and to refuse to issue visas to Muslim Brotherhood members or associates “who are on record as having made extremist comments”. He said:
Muslim Brotherhood–associated and influenced groups in the UK have at times had a significant influence on national organisations which have claimed to represent Muslim communities (and on that basis have had a dialogue with Government), charities and some mosques. But they have also sometimes characterised the UK as fundamentally hostile to Muslim faith and identity; and expressed support for terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas.
Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities therefore run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. The Muslim Brotherhood is not the only movement that promotes values which appear intolerant of equality and freedom of faith and belief. Nor is it the only movement or group dedicated in theory to revolutionising societies and changing existing ways of life. But I have made clear this government’s determination to reject intolerance, and to counter not just violent Islamist extremism, but also to tackle those who create the conditions for it to flourish.
The main findings of the Review support the conclusion that membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism.
We will therefore keep under review the views that are promoted and activities that are undertaken by Muslim Brotherhood associates in the UK, in Arabic as well as English.
Last month Paddy Ashdown claimed that Cameron only set up the Muslim Brotherhood review to appease Saudi Arabia and that, even though the original draft was finished last year, publication was delayed because the review did not conclude it was a terrorist group.
Juncker says he is 'convinced' there will be compromise deal over UK's EU renegotiation demands
The Press Association has filed more from what Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, told reporters this morning. Juncker said that he was “convinced” that there would be a compromise deal over David Cameron’s EU renegotiation demands. He said:
We will enter the concrete and vital phase of negotiations with our British colleagues, the commission is ready to look for other options to the single one proposed by the British prime minister [in relation to benefits] and I am quite convinced that we will find an answer to that highly complicated question.
We want a fair deal with Britain and this fair deal with Britain has to be a fair deal with the other 27 too, so we are open-minded. We are engaging in this dialogue which will be a negotiation with Britain in an open-minded way.
I don’t want the British to leave and I don’t want to blame the British - they have their points, we have our points and as reasonable people we will find a way out of the complicated situation we are in.
The government has now published Lord Strathclyde’s review proposing curbing the power of the Lords over secondary legislation. It does not seem to be available online yet, but the key recommendation is the one briefed overnight - a new law saying the Lords should only have the right to reject secondary legislation once, and that if the Commons passes the measure a second time, it should go through.
In his report Strathclyde says he considered two other options: using standing orders to change the rules, not primary legislation; and taking away the power of the Lords to consider secondary legislation altogether.
He explains why he opted for the third option- limiting the power of the Lords by statute.
I recommend the third option of creating a new process, set out in statute, for the Lords to ask the Commons to think again about a statutory instrument. This would provide the government of the day with a degree of certainty, while maintaining for the House of Lords a simplicity of procedure in keeping with already established procedures for other forms of legislation. It would preserve and enhance the role of the House of Lords to scrutinise secondary legislation by providing for such legislation to be returned to the Commons. In the event of a further Commons vote to approve a statutory instrument, it would enable the Commons to play a decisive role.
I also recommend that a review should be undertaken, with the involvement of the House of Commons procedure committee, of the circumstances in which statutory instrument powers should be subject to Commons-only procedures, especially on financial matters, with a view to establishing principles that can be applied in future.
Finally, in order to mitigate against excessive use of the new process which I have proposed under option 3, I believe it would be appropriate for the government to take steps to ensure that bills contain an appropriate level of detail and that too much is not left for implementation by statutory instrument.
In a written ministerial statement with the wonderfully euphemistic “Publication of renewable energy cost control measures”, Amber Rudd, the energy secretary, has confirmed details of her plans to cut subsidies for people fitting solar panels.
The Ministry of Justice has published its response to the report from the Harris review on self-inflicted deaths in custody. Here is the MoJ response (pdf).
In the response, Michael Gove, the justice secretary, says the government must do more to tackle this problem.
There remain too many instances where individuals have, sadly, taken their own lives. Between April 2007 and December 2013, there were 83 self-inflicted deaths amongst 18-24 year olds in prison custody. Over the last two years, the total number of self-inflicted deaths across all age groups has increased. We must do more to reverse this trend.
One solution will be to give governors more autonomy, he says.
We believe that those who work with offenders on a daily basis are best placed to decide how to rehabilitate them most effectively. As such, Prison Governors need more autonomy and the freedom to innovate and find better ways of rehabilitating offenders. The principles of ensuring prisoners can maintain strong family ties, participate in work and education, and look to the future with ambition whilst giving more freedom to governors are at the heart of the work that is currently underway to reform the prison system. We will set out these bold reform proposals for prisons in the New Year.
Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, has told reporters this morning that he expects a “frank and open debate” at the EU summit.
Commission president @JunckerEU "As for as so-called brexit we will have a frank and open debate for first time"
— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) December 17, 2015
& @JunckerEU "We want a fair deal with Britain and it has to be a fair deal for the other 27 too"
— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) December 17, 2015
He also confirmed that the EU would not accept David Cameron’s proposal for the UK to be allowed to stop EU migrants claiming benefits for four years.
Asked Juncker if Cam has any chance of getting 4yr ban. He said: 'Commission is ready to look for other options than the one proposed by PM'
— John Stevens (@johnestevens) December 17, 2015
This is the last day I will be writing the blog this year.
Next week I will put up a readers’ edition blog on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. But then I am proposing to leave it until Monday 4 January, when I will be back writing my normal blog, on the grounds that all sensible people need a break from politics between Christmas and the New Year. But if there is very, very strong demand for a readers’ edition that week, I could reconsider. Let me know what you think BTL. For anyone desperate for a politics fix, I presume my friends at flythenest will be in action.
Lord Ashcroft, the former Conservative deputy chairman, is back in action on the polling front. He has just published a 48-page report on attitudes to the EU referendum, based on the findings of a poll of 20,000 people and 12 focus groups. We already know quite a lot about headline attitudes to the EU, but this research is revealing because it explores public thinking in considerable depth.
Here is the full report (pdf) and here is Ashcroft’s summary.
And here are some of the key findings.
- There are considerably more people who are minded to vote Out than who are minded to vote In. One paper this morning says the poll shows 47% want to leave and 38% want to remain, but it is not quite as simple as that.
Rather than replicate the referendum question itself we asked people to place themselves on a scale between zero, meaning they would definitely vote for the UK to remain in the EU, to 100, meaning they would definitely vote to leave. Just under four in ten (38 per cent) put themselves between zero and 49, showing they were inclined to remain, and nearly half (47 per cent) gave themselves a score between 51 and 100; 14 per cent placed themselves at 50, meaning they were completely undecided.
- Those inclined to vote Out are more likely to vote.
Those leaning towards leaving (51-100) gave themselves a slightly greater likelihood of turning out to vote (8.02 out of 10) than those leaning towards staying (7.39 out of 10).
- But many people say they are willing to change their mind.
Many of those opinions were held only lightly. Around two fifths of the population put themselves firmly at one end of the spectrum or another, between zero and nine or between 91 and 100. On both halves of the scale, a quarter of voters said they did not have a strong view and could easily be persuaded to change their minds.
- Those who think leaving the EU poses the greater risk only narrowly outnumber those who think staying poses the greater risk.
People were quite evenly divided over whether the biggest risk lay with leaving the EU (53%) or remaining a member (47%). Those who were completely undecided on how to vote in the referendum said leaving was the bigger risk, by 61% to 39%.
This should be worrying for the Remain camp, because it has been assumed that people will see the risks associated with leaving as much greater (although they will be relieved that undecideds seem to take this view).
Which is the bigger risk for Britain - staying in the EU, or leaving? pic.twitter.com/510Dhw862S
— Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft) December 17, 2015
- Many people do not accept the argument that leaving the EU would enable the UK to control immigration.
While 39% thought “we’ll never be able to bring immigration under control unless we leave the EU”, a further 37% thought “we won’t be able to bring immigration under control even if we leave the EU”.
This should be worrying for the Leave camp, because many of them think enabling the UK to control immigration is the best argument for Brexit.
Would leaving the EU mean we would bring immigration under control? pic.twitter.com/312fRnvGr6
— Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft) December 17, 2015
We’re also getting an oral statement in the Commons on the Strathclyde review, presumably from Chris Grayling, leader of the Commons.
Statements in the Commons today: 1. Business Statement 2. Local government finance 3. Strathclyde Review. Confirmation on UQs to follow.
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) December 17, 2015
It is going to be rather a hectic day, with the politics news hose spraying at full blast. We’ll be looking at a wide range of stories, and focusing on the most interesting.
David Cameron is heading for Brussels for a summit where he is going to discuss his EU renegotiation demands with fellow EU leaders. The key debate takes place tonight, over dinner, and it will be outside my time. But this morning Herman Van Rompuy, the former president of the European Council, told the Today programme that he thought it would be possible to find a “compromise” over Cameron’s demand for the power to stop EU migrants in the UK claiming in-work benefits for four years - a proposal opposed by almost everyone else in Europe. Van Rompuy said:
I think now we need a lot of creativity to tackle the problem posed by Britain and, at the same time, not crossing those red lines of non-discrimination ... I think there are possibilities. I’m not entering into details, but I think within the constraints and given the problem posed by Britain, a compromise is possible – that’s also the opinion of the German chancellor. I fully agree with her.
I will the latest developments as the summit gets underway.
In the Commons there is an announcement about local government spending, and the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission is publishing its annual report. And we are getting Lord Strathclyde’s report on how the powers of the House of Lords over second legislation should be limited.
And its the last day the Commons is sitting before the Christmas recess. This is always a day when the government slips out a lot of announcements that it has been holding back, and today there are 36 written ministerial statements, according to the Commons order paper (pdf). Some of them, including the publication of the report into the Muslim Brotherhood, are likely to be very newsworthy in their own right.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10.30am: The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission publishes its annual report.
10.30am: Greg Clark, the communities secretary, announces the local government spending settlement.
Around 2pm: David Cameron arrrives in Brussels for the EU summit.
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 will post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on@AndrewSparrow.
Updated
