Afternoon summary
- Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has said the UK should be willing to agree common “ground rules” with the Brussels as part of a trade deal given Boris Johnson’s claim to be committed to high standards. In a speech in Brussels (full text here), Barnier said that he believed Johnson did not want to turn the UK into a deregulated “Singapore-on-Thames”. But he also said that a trade deal would have to include rules to guarantee fair competition and that the UK could not have an off-the-peg Canada-style deal because “the UK is not Canada”. (See 4.39pm.)
- A YouGov poll of Labour members for Sky News suggests Sir Keir Starmer is on course to win with 53% of first-preference votes. Rebecca Long-Bailey is on 31%, the poll suggests, and Lisa Nandy on 16%.
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
Here is the Guardian’s latest Politics Weekly podcast. Rowena Mason is joined by Marie Le Conte, Karin Robinson, Raoul Ruparel and Tim Bale to discuss turmoil in Whitehall, the US Democrats’ Super Tuesday, and the upcoming EU trade talks.
Michel Barnier's speech and Q&A - Summary
Here are the main points from Michel Barnier’s speech and Q&A.
- Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, said that he accepted Boris Johnson’s claim that he does not want to turn the UK into a deregulated “Singapore-on-Thames”. He said:
Of course we have heard Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s assurances that the UK would never engage in a race to the bottom, that it would not seek to undermine European standards, that the UK would in fact maintain higher standards than the EU. And, to be frank, we are ready to believe this.
In fact, I do not believe that the UK will become some sort of Singapore-on-Thames.
- But Barnier also said that, if the UK is committed to high standards, it should be willing to agree common “ground rules” with the EU. He said:
I do not believe that the UK will become some sort of Singapore-on-Thames.
What that means is it should not be a problem for the UK to agree on a number of ground rules.
And I want to be very, very clear.
We understand that the UK wants its own rule book. We respect that choice, the UK’s sovereign choice. That was the whole point of leaving the EU ...
Adam Fleming, the BBC’s Brussels correspondent, suggests Barnier was sounding a little more accommodating towards the UK at this point than in the past.
Has @MichelBarnier finessed his rhetoric on the level playing field?
— Adam Fleming (@adamfleming) February 26, 2020
🔹“I don’t believe 🇬🇧 will become some sort of Singapore-on-Thames.”
🔹”We understand 🇬🇧 wants its own rulebook.”
🔹”Let’s lay down together a number of rules building on our current high standards...”
- Barnier said a simple Canada deal was not on offer to the UK. This is what the British government is now demanding. But Barnier said:
There is no single template. There was never, and there never will be, a single template. The UK says it wants Canada. But the problem with that is that the UK is not Canada.
Barnier explained that Canada was not an option because the UK was much closer to the EU than Canada, and its volume of trade with the EU was much bigger. That was why level playing field provisions mattered more, he said.
- He said the EU was willing to offer the UK “super-preferential access” - in return for assurances that competition would be free and fair. He said:
We are ready to offer to the UK super-preferential access to our markets - a level of access that would be unprecedented for a third country.
Is this something we can do without firm guarantees that the UK will respect the level playing field and avoid unfair competitive advantages? The answer, I’m afraid, is simple. We cannot.
We want competition in future but it must be fair - fair and free ...
That is why we are asking that the EU and the UK lay down together a number of rules building on our current high standards in specific areas: state aid, environmental protection and the fight against climate change, social and labour rights and taxation issues. This way we will make sure that somewhere down the road, perhaps in years to come, neither side will use unfair subsidies, nor grant derogations on industrial emissions or on labour standards to win industries from the other.
- He said that the EU would strictly enforce rules of origin checks on British goods entering the single market from 2021 - even if there is a trade deal. Explaining why, he said:
On 1 January 2021, whatever the outcome of the negotiation, there will be checks and controls on all UK goods entering the single market as there are for any third country.
These checks are particularly important given the UK’s position as a major entry point into the single market and as part of these checks we will need to pay the greatest attention to the rules of origin that we will put in our trade agreement.
Of course we love ‘Made in Britain’ but we must guarantee that the goods we import from the UK - tariff and quota free - really are British.
We cannot take the risk that the UK becomes a kind of assembly hub for goods from all over the world, allowing them to enter the single market as British goods.
- He said the EU would not allow British financial institutions to get permanent equivalence status for trading in the single market from 2021. Earlier this month it emerged that the UK would be asking for permanent equivalence. But Barnier said that, although the EU would be willing to grant equivalence (the right to do business, subject to certain conditions) in some sectors, equivalence decisions would remain temporary, and subject to EU discretion. He said:
We will do so when it is in the interests of the EU, our financial stability, our investors and our consumers. But these equivalences will never be global nor permanent, nor will they be subject to joint management with the UK. They are, and will remain, unilateral decisions.
- He said a “point of concern” for the EU was the extent to which the British government now seems to be “distancing” itself from the commitments made on Northern Ireland border rules (in the legally binding Northern Ireland protocol) and on level playing field commitments (in the political declaration). He said the EU needed to check what the UK’s intentions really were in these areas “in the next few days and weeks”.
Updated
After the audience all stood for the European anthem, Barnier is now being presented with an honorary degree.
I will post a summary of his speech shortly.
Barnier's Q&A
Barnier has finished his speech. He is now taking questions.
Q: Has anything surprised you in the Brexit negotiations so far?
Barnier says what was surprising was that the PM could not reach a majority for a deal.
He says he once asked Nigel Farage what his vision was for life after Brexit. He says Farage told him that after Brexit the EU would no longer exist. He says that showed that, for some people behind Brexit, they wanted to use it to destroy the EU.
He says he is surprised by how far the British government has moved from its previous commitments (ie, in the Northern Irish protocol and in the political declaration). But the EU will have to check this in the coming days and weeks, he says.
Q: You say you think the British government is distancing itself from the withdrawal agreement, and what it said about Ireland. Do you think Ireland could unite in the coming years, and Northern Ireland rejoin the EU that way?
Barnier says he listens to everybody, including people from Northern Ireland and from Scotland. But he does not want to intervene in the national debate in the UK.
Q: What are the changes since 1973 that led to the UK leaving the EU?
Barnier says the UK joined the EEC mainly for trade reasons. But for Europeans, the EU is more than a supermarket, or a free trade zone. It has become an economic ecosystem. And that is why China and the US respect the EU, he says. That is why the EU will never let it unravel.
He says there are specific British reasons for Brexit. But there are common popular views. There are many British regions where was is behind Brexit is “social anger”, and the feeling that the EU does not protect people. Politicians must take the time to listen, to understand and to respond, he says. He says it is too late to do this in Britain, but not elsewhere.
And he says you should not confuse this popular sentiment with populism. Populism used this sentiment, he says.
And he says there are answers to people’s concerns.
Q: How will the EU make up for the loss of the UK’s contribution?
Barnier says the UK has been a net contributor to the EU budget. The loss amounts to 1% of the EU’s GDP, he says. But he says there is a huge and very difficult debate about the budget. This debate has never been easier, but it has been made harder by the departure of the UK. The gap amounts to €10bn.
Updated
Barnier says the negotiation with the UK starts on Monday.
He says the EU has been listening to ministerial declarations from the UK, and it has seen distancing from the withdrawal agreement.
The EU wants the text of that agreement implemented to the letter.
Barnier says the UK is insisting a lot on its own sovereignty.
He says nobody contests this.
The EU respects the UK’s sovereignty, he says. But it is not just a matter of sovereignty; it is a matter of pragmatism too.
From January 2021 there will be changes in many areas, he says.
He says the more the UK seeks to distance itself from the common rules established over years, the more the relationship will be separate, sector by sector.
He says the EU is not proposing that the UK loses control; it is offering the UK to use its sovereignty for mutual advantage.
The UK is leaving 600 international agreements by virtue of Brexit, he says. This will have consequences from 2021, even if there is a deal.
He says he has three examples.
First, from 1 January 2021 there will be checks and controls on all UK goods entering the single market, as with any third country. This will apply even if there is a deal. He says this will involve attention being paid to rules of origin. The EU loves “made in Britain”, he says. But it will want to know these goods are made in Britain. Britain cannot just become an assembly hub.
Second, from January 2021 UK financial services firms will lose the financial passport. They will not be able to offer services in all EU states based on being British. He says they might have to establish themselves in an EU country. In some sectors the EU will grant equivalences, where it is in the EU’s interest. But they will “never be global and permanent”, and never be subject to joint management with the EU, he says.
As a former financial services commissioner, Barnier says the EU cannot allow the UK to keep profits, while the EU takes on the risk. The EU must take responsibility for its financial supervision, and financial responsibility.
Third, on goods, Barnier says the UK will not be able to grant market authorisations for things like cars and pharmaceuticals for the EU market. This function must be carried out in the EU, he says.
Updated
Barnier says UK cannot get Canada trade deal because 'UK is not Canada'
Barnier has now switched to speaking in English.
He says trade is about more than boosting economic performance. It is also about maintaining and promoting high standards, he says.
He says the EU has heard Boris Johnson’s assurances about planning to never engage in a race to the bottom. Johnson says he has higher standards, he says. And Barnier says he believes Johnson on this.
He says that means it should be possible for the two sides to agree on ground rules.
The UK wants to be sovereign, Barnier says. He says the EU accepts that. But he says trade deals are about opening up markets.
There is no single template that could apply for a trade deal with the UK, he says.
He says the UK says it wants a Canada-style deal. “But the problem with that is that the UK is not Canada,” he says.
He says you can fly from Brussels to London in 70 minutes. The flight to Ottawa takes more than 10 hours, he says.
And he says trade with the UK is worth more than 10 times more than trade with Canada.
He says because the UK is on the EU’s doorstep, the EU will insist on a level playing field. Competition must be free and fair, he says.
That is why they want level playing field provisions, he says, covering state aid, environmental protection, climate change, social and labour rights and taxation.
Barnier says the EU had a complex negotiation with Boris Johnson to ensure no return of a hard border in Ireland.
The UK has now left. But a transitional period applies, he says.
Boris Johnson has said “again and again” that he will not request an extension to the transition, Barnier says. So both sides have to make the best use of the limited time available.
The withdrawal agreement must be implemented, he says. He says this is a matter of trust.
Barnier is recalling the referendum held in France in the early 1970s to decide whether Britain, Ireland, Denmark and Norway should be allowed to join what was then the EEC.
He says he voted yes, even though he was a Gaullist and General de Gaulle was opposed.
He says an interviewer recently asked why he was negotiating a new Brexit agreement, when he had already spent three years negotiating Brexit. Brexit is a divorce, he says. And all divorces have consequences. These consequences were poorly explained, he says.
He says no one has been able to show him the added value of Brexit, even Nigel Farage. But where the risk is the highest is in Ireland, he says.
Updated
Michel Barnier's speech in Brussels
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, is speaking now.
The event he is attending is mainly about the European green deal, but the chair said that Barnier would be talking about the Brexit negotiations.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, is giving a speech in the chamber of the European parliament this afternoon for an event run by the ESCP Business School. There is a live feed here. Barnier is one of several speakers, but I will cover what he says in detail when he starts.
Yes, you can watch it live here: https://t.co/AujBcD1oPM it will start at 3pm
— ESCP Business School (@ESCP_bs) February 26, 2020
Here is the New Statesman’s Stephen Bush on Sajid Javid’s resignation statement.
A lot of differences between Javid 2019 and Lawson 1989 but here's a fun* one: Lawson's objection was that "economic policy is possible only if there is, and is seen to be, full agreement between the Prime Minister and the Chancellor" - Javid's is the reverse.
— Stephen Bush (@stephenkb) February 26, 2020
Labour says Javid seeking to position himself as leader of Thatcherite, low-tax Tories
John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, has described Sajid Javid’s resignation statement (see 1.37pm) as an attempt by Javid to position himself as the leader of a Thatcherite Tory faction fighting for low taxation. In a statement McDonnell said:
Sajid Javid’s statement is not only a damning attack on Dominic Cummings’ dominance of the Johnson administration but also an unashamed leadership bid to the group of Thatcherite backbenchers committed to resisting tax rises for the wealthiest and big business. Choppy waters are ahead for Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson.
Sajid Javid's resignation statement - Summary and analysis
Here are the key points from Sajid Javid’s resignation statement. It was not a Geoffrey Howe-style sabotage mission by any stretch of the imagination, and the tone of his remarks – and of Boris Johnson’s response – implied that a return to government at some point in the future may well be an option. But Javid did deliver two messages that sounded like polite but firm warnings about the direction in which Johnson is leading his government.
- Javid said Johnson should not try to stop his ministers “speaking truth to power”. Javid resigned in the reshuffle because Johnson said he could only stay at the Treasury if he agreed to sack some of his advisers and replace them with officials jointly appointed by No 10. Javid said he thought that was unreasonable. He said:
It has always been the case that advisers advise, minsters decide and minsters decide on their advisers. I couldn’t see why the Treasury, with the vital role that it plays, should be the exception to that.
More importantly, Javid suggested that Johnson would not be able to govern properly if he was not exposed to independent advice from his ministers. He said:
A chancellor, like all cabinet ministers, has to be able to give candid advice so he is speaking truth to power. I believe that the arrangement proposed would significantly inhibit that and it would not have been in the national interest.
So while I was grateful for the continued trust of the prime minister in wanting to reappoint me, I am afraid that these were conditions that I could not accept in good conscience.
- Javid made it clear that he held Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief adviser, responsible for what happened. He made this point by means of a joke. He said:
Now I don’t intend to dwell further on all the details and the personalities ... the Cummings and goings if you will.
Perhaps that line also contains a hint that Javid was expressing a hope that Cummings himself would be going quite soon.
- Javid backed Rishi Sunak, his successor. He said:
I very much hope that the new chancellor will be given space to do his job without fear or favour. And I know that [Sunak] is more than capable of rising to the challenge.
On the day of his resignation Javid said that “any self-respecting minister” would reject the conditions imposed by Johnson, implying that Sunak was not a self-respecting minister. Javid did not use the same line today, and his complimentary comments about Sunak sounded genuine.
- Javid said it would be a mistake for Johnson to water down the commitments given in the Tory manifesto about reducing the national debt. He said:
The prime minister has won a huge mandate to transform our country and already he is off to a great start - ending the parliamentary paralysis, defeating the radical left, getting Brexit done, a points-based immigration system and an infrastructure revolution.
We need a resolute focus on long-term outcomes and delivery, not short-term headlines. The Treasury as an institution, as an economic ministry should be the engine that drives this new agenda.
But the Treasury must also be allowed to play its role as a finance ministry with the strength and credibility that it requires.
You see, I’m a proud, low-tax Conservative and I always will be. Already our tax burden is the highest it has been in 50 years.
It is fair to say not everyone at the centre of government always feels the pressure to balance the books. It was ever thus.
But the Treasury has a job to do. It is the only tax-cutting ministry. Every other department has an in-built incentive to seek and to spend ever more money ...
At a time when we need to do much to level up across generations it would not be right to pass the bill for our day-to-day consumption to our children and grandchildren.
And unlike the US, we don’t have the fiscal flexibility that comes with a reserve currency, so that’s why the fiscal rules that we are elected on are critical.
To govern is to choose, and these rules crystallise the choices that are required to keep spending under control, to keep taxes low, to root out waste and to pass that fitness test that was rightfully set in stone in our manifesto on debt being lower at the end of the parliament.
This passage was a reference to speculation that Johnson and his new chancellor may abandon the fiscal rules announced by Javid during the general election. The Tory manifesto specifically said that under the Conservatives “debt will be lower at the end of the parliament – rather than spiralling out of control under Labour.”
Updated
Hancock is now responding to Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary.
Hancock thanks Ashworth, and other MPs, for taking a responsible and proportionate approach.
There are plans in place in case of the virus becoming pandemic, he says. But he says the government is still working on the basis of plans to contain the virus.
He says people should only travel to the quarantined areas in Italy if their travel is essential.
He says it is important that the government is not advising the blanket closure of schools.
Testing sites are available at all A&E facilities in England, he says, but the NHS also wants to introduce home testing for the virus. That will allow the government to roll out testing for a much wider group of people, he says.
Updated
Matt Hancock's statement on coronavirus
Matt Hancock, the health secretary, is making a Commons statement now on coronavirus.
He says there have been 13 cases of the virus in the UK. Eight of those people have been discharged, he says.
But the government expects more cases to arise, he says.
He says the government has a four-point strategy for dealing with this: contain, delay, research and mitigate.
He says the government will be rolling out a publicity campaign soon.
Yesterday advice for travellers coming back to the UK from northern Italy and some other countries was published.
He says the government is coordinating with its international partners to ensure it is ready for all eventualities.
Updated
Boris Johnson, intervening on a point of order, thanks Javid for his contribution and says Javid should know “he has friends and admirers” on all sides of the Commons.
Javid warns Johnson he should not abandon Tory commitment to cutting national debt
Javid says he is a proud low-tax Conservative.
But the tax burden is the highest it has been for 50 years.
Not everyone in government is committed to keeping taxes down, he says.
He says the Treasury is the only tax-cutting department in government.
He says the government should not pass down debt to our grandchildren. And he says, unlike the US, the UK does not have a reserve currency.
He says that is why he supports the rule that debt should be falling by the end of this parliament.
The Tories have the chance to implement wholesale renewal, he says.
And they can put social justice at the heart of a more human capitalism.
He says the PM has the tenacity to see this through. Boris Johnson has his full support, he says.
Updated
Javid says he would not have been able to 'speak truth unto power' if he had stayed as chancellor on PM's terms
Javid says he wants to explain why he resigned.
He thanks MPs who have supported him, and he thanks his family.
He came into politics to give something back, he says.
He says he hopes he has more to contribute to public life.
He ran four departments, he says. Each taught him something.
He never took a decision that he did not think to be in the national interest, he says.
He says this country is strong because of its institutions. Conservatives believe that no one person has a monopoly on good ideas, he says.
He says there is no one model for the No 10/No 11 relationship. That relationship should depend on “mutual trust”, he says. It should be the case that “advisers advise, ministers decide, and ministers decide on their advisers”.
He says the chancellor must be able to give candid advice to the PM, and to “speak truth unto power”.
He says he could not stay as chancellor because the conditions imposed by the PM would not make this possible.
He will not dwell any more on this – on “the Cummings and goings, if you will”, he jokes.
He says the new chancellor must be allowed to do his job. Rishi Sunak is capable of rising to the challenge, he says.
Updated
Sajid Javid's personal statement
Sajid Javid says it is eight years since he last spoke as a backbencher.
He is proud to represent the people of Bromsgrove, he says.
And he will champion the causes he believes in most - but from outside government.
He says he had hoped to stay in government longer.
Labour’s Ian Mearns asks about the Marmot report and health inequalities affecting Gateshead. What will the PM do to ensure that people in Gateshead can live as long as people in Johnson’s constituency?
Johnson says he has enormous respect for Prof Marmot. He worked with him as London mayor. But there is more to be done, he says. That is why the government believes in levelling up.
Daniel Kawczynski, a Conservative, asks about flooding in Shrewsbury.
Johnson says the environment department will do what is necessary.
The SNP’s David Linden asks about religious intolerance in India. Will the PM meet him to discuss this?
Johnson says this is a crucial issue. He is particularly keen to defend religious freedom, and to protect those of a Christian faith.
Marco Longhi, a Conservative, asks about plans for a university campus in Dudley.
Johnson says he will look at this.
Labour’s Gerald Jones asks whether the PM will give Wales the funding it needs to recover from flooding.
Johnson says this is a devolved matter. But the government will work flat-out to make sure Wales gets the cash it needs.
Updated
Theresa Villiers, the former environment secretary, asks the PM to resist the selling-out of fishing communities.
Johnson says he “will indeed”. He says the SNP would hand back control of fishing to Brussels.
Updated
Ex-chancellor @sajidjavid sitting next to axed minister @Nus_Ghani. They're sitting behind @theresa_may and @DamianGreen.
— Kate Proctor (@Kate_M_Proctor) February 26, 2020
The old guard with the very recent old guard.#PMQs
PMQs - Snap verdict
Boris Johnson was able to rouse a cheer from the Tory benches with his final answer to Jeremy Corbyn, which involved a rumbustious but badly aimed rant about Labour (no one in the opposition is arguing for the UK to rejoin the EU), but it could not disguise the fact that by then he had been comprehensively clobbered over his decision to go Awol last week when the country was under water. Corbyn was not especially witty or forensic, but he was saying what many people think (which is enough) and his comments about Johnson being a “part-time prime minister” and only “pretending to care” will register. No 10 types have been briefing that the row about the PM’s extended absence last week was a Westminster bubble controversy that does not matter to voters. But that’s the sort of thing spin doctors always say when they are on the defensive, and it does not sound very plausible. Next time flooding strikes I expect Johnson will be searching for his wellies ...
Updated
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, says immigration is crucial for the Scottish economy. The Scottish government’s plans for a Scottish visa system have been welcomed by business and even Scottish Tories. Does the PM accept it was a mistake to reject the plan?
Johnson says this idea was rejected by the migration advisory committee. He says under the government’s plan, firms will be able to get the workers they need.
Blackford says the PM is “delusional”. He says the care sector will suffer, the GMB union says firms could be tipped over the edge, and the Scottish Tourism Alliance says the immigration plans will be devastating for the sector. Do Scottish businesses matter?
Of course Scottish businesses matter, says Johnson. He says SNP plans for tax rises would penalise them.
Updated
Corbyn says he has learned a lot from visiting victims of flooding. The PM should try it. He says people cannot get insurance. Isn’t it time the PM found an urgent solution to this problem? Just imagine what it must be like. People are looking to the government for help.
Johnson says there are problems with insurance. But the government scheme has helped many households. He says he is looking at what can be done to protect homes that cannot get insurance. He says any government led by Corbyn would not be able to help.
Corbyn says the Welsh Labour government has done what it can. He says Johnson often goes Awol. He was on holiday when the London riots happened, he was away when the Iranian general was assassinated, and he was away last week. He says Johnson is a “part-time prime minister”. Last night Johnson was schmoozing Tory donors instead of helping flood victims.
Johnson says the government has stopped the early release of terrorists, and it is hiring more police officers. He says it can do this because it has a strong economy. The opposition is jabbering away because they cannot decide whether they want to be in the EU. The hottest topic in Labour is what job Corbyn should have in the shadow cabinet. The government is delivering on the people’s communities, he says.
Updated
Corbyn accuses Johnson of just 'pretending to care' about victims of flooding
Corbyn says no Cobra has been called. Is Johnson just “pretending to care”?
Johnson says there has been a stream of ministerial meetings. He says he has been directing things. He says Cobra is Cabinet Office briefing room A. It is not the only place where meetings can take place.
Corbyn says people need help, not “trite answers like that”. Does Johnson agree with the Tory MP Philip Davies who says the government has done little to protect people from floods.
Johnson says the government is doing a lot to protect homes.
Jeremy Corbyn says his thoughts are with those suffering from coronavirus. He says he hopes the health services will get the resources they need.
He pays tribute to the work of those helping flooding victims.
Does the PM agree with the Conservative leader of Derbyshire county council that he has turned his back on flooding victims?
Johnson says the government has been working to ensure the victims get the help they need.
Corbyn quotes the Tory council leader. He says he visited flood victims. But the PM was silent, sulking in his grace and favour mansion at Chevening. When will the PM stop hiding and show he cares? Or is he too busy doing something else? If he is, he could send Dominic Cummings.
Johnson says there has been “a constant stream of ministerial activity” on this. He says 200,000 households have been protected from flooding by government measures.
Philip Dunne, a Conservative, says Storm Dennis has brought record high water levels. Over 100 properties in his Ludlow constituency have been flooded. Will the government spend more on flood defences?
Johnson says it will. The government is investing “massively” in flood defences, he says.
Boris Johnson starts by expressing condolences to the family and friends of those killed in the recent storms.
Boris lives! He has come out of self-isolation for #PMQs
— John Crace (@JohnJCrace) February 26, 2020
According to the Evening Standard, Sajid Javid’s resignation speech will be “dramatic”.
Our @EveningStandard as Brits advised to ‘keep your distance’ as virus spreads & Sajid Javid set to deliver warning to PM in Commons pic.twitter.com/55lD2KL6Gv
— George Osborne (@George_Osborne) February 26, 2020
PMQs
PMQs is starting soon.
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.
Labour demands investigation into claims rough sleeping numbers five times higher than official figures say
Labour is demanding an investigation into claims that the level of rough sleeping in England is five times as high as official figures say. John Healey, the shadow housing secretary, has been prompted to act by this BBC story, which is based on freedom of information requests to councils. The BBC says:
More than 28,000 people in the UK were recorded sleeping rough in 12 months, research by the BBC has suggested.
In England five times as many rough sleepers were seen by councils in the year than reported in official figures, which are a one-night snapshot ...
New official figures will be released on Thursday but the data for 2018 showed 4,677 people slept rough in England on the one night the snapshot survey was taken, down 2% on the year before but 165% up on 2010.
However council responses to the BBC showed nearly 25,000 people were recorded sleeping rough at least once in England during the latest year on record.
Healey has asked the UK Statistics Authority to investigate. In a letter to Sir David Norgrove, its chair, he says:
The government’s own figures, as published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in the latest publication ‘Rough Sleeping Statistics: Autumn 2018, England’, declare that the total number of people counted or estimated to be sleeping rough was just 4,677. You’ll be aware that this data is gathered each year on a single night in the autumn.
In light of the new figures published today, it is clear that the use of the government’s own figures as the sole official measure of rough sleeping is seriously misleading as it dramatically undercounts the number of people sleeping rough.
You will know the longstanding concern about the government’s rough sleeping statistics, including from expert organisations and charities. For example, in 2018 the charity Crisis commissioned research which calculated that the number of people sleeping rough in England is more than double what government statistics suggest.
The UKSA’s own work in this area confirmed in 2015 that these rough sleeping statistics do not meet the standards required of national statistics – trustworthiness, quality and value.
The government’s rough sleeping statistics are the sole statistics produced by government on rough sleeping so they are naturally and inevitably assumed by the public to be an accurate portrayal of the scale of rough sleeping. This is clearly not the case, as the statistics are an unreliable undercount and are an unsound basis for public policy-making or debate. I would be grateful if you would investigate the flaws in these figures and how the government’s statistics could be improved so they better capture the level of rough sleeping in our country.
Updated
Sajid Javid is expected to make a statement to MPs following his resignation as chancellor, and it is likely to come just after PMQs, according to Labour whips.
By convention ministers who resign from cabinet are allowed to make statements to the Commons. In the past some of these interventions (eg, Geoffrey Howe’s) have been devastating, but mostly ex-ministers tend not to make these resignation statements now and, when they do, their content tends to be quite measured.
According to Politico, Javid plans to be “constructive and positive”.
Immediately following PMQs and before the Coronavirus Statement, we expect a personal statement from @sajidjavid
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) February 26, 2020
George Eustice, the environment secretary, held a press conference at the National Farmers’ Union conference in Birmingham where he was speaking this morning. As ITV’s Daniel Hewitt reports, Eustice defended the PM’s decision not to visit areas recently flooded, even though he did visit flood victims during the general election campaign last year. Eustice said the PM felt he had to get involved last year because the purdah period in force during the election meant that, without his intervention, Whitehall was slow to get a grip on the crisis.
When asked by @DanielHewittITV why the PM has not visited flood-hit communities unlike during the election period, the Environment Secretary defended Boris Johnson and said his visit would not have made 'any difference'https://t.co/azaEL8CmCt pic.twitter.com/Kdjo2P6pT9
— ITV News Politics (@ITVNewsPolitics) February 26, 2020
Me: Why did PM go to Yorkshire in the election but not now?
— Daniel Hewitt (@DanielHewittITV) February 26, 2020
GE:“that was a specific set of circumstances where we were in what’s called a purdah period so ministers weren’t in the dept, that meant it was harder initially for civil servants to make the decisions they needed to”👇
“That is why the PM felt he needed to get involved at that point to get a grip of the situation and that is why he convened COBRA. But that’s basically because there was a general election but not for the reasons some people have alleged.” 👇
— Daniel Hewitt (@DanielHewittITV) February 26, 2020
Me: Would it not help you if he went now?
— Daniel Hewitt (@DanielHewittITV) February 26, 2020
GE: “I don’t think it makes any difference at all, we’ve had a grip of this situation...a visit from the Prime Minister would not have effected the way we’ve approached this crisis.”
Updated
Turning back to the budget, here are three related stories from today’s papers.
Eighteen MPs from the blue collar group of Conservative MPs caucus – 14 of whom were elected for the first time in 2019 in north and Midlands of England – wrote to the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, expressing “deep concern” the fuel duty freeze will be scrapped.
A small increase would raise an extra £4bn worth of funding for the Treasury. Fuel duty could rise by up to two pence which will see overall petrol and diesel costs increase, according to reports.
However in the letter the group says: “We are writing to express our deep concern following reports that you are considering scrapping the fuel duty freeze at this year’s budget.
“If the decision was taken to raise taxes on fuel, hard-working people and businesses in blue-collar communities – many of which lent us their support at the general election for the first time in generations – will suffer.”
The chancellor is shifting more of the cost of meeting climate change targets from consumers to business as he finalises the budget, say allies. They suggest that he is cooling on ending the 10-year freeze on fuel duty amid a mounting backlash from Tory MPs.
Instead, he is preparing new environmental taxes, including heavy restrictions on the use of so-called red diesel.
The Sun understands the chancellor is mulling closing two tax reliefs rich families use to funnel money through ghost companies and farmland before they die.
Rich Brits cut down the amount of inheritance tax they have to pay by setting up a business or buying land, which can be passed on to their family after death.
Agricultural relief and business property relief can protect between 50% and 100% of money invested from inheritance tax.
Ending business relief would raise the Treasury an estimated £480m a year and stopping agricultural relief would bring in £320m.
Updated
The health secretary, Matt Hancock, is making a Commons statement on coronavirus after 12.30pm.
One oral Statement at 12:30:
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) February 26, 2020
Wuhan Coronavirus Update - @MattHancock / @JonAshworth
Updated
Here is Jack Blanchard’s take on Sir Keir Starmer getting Sadiq Khan’s endorsement from the London Playbook briefing.
It’s a big boost for Starmer’s campaign, though probably comes as no great surprise to Labour Kremlinologists, given Khan and Starmer are both London-based lawyers with closely aligned political outlooks, and actually go back years (Khan used to brief Starmer when he was a human rights solicitor). But a public endorsement from Labour’s most powerful elected politician will nevertheless give further credence to Starmer’s status as the clear frontrunner.
Updated
And Sir Keir Starmer has responded to the news he has been endorsed by Sadiq Khan.
I’m honoured to have received Sadiq’s backing to be the next Labour leader.
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) February 26, 2020
Sadiq is demonstrating that Labour in power can change lives. I look forward to campaigning alongside him to keep London Labour. https://t.co/iMOZ0sKwC8
Sadiq Khan backs Starmer for Labour leader
Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, has announced that he is voting for Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, for Labour leader.
I will be voting for @Keir_Starmer to be the next Labour leader. I've known Keir for decades. He's the best person to unite our party, take the fight to the Tories and put Labour in government. #AnotherFutureIsPossible
— Sadiq Khan (@SadiqKhan) February 26, 2020
Kit Malthouse, the minister for the police, has been giving interviews this morning. Here are three of the lines that emerged.
- Malthouse played down reports that his boss, the home secretary, Priti Patel, bullied civil servants. Asked whether she was a bully, he replied:
I haven’t witnessed any of that. To be honest with you, I’m totally focused on crime. Everybody in the Home Office is focused on that, rather than on the sort of soap opera, I’m afraid.
- He claimed there was no longer a rift between Patel and Sir Philip Rutnam, the Home Office permanent secretary whom Patel was reportedly trying to remove. Asked about this, Malthouse said:
[Rutnam] and the home secretary have put out a joint statement showing, I think, glutinous harmony, as the prime minister would call it. Hopefully now we can get on with the mission.
- Malthouse said it was up to the House of Lords to decide whether Tom Watson, the former Labour deputy leader, was fit to receive a peerage in the light of the role he played in publicising false claims about Westminster figures being involved in child abuse. Asked whether Watson should go to the Lords, Malthouse said:
There is a process of the House of Lords now that is independent that will have a look at whether he should or he shouldn’t, as it would with all nominees. I don’t really want to interfere with that.
Jeremy Corbyn has reportedly nominated Watson for a peerage in the forthcoming dissolution honours.
Updated
On universal credit, Paul Johnson says some people will gain a lot, and some people will lose a lot. Some of the cuts are still working their way through the system, he says.
Q: Where will the money come from?
Johnson says there has been talk of cutting pension tax relief for high-earners. But this will hit people earning between £50,000 and £80,000 – exactly the group that Boris Johnson promised to help when he was standing for Tory leader, Johnson says.
He says council tax could be reformed to raise tax on higher-value properties.
And he suggests that the entrepreneurs’ tax relief could go. Only a small number of people benefit from it, he says.
Updated
Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, is now being interviewed on Sky’s All Out Politics about the IFS budget assessment out today. (See 9.09am.)
He says this could be “a really big moment” for the British economy. Last year was the first year without a budget since the 1800s. And previous budgets were minor, because the government did not have a proper majority. So this will be the first major budget for years, he says.
He makes the IFS point about the government having to choose between raising taxes, continuing with austerity, or breaking its rules on borrowing.
He says, outside of infrastructure, the government did not make many promises on spending in the Conservative manifesto. But reversing the cuts of the last 10 years would be very expensive, he says. He says we will see in the budget whether the government is serious about reversing those cuts.
Updated
Day-to-day spending per head on non-NHS public services down 26% from 2010, says IFS
Boris Johnson replaced his chancellor in the reshuffle two weeks ago but changing the underlying economic outlook facing the country is not so straightforward and, as the Institute of Fiscal Studies points out in an analysis today, the government faces difficult choices in the budget. “Raise taxes, entrench austerity or break a fiscal rule,” as the IFS puts it in the headline of its press release. Theoretically, the government could opt for all three. My colleague Richard Partington has written up the IFS’s assessment here.
The IFS analysis also illustrates quite how severe the cuts to public spending have been over the past decade. It says that day-to-day non-NHS public spending per head is 26% lower than it was at its peak in 2010, and that welfare cuts currently in the pipeline are set to take colossal sums away from some low-income families. Here is an extract (bold type from the IFS original).
Outside of health, day-to-day public service spending per person remains 26% below its 2010 peak. £54bn would be required just to return to real 2010 levels.
No department will see cuts in 2020–21. Beyond that there are commitments to increase spending on the NHS, schools, defence and overseas aid. Simply to avoid any further real-terms cuts elsewhere over the following three years the chancellor would need to find an additional £3bn by 2023–24. Maintaining spending on unprotected services as a share of national income would require an additional £6.5bn.
This would still leave cuts to means-tested support for low-income families with children slowly working their way through the system. The removal of an additional tax credit payment for the first child will eventually lead to around 3.2 million households getting £550 per year less than they would have received, while the two-child limit in means-tested benefits will eventually lead to around 750,000 households losing an average of £3,600 per year.
And this is what John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, is saying about the IFS analysis.
This analysis shows the damage done by a decade of decline under Conservative governments, and the scale of investment needed even just to get back to 2010 spending levels.
Ten years of Tory rule have brought 10 years of chaotic and erratic economic policy, with 16 fiscal targets proposed and ripped up and productivity growth plummeting.
Despite all the hype about this budget turning a page, it risks setting in train five years of disappointment. Labour will continue to call for the fair taxation and investment needed to end austerity and tackle our social and climate emergencies.
This may, or may not, come up at PMQs later. Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: The Institute for Fiscal Studies publishes its assessment of the options for next month’s budget.
12pm: Boris Johnson faces Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs.
12.30pm: Sajid Javid is expected to make a statement to MPs following his resignation as chancellor.
2pm: Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, gives a speech in Brussels.
As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary when I wrap up.
You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe roundup of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.
Updated
