Afternoon summary
- Robin Walker, a Brexit minister, has hinted that the government may publish its 58 Brexit sectoral impact assessments in summary or redacted form. (See 5.06pm.) He floated the idea as he announced that the government will not vote against a Labour motion calling for the documents to be given to the Commons Brexit committee with a view to publication. (See 4.22pm.) The Labour motion invokes an arcane parliamentary procedure and, in a blow to the government, which routinely ignores straightforward opposition day motions when they are passed by the Commons on the grounds that they are not binding, the deputy speaker Eleanor Laing told MPs that motions like the “humble address” one being used by Labour today normally are seen as binding. (See 5.20pm.)
- Liam Fox has defended the controversial practice of disinfecting chicken with chlorine, reopening a cabinet rift over whether post-Brexit food standards should be lowered to facilitate a trade deal with the US. This afternoon, in evidence to the Commons environmental audit committee, Michael Gove, the environment secretary, hit back, defending the government’s decision to rule out a UK-US trade deal that would force the UK to accept American chlorinated chicken. Gove said he accepted that it did not pose a health risk to humans. But he went on:
Some confusion sometimes arises in the minds of some as to why it is that there is currently a restriction on the importing of chlorinated chicken. It is not because there is a public health problem in eating chicken that has been chlorine-washed - it is safe for human consumption. The issue is an animal welfare issue ...
It has been the case in cabinet and cabinet sub committees that we have agreed collectively that there should be no diminution in environment or animal welfare standards in pursuit of trade deals.
That’s all from me for today.
Hopefully tomorrow we will be able to reopen comments.
What the deputy speaker said about motions of this kind normally being seen as binding
And here is the full quote from Eleanor Laing, the deputy speaker, when she said that in the past a motion of this kind was seen as binding. (See 4.47pm.) She said:
A motion of this kind has in the past been seen as effective or binding. That does not mean that I am making a ruling at this point about the nature of the motion before us today. I will reiterate that what I said before, that while it is correct for the chair to make a ruling on what happens here in the chamber, it is for the government to decide how the government will proceed having considered the opinions of the House.
It would of course be quite wrong for the government not to pay any attention to a decision taken by this House. But the way in which the minister interprets what he and his colleagues should do after the House has expressed an opinion is a matter not for the chair, but for the minister.
Here is the extract from Erskine May that Jacob Rees-Mogg quoted earlier, in the intervention that made him an unlikely hero for remainers. (See 4.54m.)
For those who do not have their copy of Erskine May on them, page 819 @Jacob_Rees_Mogg referenced re: binding vote on Impact Assessments pic.twitter.com/560WGvmn7u
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) November 1, 2017
This is from James Chalmers, a law professor.
Game-changer as Remainers discover Rees Mogg can be weaponised by invoking 19th century procedure. https://t.co/95ExORvKEU
— James Chalmers (@ProfChalmers) November 1, 2017
Walker suggests Brexit impact reports could be published in summary or redacted form
Here is the key quote from Robin Walker, the Brexit minister, where he suggested that the Brexit impact assessment reports could be published in summary, or in redacted form, if the Labour motion is published. (See 4.38pm.) He told MPs:
If this motion were to pass, we would need to reflect on these various constraints and conflicting responsibilities [ie, the need not to release information that might undermine the government’s negotiating position] when it comes to passing information to the committee for exiting the European Union. And I take note of the points [Keir Stamer] made about looking at redaction and summary as an approach. And I think, given the generosity of the approach that he has taken in that regard, we will not be opposing this motion today.
Updated
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative MP and an arch Brexiter, stands to make another point of order. He says on page 818 Erskine May, the Commons procedural bible, says that in a recent case in Canada, after the Canadian parliament passed a motion of this kind, it was ruled that ignoring the motion was a contempt of parliament.
- Rees-Mogg suggests that government should publish Brexit impact assessments if Labour motion is passed.
Laing says privilege is “a grey area” and that these matters are “not black and white”.
Iain Duncan Smith, another Conservative Brexiter, says in the Canadian case there was a contempt of parliament because the government ignored the motion. He says in this case the government has not said it will ignore the motion; it has said it will respond in some form.
Laing says that confirms her point about this being a grey area.
Deputy speaker says in the past motions of this kind have been seen as binding.
Ben Bradshaw, the Labour MP, raises another point of order. He asks Eleanor Laing if she has had fresh guidance as to whether the motion is binding.
Laing says in the past a motion of this kind has been seen as binding.
But that does not mean she is making a ruling on this particular motion, she says.
It is for the chair to rule on what happens to a motion in this House. But it is for the government to decide how it responds to a motion passed by the Commons, she says.
- Deputy speaker Eleanor Laing says in the past motions of this kind have been seen as binding.
Walker refuses to say if government views motion as binding
The Tory MP Anna Soubry asks Robin Walker what will happen if the Labour motion is passed.
Walker says the government pays careful attention to the views of the House. It will “respond appropriately”.
Sir Keir Starmer asks Walker if he views the motion as “binding”.
Walker sidesteps the question. He says it is not his job to interpret what the motion means. That is a matter for the House.
An MP raises a point of order, and asks the deputy speaker, Eleanor Laing, if the motion is binding. Laing says she cannot give an answer to that.
Labour motion calling for Brexit impact assessments to be published set to pass as government says it will not vote against
David Davis, the Brexit secretary, is not in the Commons to respond to the debate. Robin Walker, a junior Brexit minister, is responding.
He says the government is committed to keeping parliament informed. But it is also committed to acting in the national interest.
He says the procedure being used by Labour (see 4.22pm) has not generally been used in parliament for these purposes since the 19th century.
Ministers have a duty not to disclose interest when it would not be in the public interest. In this case, the public interest is the same as the national interest, he says. He says if this advice were published, it would undermine the UK’s position in the Brexit negotiations.
He says the government will consider Starmer’s request for a summary of this information to be published.
In the light of that, the government will not be voting against the Labour motion, he says.
- Ministers will consider publishing summary of Brexit impact assessments, says Robin Walker, a Brexit minister.
- Labour motion calling for Brexit impact assessments to be published set to pass as government says it will not vote against.
Starmer says, as someone who wants to catapult the Commons into the 21st century, the wording of today’s motion (see 4.22pm) is odd.
But this is the procedure for getting papers published, he says.
He says Labour thinks this motion will be binding on the government.
The motion does not require the blanket publication of these assessments, he says. It requires the papers to go to the Brexit select committee. That committee could then decide what got published and what did not get published. It is a trusted committee, with a government majority, he says.
He says Labour is open to hearing from the government if it can propose other mechanisms for publishing this information.
Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, says it is very unusual for a government to decide that something is so sensitive that nothing from it can be published.
He asks why the government cannot publish a summary of the information in these Brexit sectoral impact assessments, if it cannot publish them in full.
MPs debate Labour call for Brexit sectoral impact assessments to be published
The Labour motion calling for the publication of the sectoral Brexit impact assessments is not a straightforward one. Labour are using a relatively arcane procedure, calling for a humble address.
Here is the wording of the motion.
That an humble address be presented to Her Majesty, that she will be graciously pleased to give directions that the list of sectors analysed under the instruction of Her Majesty’s ministers, and referred to in the answer of 26 June 2017 to question 239, be laid before this House and that the impact assessments arising from those analyses be provided to the committee on exiting the European Union.
Labour claims that, if this is passed, it will be binding - unlike normal opposition day motions.
Today @UKLabour will use an ancient procedure, a “Motion for Unopposed Returns” via a “humble address”, to instruct impact studies published pic.twitter.com/VeXG3LuuQQ
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) November 1, 2017
By strange coincidence the Govt will use the same ancient procedure today to publish a report, proving our point that they are binding pic.twitter.com/XixL3MCVZm
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) November 1, 2017
The Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston is backing Labour on this issue.
At lunchtime Number 10 sources refused to say whether they would regard a vote in favour of the Labour motion as binding, or how the government would vote on this matter. A source said:
The undertaking that we’ve given is that we will respond to votes passed on opposition motions within three months regardless of the nature of the vote. I don’t think we’ve committed to specific action.
Updated
Commons backs Labour motion saying public sector pay cap should be lifted for armed forces
The Labour motion saying members of the armed forces should get a “fair pay rise” has been approved by MPs without opposition.
House of Commons carries @UKLabour motion on Armed Forces pay unanimously pic.twitter.com/9II5T4Mjwl
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) November 1, 2017
MPs have now started debating the Labour motion saying the government should publish its 58 sectoral Brexit impact assessments. Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is leading for Labour.
Here are some of the main points from Boris Johnson’s evidence to the foreign affairs committee.
- Johnson, the foreign secretary, said that Britain is recruiting 50 more diplomats to “beef up” the country’s bilateral influence in the European Union after Brexit. This will cost around £8m, he said. He told MPs:
We tended to put all our eggs in the Brussels basket and we tended to think that a lot of bilateral diplomacy, particularly with very, very important partners such as France and Germany, could be conducted through that prism and through that optic ...
[Having more European diplomats] will give us the presence and the throw-weight that we need in those other European capitals, particularly ones that have felt a bit neglected over the last few decades.
- He said the UK could not start formal negotiations for trade deals with other countries until Brexit. But after March 2019 formal negotiations could start, he said.
What we can do is look at it in principle, look at the opportunities, we can scope it out. We can pencil it in but we cannot ink it in. We can get them ready, we can pre-cook them, we can think about them in great detail licking our lips.
- He insisted America was committed to a free trade deal with the UK.
Anybody with any experience of dealing with the US will tell you they will try to be very tough but I haven’t met a single US congressman, senator, who wasn’t very enthusiastic about a free trade deal.
Overall, though, it was not a very revealing session. This is from Sky’s Tom Boadle.
Boris tells Foreign Affairs Cttee they "couldn't possibly be misled by anything I've said, since I haven't said anything..." *cue laughter
— Tom Boadle (@TomBoadle) November 1, 2017
May proposes getting independent body to investigate allegations of mistreatment of Commons staff
Downing Street has now released the text of the letter that Theresa May has sent to the leaders of the other political parties represented at Westminster inviting them to a meeting on Monday to discuss a new Commons procedure for dealing with sexual misconduct allegations. May announced the initiative at PMQs.
On Monday, in her own statement to MPs, Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, announced plans for a beefed-up Commons helpline to deal with complaints of this kind.
In her letter May largely repeats the proposals set out by Leadsom. But in two respects she goes beyond what Leadsom was saying two days ago.
First, May proposes having an “independent body” to investigate complaints. Leadsom said the beefed-up helpline should include a support team that could refer complaints onwards for investigation. But her statement did not say who the investigating body would be. May says the support team should be able to refer any case “to an independent body - to ensure appropriate investigation and action takes place”.
Second, May says there should be a “common, transparent, independent grievance procedure for all those working in parliament”. Unlike Leadsom, she argues that it would be a mistake to leave this up to the political parties. She says:
While there is undoubtedly a role for individual political parties to play, it cannot be right when dealing with serious issues such as these that vulnerable or concerned people are expected to navigate different grievance procedures according to political party. Neither can it be right that such difficult issues themselves are dealt with on a party political basis; and that no support is provided for those with no political party or party affiliation.
That is why there has to be a common, independent grievance procedure, she argues.
(One problem May could face is that the Commons already has a parliamentary commissioner for standards who investigates misconduct allegations about MPs. As my colleague Rowena Mason’s story about the Westminster staffer attacked by an MP on a trip abroad reveals, there are some complaints the commissioner will not investigate because they are out of her remit. But setting up a new body may create a potential for overlap.)
The meeting May is convening with other party leaders is scheduled for 5.15pm on Monday next week.
Rory Stewart says sex misconduct spreadsheet claims about him are ' completely untrue' and 'deeply hurtful'
Rory Stewart, the Foreign Office minister, is another Tory named on the sex misconduct spreadsheet. Referring to him, it says: “Asked female researcher to do odd things (Sophie Bolsover).”
On Twitter Stewart has described this as “completely untrue” and “deeply hurtful”.
This story is completely untrue + deeply hurtful. Neither of us have any idea how our names appeared on the list. See @sophiebolsover below https://t.co/UCo1PgwCMo
— Rory Stewart (@RoryStewartUK) November 1, 2017
He also retweeted a tweet from Sophie Bolsover also denying the claims strongly.
All that I am going to say on the matter: pic.twitter.com/1c3LnJUGF9
— Sophie Bolsover (@SophieBolsover) November 1, 2017
This is from the Daily Express’s Nick Gutteridge.
Interesting report in German media today: Berlin wants £44bn Brexit bill offer to trigger trade talks. But it's prepared to drop demands UK covers cost of relocating agencies and future liabilities on bad ECB loans. https://t.co/LSMpGfuf57
— Nick Gutteridge (@nick_gutteridge) November 1, 2017
In evidence to the Lords constitution committee this morning Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, the former president of the supreme court, said the courts will face a “difficult” time after Brexit because of uncertainty about much EU legal principles will still apply.
Under the government’s plan the European court of justice will no longer have jurisdiction, but British courts will still in some circumstances be expected to take account of its rulings.
Neuberger also said judges would pushed further into a policymaking role after Brexit if parliament did not give clearer instructions on how it wanted them to proceed.
Asked if the EU withdrawal bill provided clarity on this, he replied:
It isn’t possible to produce a bill that’s going to be completely satisfactory. It may in theory be possible, but there are so many potential pitfalls.
And I suspect that politically, a) there is not the time, and b) there are certain areas where one may say ‘yes, we should spell it out, but the expenditure of political capital to do it is too great’, meaning that we are never going to have a particularly satisfactory statute on this.
Time, political reality, the nature of the beast with its great complications and the fact that you are never going to find a perfect answer to some of the problems we have been discussing - all of that means that we are going to be cast into waters which are both unpredictable and choppy.
And recent experience suggests that it’s quite difficult to predict what’s going to happen.
So, I think we are in for, and the courts in particular, are in for, a difficult time. All that one can say and ask as a former judge is that the legislation is made as clear as possible ...
The more that the legislature leaves it to the judges to make policy decisions, the more we are pushing the judges into making policy decisions. And, as it were, if that is not too grand a word, psychologically making them think that they have more and more a policy role.
In the committee Boris Johnson is being asked if he wants the UK to have “observer status” on the EU’s political and security committee (PSC) after Brexit.
Johnson dodges the question. The key point is that the UK wants to come up with a mechanism that allows it to show its “unconditional support” for European security, he says. Exactly how it happens is a matter for discussion, he says.
At the foreign affairs committee Boris Johnson said the government has not yet decided whether it wants the UK to sit on the EU’s security committee after Brexit.
He then got into an elaborate metaphor.
Boris says he wants the UK to be a "flying buttress to the EU kirk" but he is "not too fussed about how the masonry interlocks"
— John Ashmore (@smashmorePH) November 1, 2017
That prompted the Labour MP Chris Bryant to point out that the flying buttress is part of the church.
Labour suggests Cabinet Office inquiry into Damian Green may not be robust enough
Labour has suggested that the Cabinet Office inquiry into Damian Green ordered by the prime minister may not be sufficiently robust.
Asked about the investigation into the allegations about Green, a spokesman for Jeremy Corbyn said:
I think it’s clear that the processes need to be robust and independent and effective. And that needs to apply at all levels of parliament.
He said the party had some concerns about Green – who is, among other roles , the minister for the Cabinet Office – being investigated by the cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood. The spokesman said:
I think there’s clear questions about that, about whether that’s an effective procedure to deal with these allegations in this case.
The spokesman said the Labour investigation into the allegations by Bex Bailey that she was advised by a party officials to not report a rape to police, would be looked into by someone outside Labour. He said:
I think they key point is you can’t have your own staff looking into allegations about your own staff on something like that. And so it will be someone outside the Labour party, an expert in investigating these kind of allegations. That will be done as quickly as possible.
Updated
Bex Bailey, the Labour former NEC member who yesterday revealed how she had been raped at a party event six years ago and discouraged from reporting it, has posted a message on Twitter thanking those who have offered their support.
Thank you for all the support. I spoke out in hope that policy, process & culture will change. Independent agency to report to is vital.
— Bex Bailey (@bexbailey) November 1, 2017
Can Switzerland or Norway border model be a solution in Northern Ireland, post Brexit?
Border controls are hugely expensive and cost a country like Switzerland more than a £1bn a year, MPs investigating the Irish border post Brexit were told this morning.
Christian Bock, director general, of Switzerland’s Federal Customs Administration, told the Northern Ireland affairs select committee that the “Swiss border guards is the biggest security organisation in Switzerland” with a budget of CHF1.5bn (£1.13bn) and a staff of almost 5,000.
He told the committee the border controls were “very efficient” and it could take “between one to two minutes” to enter Switzerland through the border checks in Basel.
Switzerland operates has just eight approved roads with 24 hour customs checks with around 70 others with customs infrastructure and 10 inland customs clearance offices.
Bock said speedy clearance can happen when it has ”all the information in advance” and because of eight treaties with neighbouring countries allowing investigations to by beyond its frontiers. He told the MPs:
I have done customs checks in Germany - we are allowed to with German officials of course. They are German police helicopters flying in Switzerland with my people on board.
This is similar to the system in Norway and Sweden, the MPs heard, where Norwegian and Swiss personnel can travel up to 15km into the other country to check on suspect vehicles.
A similar situation in Ireland with British officials entering warehouses and farms south of the border and Irish officials doing the same north of the border is likely to be a political challenge, said Lady Sylvia Herman, independent unionist MP for North Down. She asked:
Do you really think that would be applicable over a disputed border that we have Irish helicopters flying over the jurisdiction of Northern Ireland or indeed British helicopters flying over the jurisdiction of the Republic of Ireland?
Northern Ireland business, and particularly agriculture, has warned that business could be wiped out if border tariffs and checks are introduced.
Bock said concerns over customs checks farms which straddle both sides of the border could easily be assuaged.
Farmers could simply give customs officials their list of daily sales each month with inspections “from time to time” sufficient. “That is enough,” he said.
Larger traders can also have their freight pre-cleared in Switzerland while in Norway, membership of the common transit convention between the EU and six non-EU countries allows freight to travel freely across Europe with checks inland in Norway.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, has just started giving evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee. You can watch the hearing here.
I won’t be covering every word, but I will be keeping an eye on it and posting the highlights.
Tory minister on sex misconduct spreadsheet issues comprehensive denial, denouncing claims as 'false and malicious'
Dominic Raab, the justice minister who is tipped as a future cabinet minister and possible future leader, is one of the Tories MPs who features on the sexual misconduct spreadsheet doing the rounds at Westminster and now on social media. The Raab entry says “injunction for inappropriate behaviour with a woman”.
Raab has this morning issued a very comprehensive denial which he has just repeated on the World at One. The full text is on his website, but here is the key extract.
Under my own name, the entry reads: “Injunction for inappropriate behaviour with a woman”. And yet, I have never been served with any injunction for anything. Nor have I ever sought one. Equally, any insinuation that I have engaged in anything resembling sexual harassment, sexually abusive behaviour or lewd remarks with either parliamentary colleagues or staff (in any job I have done) is false and malicious. I have already taken legal advice.
The only tenuous link I can conceive of is that, in 2011, a tabloid newspaper ran a vexatious story smearing me, in relation to a previous job before I became an MP. I successfully sued that newspaper for libel, and in March 2012 they paid a five figure sum in compensation, and printed an unequivocal apology and retraction on page 2.
I appreciate the Westminster list will encourage a further media feeding frenzy against MPs. I also recognise that there are undoubtedly some very disturbing allegations out there, which need to be taken seriously. At the same time, for anonymous individuals to compile and publish, or allow to be published, a list of vague, unsubstantiated and – in my case – false allegations is wrong. It is also a form of harassment and intimidation, although of course I am not suggesting it is the same or equivalent. Still, accountability should mean properly investigating any reports of abuse, without irresponsibly smearing those who have done nothing wrong.
PMQs - Verdict from the Twitter commentariat
This is what political journalists and commentators are saying about PMQs on Twitter.
Basically, the commentariat was not particularly impressed by either leader.
From the Daily Mirror’s Jason Beattie
My snap verdict on #PMQs Corbyn fails to give May at taxing time:https://t.co/0XFuuMrE0a pic.twitter.com/R6biFgzoKm
— Jason Beattie (@JBeattieMirror) November 1, 2017
From Sky’s Lewis Goodall
Corbyn's questions worthy but baffling. House feels utterly flat. #PMQs just not reflecting the national conversation at all.
— Lewis Goodall (@lewis_goodall) November 1, 2017
From the Spectator’s Isabel Hardman
PMQs odd mix of MPs looking and sounding subdued following harassment allegations and pointless tit-for-tat about who has done more on tax
— Isabel Hardman (@IsabelHardman) November 1, 2017
From the Spectator’s James Forsyth
Even, though, PMQs is now on tax evasion, atmosphere remains subdued and less partisan than usual
— James Forsyth (@JGForsyth) November 1, 2017
From the Mail on Sunday’s Dan Hodges
Corbyn's not really getting anywhere with this.
— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) November 1, 2017
PMQs was becoming a danger zone for May. Over the past couple of weeks Corbyn has let her escape it.
— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) November 1, 2017
From the Birmingham Mail’s Jonathan Walker
Corbyn's Qs about tax avoidance and jets on the Isle of Man seem odd and esoteric. If it has legs as a story,will look agenda-setting #pmqs
— Jonathan Walker (@jonwalker121) November 1, 2017
From the Specatator’s Katy Balls
Fact that Corbyn leading on tax evasion, Isle of Mann and yachts shows that Parliament sleaze scandal difficult for all parties #pmqs
— Katy Balls (@katyballs) November 1, 2017
Updated
Here is Sky’s Faisal Islam on the answer he thinks Theresa May should have given to Lisa Nandy.
Sure the PM would argue that she answered Nandy in 2014 - and independent Alexis Jay abuse inquiry does include political parties in scope
— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) November 1, 2017
May not have remembered quite what Nandy was referring to when Nandy asked her question. (See 12.38pm and 1.07pm.)
Here is the documentary clip that prompted Lisa Nandy’s question three years ago, and again today. (See 1.07pm.)
Here's the BBC documentary clip @lisanandy is referring to of Tim Fortescue, who was a Tory Whip from 1970-73. https://t.co/isoajBmhGM
— Dino Sofos (@dinosofos) November 1, 2017
The Labour MP Lisa Nandy has tweeted a link to one of the questions she asked Theresa May three years ago about whips covering up abuse allegations. She raised this at PMQs just now. (See 12.38pm.) Anyone listening to Nandy’s question may have thought she was referring to contemporary abuse allegations. But, as Nandy’s tweet makes clear, her original inquiry was prompted by evidence of what was happening in the 1970s.
3 yrs ago, I asked Theresa May to act on evidence that Whips had covered up sexual misconduct. Today at #PMQs I asked her again to act. pic.twitter.com/NBl0iwyJK3
— Lisa Nandy (@lisanandy) November 1, 2017
As usual, the two questions from Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, got overlooked earlier because I was writing up the snap verdict. So here they are.
Blackford asked how much a single working parent would lose through universal credit.
May said people on UC would keep more of what they earned.
Then Blackford said a single working parent on UC could lose up to £1,350 a year. He said UC could be as damaging to May as the poll tax was to Margaret Thatcher.
Working single parents could lose an average of £1,350 a year because of the cuts to work allowances. Universal credit is fast becoming Theresa May’s poll tax. The prime minister has a habit of U-turning. Will she U-turn one more time and fix the problems with universal credit?
May replied:
We will continue to roll out universal credit, looking carefully at the implementation as we do so because we’re doing this in a careful way over a period of time but the important principle is universal credit is a simpler system that ensures people keep more as they earn more.
I’ve taken the quotes from PoliticsHome.
Labour’s Tracy Brabin says the self-employed are not eligible for shared parental leave. That means mums have to bear the burden. Has May seen the demands from the march of the mummies?
May says she is aware of the issue. She introduced shared parental leave when she was minister for equalities, she says.
Photograph: Szymanowicz/REX/Shutterstock
Mark Francois, a Conservative, says if May stays in the chamber after PMQs, she will hear Richard Benyon introduced a 10-minute rule bill putting a statute of limitations on prosecutions against the armed forces. The government should not be prosecuting soldiers to pander to Sinn Fein, he says.
May says any investigations that take place in the future should take place in a fair and proportionate way.
Labour’s Alison McGovern says an hour ago the government published a report about the experience suffered by the Hillsborough families. But their experience could be being repeated with the Grenfell Tower families. Will the government commit to ensure families don’t get outspent at inquests by the state.
May says the report out today is important. The government will consider its recommendations. She says she has always been clear that the experience of the Hillsborough families should not be repeated. That is why she is looking closely at the proposal for a public advocate. The government will not forget the Hillsborough families, she says.
The Conservative Jack Lopresti asks about the Kurds and the fight against Islamic State.
May says the UK wants to see political reconciliation in Iraq and in Syria. The UK has always been clear that any move towards Kurdish independence must be agree with the government of Iraq.
Labour’s Ben Bradshaw says the Electoral Commission is investigating Arron Banks. Is the UK government cooperating fully with the Mueller investigation into Russian involvement in the US elections.
May says the UK takes this very seriously. It works closely with the US authorities, “and we do cooperate with them where required”.
Chris Davies, a Conservative, asks about the fire in his constituency that killed a father and his five children.
May says this was a terrible fire. She commends the work of the emergency services.
Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader, says Philip Hammond says recently the government could not afford to borrow £50bn to spend on housing. But Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, wants that investment. Will May adjudicate?
May says she does not have to, because the government has already committed to spending more on housing.
Leo Docherty, the Tory MP for Aldershot, invites May to meet servicemen and women in his constituency.
May praises the role of the armed forces.
Labour’s Lisa Nandy says three years ago she gave May evidence of whips using information about sexual abuse to demand loyalty from MPs. Nandy says on three occasions she asked her to act, and on three occasions May refused.
May says she will look back at the questions that Nandy raised. She says all whips offices in the Commons should make it clear that sex abuse allegations go to the police. Where there are allegations of misconduct, action will be taken, she says. She says she wants people to feel confident that they can bring forward cases, she says. She says she wants a good process in parliament, so people so not need to go through party processes.
PMQs - Snap verdict
PMQs - Snap verdict: This is not really a week where anyone at Westminster is a winner, and this was a more scrappy and inconclusive PMQs than some of the recent ones, although Corbyn scored more points. May addressed the sexual harassment issue in her very first statement, but it seemed a minimalist announcement and Corbyn’s response, stressing the need for parties, as well as the Commons to act, sounded a bit more substantial. After that he started very well with a cracking revelation about the Isle of Man private jet import boom (is there enough space for all those planes on the airport tarmac?), as a means of raising tax avoidance and tax evasion. He also quoted a good stat at the end, about the decline in the amount of tax paid by the super rich (whoever they are). But the bit in the middle, where Corbyn and May got engaged in an inscrutable ding-dong about whose record on tax avoidance was the best, did not really go anywhere, and will have been almost impossible to follow by anyone not familiar with the intricacies of tax avoidance policy. May was sounding defensive, but she was right when she said that all governments close tax avoidance loopholes and that HMRC is constantly trying to keep up with the latest tax avoidance scams. Labour’s tax priorities would be very different from the Conservatives’, but this was not an exchange that illustrated that point powerfully.
Updated
Corbyn says the Tories did not back a tax evasion measure proposed by Labour only yesterday. He quotes a report saying the UK is obstructing the fight against money laundering. Isn’t May worried that vital revenue is being lost to fund schools and hospitals?
May says the government has raised an extra £160bn through extra compliance measures taken since 2010. And it would have raised more if Labour had not blocked measures before the election. The government has been leading the world on this, she says.
Corbyn says, if the UK is leading the world, why are the super rich paying less in tax. He quotes figures showing the amount they pay has fallen. The super rich are getting help not available to other taxpayers, he says. School budgets are being cut, he says. More people are waiting longer for treatment, he says. Does the PM think it is acceptable that there is one rule for the super rich, and another rule for the rest?
May says the top 1% are paying 28% of the tax burden. That is the highest percentage ever under any government, she says. She says extra money is being put into schools and hospitals by the government. The real problem is we spend £50bn on payments on interest as a result of debts racked up under Labour. That is more than the NHS pay bill. It is more than the core schools budget. That is a result of the economy left by Labour. And Corbyn wants to borrow £500bn more. That would make the situation worse, she says.
Corbyn says the Panama Papers exposed many individuals avoiding tax. Just yesterday Labour tried to beef up the finance bill with anti-avoidance amendments. Why did the government not support them?
May says this government has taken measures not taken by Labour. If Corbyn is saying this is an issue that needs constant attention, she agrees.
Corbyn says Tory MEPs have voted against five reports on measures dealing with tax avoidance and evasion. HMRC is cutting another 8,000 staff. So, in the budget, will HMRC get more resources to tackle tax avoidance and evasion.
May says HMRC is acting, and has been acting, since 2010. She says before the election Labour refused to support tax evasion measures introduced by the government.
Corbyn says 957 business jets on the Isle of Man seems excessive. Estimates of the money lost through tax avoidance go up to £190bn, more than the NHS budget. Will the government prosecute where feasible?
May says the government does investigate and prosecute where appropriate. The government has introduced more than 100 tax avoidance measures. HMRC does want to collect tax, she says. That’s its job.
Updated
Jeremy Corbyn says he is happy to meet with May to discuss better procedures to deal with sexual harassment. Workplace unions must be involved, he says. But he says parties must also have proper procedures in place.
He pays tribute to Frank Doran and Cathy Atherton, two former Labour MPs who died this week.
In 2010 the Labour government intervened through HM Revenue and Customs to shut down a scheme allowing people to avoid tax by importing yachts. A new scheme, which is similar, involves people importing planes through the Isle of Man. Will that be closed down?
May says it is crucial that there are proper process in this parliament allowing people to report misconduct.
She also pays tribute to Doran and Atherton.
On the subject of tax avoidance, May says where cases are referred to HMRC, they are taken seriously. The government has taken action since 2010 on this, securing almost £160bn through compliance measures.
Updated
Nusrat Ghani, a Conservative, asks about Islamic State. Will May back UN moves to ensure Isis terrorists are prosecuted?
May says she agrees. The message is clear: our values will prevail. The UK needs to work with international partners, she says. The UK wants to develop safe spaces in Iraq and Syria, she says. The UK is working with others to ensure evidence is gathered so people can be prosecuted.
Labour’s Dennis Skinner asks about homes being knocked down to make way for HS2.
May says HS2 is being built to increase rail capacity. If Skinner looks at everything the government has done, this is a government that wants to ensure this is a country that works for everyone.
May says all party leaders invited to meet to discuss new Commons sex misconduct grievance system
Theresa May says MPs will be appalled by the terror attack in New York.
And she says MPs want a response to the sexual harassment problem.
- May announces all party leaders have been invited to a meeting next week to discuss the sexual harassment procedure. They will discuss launching a new independent grievance system, she says.
Theresa May has arrived for #PMQs, carrying the easy air of a doctor that knows it's terminal.
— Tom Peck (@tompeck) November 1, 2017
Damian Green also in his usual spot. Looking like he's not had the most restful night of his life. #PMQs
— Tom Peck (@tompeck) November 1, 2017
Damian Green has just arrived for PMQs. Sitting in usual place. No reaction from MPs one way or the other
— Patrick Kidd (@patrick_kidd) November 1, 2017
PMQs starts in five minutes.
Well I'm sure this will be calm and measured and not at all incendiary... #PMQs pic.twitter.com/6ZlAgRBuSc
— Alain Tolhurst (@Alain_Tolhurst) November 1, 2017
Michael Russell, the Scottish government’s Brexit minister, has written to David Davis this morning asking him to share with the devolved administrations his own analysis of the potential impact of Brexit.
The UK government has commissioned a series of studies outlining the potential impact of Brexit across 58 different sectors of the UK.
Earlier today Conservative health select committee chair Sarah Wollaston said that she and colleagues would be urging her government to share the analysis ahead of a Labour motion in the Commons demanding their publication.
Russell’s letter to Davis comes after Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon wrote to Theresa May on Friday demanding “urgent clarity” over transition arrangements for Brexit, and expressing concerns at the possibility of a “no deal” scenario. Sturgeon wrote:
The Scottish parliament gave a clear view this week that a no deal situation would not be acceptable and I believe that if the UK finds itself in that position, that no Brexit would be preferable to no deal - or indeed a bad deal - and that each of the parliaments in the UK must have the opportunity to take a view on that.
Northern Ireland secretary James Brokenshire has claimed that the imposition of a budget for local ministries in Belfast does not entail a return to direct rule from London.
Speaking at Stormont House this morning, Brokenshire said he would be prepared to withdraw that budget if the main parties, the Democratic Unionists and Sinn Fein, reached an agreement to restore power sharing government in the region this week.
Brokenshire said he had to draw up a budget over the heads of local politicians “to protect the delivery of public services in Northern Ireland.”
He said the budget would be considered after the short November recess at Westminster.
A budget drawn up by him and his officials would give the Northern Ireland civil service “certainty” in planning for the rest of the financial year to keep devolved government departments running. Some ministerial departments that are devolved are in danger of running out of finance.
The secretary of state said the emergency budget was “not a barrier to continued political negotiations”.
However one of Sinn Fein’s key negotiators in talks with the DUP, Conor Murphy, has warned that imposing a budget without local political control would crash the negotiations.
Brokenshire revealed that he would be talking to independent experts about the possibility of cutting Northern Ireland assembly members’ salaries if the regional parliament is not restored. At present assembly members are still being paid around £49,000 plus expenses despite ten months of political deadlock.
Fox says he would have no objection to British consumers eating chlorinated chicken
Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, has been giving evidence to the Commons international trade committee. Here are some of the key points he’s been making. The tweets are from Politico’s Charlie Cooper, HuffPost’s Owen Bennett, the Times’ Marcus Leroux, and the Telegraph’s Asa Bennett.
Liam Fox, at House of Commons trade committee, says 734 people have joined the Dept since Feb.
— Charlie Cooper (@CharlieCooper8) November 1, 2017
Liam Fox says it is "regrettable that some people want to punish Britain". This is "the language of a gang not of a club" he says
— Charlie Cooper (@CharlieCooper8) November 1, 2017
Clever Q from Nigel Evans. Is no trade deal with USA better than a bad deal? Fox: wouldn't do deal "we didn't think was to our advantage"
— Charlie Cooper (@CharlieCooper8) November 1, 2017
Fox says there are "no health reasons why you couldn’t eat" chlorinated chicken. Doesn't mention issues further back in production process
— Charlie Cooper (@CharlieCooper8) November 1, 2017
Fox says there are "no health reasons" to avoid 'chlorinated chicken'. Says supermarket salads are washed in chlorinated water.
— Owen Bennett (@owenjbennett) November 1, 2017
Fox on chlorinated chicken: "I have no objection to the British public eating what they like as long as they know it's safe."
— Marcus Leroux (@marcusleroux) November 1, 2017
This is an issue where Liam Fox’s stance differs from Michael Gove’s. Gove, the environment secretary, has repeatedly said that the government would oppose any UK-US trade deal that forced the UK to accept chlorine-washed chicken.
Liam Fox "very keen on getting a [Brexit] deal". "But I'm not afraid of not getting a deal," he adds
— Asa Bennett (@asabenn) November 1, 2017
Fox is now making an interesting point about how cross-border supply chains are inadequately reflected in trade stats.
— Marcus Leroux (@marcusleroux) November 1, 2017
"I worry that our obsession with measuring gross value trade rather than value-added trade is giving us a distorted view of global trade."
— Marcus Leroux (@marcusleroux) November 1, 2017
Electoral commission to investigate Arron Banks
Brexit campaigner Arron Banks is being investigated by the elections watchdog over whether he breached campaign finance rules on donations in the 2016 EU referendum, the Press Association reports. The Electoral Commission said it will probe whether the former Ukip donor and Leave.EU chairman may have committed offences over donations or loans made to campaigners in the referendum. Responding, Banks tweeted: “Gosh I’m terrified.”
Gosh I'm terrified https://t.co/t46IBFhfpV
— Arron Banks (@Arron_banks) November 1, 2017
Two days ago the Guardian revealed that two internal Ukip whistleblowers filed complaints to the UK’s Electoral Commission over fears the party was making “unusual arrangements” with a pro-Trump website in the months before the 2016 EU referendum.
On Sky News this morning Jess Phillips, the Labour MP and chair of the women’s parliamentary Labour party, criticised Theresa May for not removing the Tory whip from Stephen Crabb, the former work and pensions secretary who admitted sending explicit text messages to a 19-year-old after he interviewed her for a job. Phillips said:
Jeremy Corbyn removed the whip from Jared O’Mara a number of weeks ago ... I don’t wish to play politics with this because all political parties are guilty [but] Jeremy Corbyn did remove the whip from somebody with a misdemeanour. And so far Theresa May has not shown that leadership. I have to say I’m a bit disappointed, actually, in that regard. I think personally that Stephen Crabb shouldn’t be walking around Westminster at the moment.
She subsequently posted this on Twitter.
Feel free to come up to me and have a laugh, if we are friends feel free to give me a hug, I'm not made of glass, I like a laugh, But if I'm a teenager applying for a job don't text me your sexual fantasies. Simples
— Jess Phillips (@jessphillips) November 1, 2017
Updated
The Tory MP Nadine Dorries has defended Damian Green on Twitter.
Confused about Damien Green story. Kate Maltby didn’t work for him Westminster or for the party. He asked her out. Have I got this right?
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) November 1, 2017
I know it’s Damian - but my phone auto correct prefers Damien
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) November 1, 2017
Green, of course, insists he was not asking Kate Malby out in a sexual sense. He did invite her out for a drink, but he insists he was not making an advance.
Dorries also thinks one solution to the sexual harassment problem at Westminster would be for all MPs’ staff to leave the building at 6pm.
There is a cultural problem in Westminster. It’s complex. MPs who work late sharing restaurants /bars with young researchers who don’t.
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) November 1, 2017
Time for MPs staff to leave the premises at 6pm and for places like the sports and social club to be closed down. Westminster is a workplace
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) November 1, 2017
Staff remain on Westminster premises drinking whilst MPs voting. Why? Plenty of pubs around London. No other workplace provides bars
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) November 1, 2017
Absolutely no reason whatsoever why any MPs staff should work past 6pm.
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) November 1, 2017
Rise in crime should not be dismissed as 'blip', says police chief
Rises in recorded crime cannot be dismissed as a “blip”, one of Britain’s most senior police officers has warned. As the Press Association reports, Sara Thornton, chairwoman of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, said offences involving knives, guns and serious violence have all increased significantly.
Speaking at the opening of a joint conference for chief constables and police and crime commissioners, Thornton asked:
So could this be the beginning of the end of the great crime decline?
Thornton acknowledged that some of the rise in crime was due to a requirement to record offences such as harassment and assault without injury. But she warned there were “worrying signs” about the increase nationally in violent crime. She went on:
I do not think we can risk viewing this rise in crime as a blip. In the same way that experts have commented that there has been shift rather than a spike in the terrorist threat, I think that we are seeing a shift rather than a blip in crime.
Margot James, the minister for small business, told Radio 5 Live this morning that Damian Green should stay in his job. Asked if he should step aside while the Cabinet Office investigates the allegation that he made inappropriate advances to a much younger woman, as Anna Soubry suggested (see 9.29am), James said:
No, certainly I don’t think so, but that is obviously up to the prime minister, but I certainly don’t think so, no. I’ve read the article in the Times today, and I certainly don’t think that it warrants anyone’s resignation, temporary or otherwise, in my opinion.
She also said that behaviour such as “slightly flirtatious” texts could not be eradicated from public life. She said:
Looked at in a holistic way, it’s a very difficult area of life to police, isn’t it really? And I think that most people have a clear idea of where something crosses a line between flirtation and suggestion, and harassment and then sexual assault ...
Unless there is evidence of more serious persistent harassment – which may or may not be criminal is one thing – a slightly flirtatious text is quite another. And I don’t think that we can start policing people to the extent that you eradicate or attempt to eradicate all such behaviour from any form of corporate or public life. I think that would be going a step too far.
On the Today programme Yvette Cooper, the Labour chair of the Commons home affairs committee, said that political parties should put in place systems to allow people to report complaints like Bex Bailey’s to someone independent. She said:
There is a big gap in the system. I think we should have within the Labour party a contract with either a charity or an independent sexual violence adviser who could come in and provide that support, so you’ve got somebody you can go and report to who you know is not going to be a friend of the person who you might be making the complaint about, and also to provide the support that if it’s needed - if this is a crime, if it’s actually an assault that’s taken place - to provide you with the support to go to the police and help you through that process as well.
Yvette Cooper says there should be an independent charity or body in politics that people can report sexual assault to #r4today pic.twitter.com/iuCEna9LXK
— BBC Radio 4 Today (@BBCr4today) November 1, 2017
In his Today interview William Hague also said he would be more likely to vote leave if there were a second EU referendum now, even though he voted remain in 2016, because the country had to accept the result.
This is from the Telegraph’s Stephen Swinford.
Lord Hague says in event of 2nd EU referendum he would be ‘more likely’ to vote to leave. Says UK ‘can’t change mind every couple of years’
— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) November 1, 2017
William Hague, the Conservative former foreign secretary and former party leader, was also on the Today programme discussing sexual harassment at Westminster, as well as other issues. He said that a “a change in attitudes across the world to how many men treat women is definitely required” and he said he hoped social media would lead to behaviour being transformed.
Clearly [there’s] a legitimate issue - sexual harassment and assault is unacceptable and that has to be dealt with. But I think in the end the greatest deterrent and solution to this is going to be that we’re in a new age of accountability, on social media discussion and these things, and people feeling ready to talk about their experiences, that will actually have a bigger impact than any formal procedure.
But Hague said it was also important not to believe every allegation in circulation.
We have to be careful, by the way, when these lists are circulated, as was seen yesterday, about individual allegations. Individual allegations can be wrong, I don’t know whether any of them are right or wrong.
Asked if he thought a witch hunt was underway, he replied:
It mustn’t turn into that, is what I would say.
The Labour MP Sarah Champion told the Today programme that all parties were guilty of brushing aside complaints about sexual misconduct. She said:
I know that those allegations have been raised, I know they have been batted away. Not by the prime minister, by the parties - when people have gone through the right channel, whether that’s at local level, at national level, within Westminster, when people have tried to go through the right channels, they have been batted away.
Katie Perrior, who was Theresa May’s communications chief in Downing Street from July 2016 until the general election, said that May was not told about sexual assault or harassment allegations involving Tory MPs during that period. Perrior told the Today programme:
There certainly wasn’t any allegation of assault or any kind of sexual harassment because that would have been acted upon, I’m absolutely convinced of it.
There’s lots of talk now that the prime minister gets regular updates but she would have only got an update of an incident where the police may have been involved or it was about to get into the newspapers, she wouldn’t have been told about stuff day-to-day.
And indeed if there was any allegation of assault, that would have absolutely been raised immediately.
I was in those meetings and I never sat in a meeting whereby anything was raised, because she wouldn’t have rolled over, rolled her eyes, and gone, ‘Oh well, that’s OK’.
Damian Green says all allegations about him are 'completely false'
The BBC has just shown some footage of Damian Green being doorstepped by reporters as he left his home. “All the allegations are completely false,” he said.
Damian Green, who as first secretary of state is effectively deputy prime minister, is now being investigated by the Cabinet Office over allegations that he made inappropriate advances to a much younger Conservative female activist. Green, who is close to Theresa May, has said the allegations are “absolutely and completely untrue” and “deeply hurtful”.
But not all colleagues are offering their support. In a remarkably frank interview on Sky News this morning Anna Soubry, the Conservative former business minister, said the allegations were “really serious”. She also floated the idea that Green should stand down from his cabinet post while the claims are being investigated. Asked if he should stand down until this is cleared up, Soubry said:
It is up to him. I think it’s really serious. God knows what his wife must feel. I think it’s very serious. This is somebody who was, I think, 30 years junior. For goodness sake ...
Here are some of the other points she made in the interview.
- She said that in “normal circumstances” someone facing allegations like those about Green would have been suspended.
The allegation against Damian Green has been reported to the Cabinet Office and there will be an investigation ... In normal circumstances that person would be suspended.
- She said the allegations that have come out so far might just be the tip of the iceberg. When she was asked if the stories that have so far emerged were the “tip of the iceberg”, she replied: “Probably. It’s appalling.”
- She said that what happened to Bex Bailey, the Labour activist who was raped at a party event and then discouraged from reporting the attack, could just as equally have happened in her party. Asked if she was confident a Tory activist would have been treated differently in the same circumstances, she said:
No, I’m not confident that she would have been. And it upsets me to have to say that. I’m not confident, because I don’t think any political party has taken these things in the serious way they should have done.
- She said all parties were guilty of “profound political failings” when it came to addressing sexual harassment.
Clearly there are profound political failings in all political parties, and I include my own. And tribalism, party loyalty, has got to be put to one side, so that we do the right thing by men and women who are invariably going to be vulnerable because they want a career in politics. It is very similar in many ways to the desire of many people to work in television, for example.
- She said she was confident Theresa May understood the need to tackle this problem.
- She said most MPs were “good, decent, hard-working people” and that only a minority were guilty of this sort of sexual misconduct.
As I said earlier, Damian Green is strongly denying impropriety. According to the BBC, he is also consulting libel lawyers.
Damian Green has instructed libel lawyers, Kingsley Napley
— Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) November 1, 2017
At some point later we might get on to Brexit. Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: Amber Rudd, the home secretary, gives a speech to the National Police Chiefs and Association of Police and Crime Commissioners conference
10am: Greg Clark, the business secretary, gives evidence to the Commons business committee.
10.15am: Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, gives evidence to the Commons international trade committee.
10.30am: Lord Neuberger, the former president of the supreme court, gives evidence to the Lords constitution committee about the EU withdrawal bill.
11.30am: Michael Gove, the environment secretary, gives evidence to the Lords EU environment sub committee.
12pm: Theresa May faces Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs.
Around 1pm: MPs begin a debate on a Labour motion saying the pay cap should be lifted for the armed forces.
2pm: Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, gives evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee.
2.15pm: Sir Amyas Morse, the head of the National Audit Office, gives evidence to the Commons Treasury committee about Brexit.
2.20pm: Gove gives evidence to the Commons environmental audit committee.
Around 4.15pm: MPs begin a debate on a Labour motion saying the government should publish its 58 sectoral Brexit impact assessments.
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.
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’s Playbook. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must reads.
I’m afraid the comments will be turned off today, at least initially, because with the sexual harassment scandal dominating the headlines, there is too much risk of people posting libellous comments BTL. But if you want to send a message to me, do use Twitter. I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Updated
