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

Cameron says 'hand on heart' he has achieved manifesto's EU goals – Politics live

EU reform offers UK best of both worlds, says Cameron - video

Afternoon summary

  • David Cameron has effectively launched his campaign to keep Britain in the European Union following the publication of a draft plan offering new terms of membership. Brushing aside assertions that the plan, published by Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, does not fully match the demands he set out in November, Cameron said he had got what he promised in the Conservative election manifesto. The deal still has to be agreed at an EU summit starting on Thursday 18 February, but Cameron indicated that he was happy with what was on offer and, in a speech in Chippenham, he focused on how Britain could have “the best of both worlds” if it opted to stay in a reformed EU. He said he hoped the EU referendum campaign “will start soon”, all but confirming he is planning a June referendum. He also said that government ministers who want to argue for Britain to leave the EU will have to wait until after the EU summit before they speak out, meaning that he has a two-week advantage over them as the debate gets going. Significantly, while Cameron today became de facto leader of the In campaign, the Out campaign remains divided, and bereft of a leader.
  • Tusk has proposed giving the UK an “emergency brake” that would allow the UK to stop EU migrants claiming benefits - although the full details have not been resolved, and the smallprint of Tusk’s document makes it clear that individual migrants would not be deprived of all in-work benefits for a full four years, as Cameron wanted. It has also emerged that the brake may not come into force until almost a year after the EU referendum.
  • Some Eastern European countries have expressed some reservations about Tusk’s plans, but so far nothing has been said by EU leaders to suggest that a deal at the February summit will be impossible. Cameron is to travel to Denmark and Poland at the end of this week to argue the case for the Tusk plans. According to Politico, Konrad Szymański, Poland’s Europe minister, said the first three of Tusk’s proposals were acceptable. Szymański went on:

The fourth one is the problem. We can’t accept discrimination but then how does Cameron offer something for people who are against migration? We understand British concerns. They have the right to shape their labor market. The issue is discrimination.

According to Bloomberg, Lithuania, Hungary and Bulgaria have also expressed concerns about the plans.

  • Boris Johnson, the Conservative MP and mayor of London, has said that “much, much more” needs to be done to get an acceptable deal for the UK. Speaking on LBC (see 9.59am), he even lapsed into sarcasm when discussing what has been achieved. Other Tory MPs have spoken about about the deal, but mostly they have been Conservatives who were already expected to vote Out. Many Tory MPs still seem to be uncommitted. There have been reports saying Cameron thinks Johnson will eventually back remaining in the EU, but today Johnson did his best to suggest that that was not a given.
  • Theresa May, the home secretary, has offered her qualified support for the Tusk deal, the Sun reports. This suggests she will eventually decide to campaign for Britain to remain in the EU. Until now she has been keeping her intentions secret.
  • Alan Johnson, head of the Labour In For Britain campaign, has said Labour backs a referendum in June. He told Sky News.

The Labour Party believes June 23 or 30 is exactly the right date. I think that’s better for those who want Britain to stay in the European Union, to do that quickly. It lifts this cloud of uncertainty that has actually been overshadowing this country, in terms of business investment et cetera, for too long.

This is significant because some Tory MPs would like to try to delay the referendum, and some hoped that Labour could be persuaded to vote with them against a June referendum. Johnson’s comment has quashed this plan.

  • Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, has criticised Cameron for not coming to the Commons to explain the EU renegotiation plan. Speaking in the Commons, he said:

[Cameron] is trumpeting the sovereignty of national parliaments as part of the renegotiations but doesn’t seem to respect the sovereignty of this parliament by coming here today to make the statement he should have done ... This whole process conducted by the prime minister is not about engaging with Parliament, is not about engaging with the necessary questioning by MPs, it is about managing the problems within the Conservative Party about this.

Cameron will be making a statement in the Commons on this tomorrow.

That’s all from us for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

Emergency brake 'may not be available until almost a year after EU referendum'

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed,” is the favourite phrase in the deal-making rooms of Brussels. This caveat has been voiced several times today, but there is a mood of optimism among EU diplomats, that a deal is in sight.

Brussels insiders think they have done everything legally and politically possible to get a deal at the EU leaders’ summit on 18-19 February, although further meetings have not been ruled out. A text emerged around 12.30pm local time on Tuesday, after a flurry of bilateral phone calls on Monday evening involving David Cameron, French president François Hollande and EU leaders Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk.

Senior figures in Brussels think this deal, if agreed, would confirm the UK’s place in the EU’s outer tier. The UK is already outside the euro and the border-free Schengen zone and has a host of other opt-outs on EU policy, but this settlement would show, in the words of one EU diplomat, that “the UK is in the slow lane and it has reached its destination”.

That outcome is still many meetings away. One of the biggest arguments will be about how long the British government can use an “emergency brake” or “safeguard mechanism” to freeze in-work benefits for EU citizens. The UK had wanted four years, but some member states could be wary of giving Westminster such a long opt-out.

One EU diplomat described the safeguard mechanism as a response to “the UK’s mistake” of allowing workers from the EU’s newest member states to come to Britain immediately after the 2004 enlargement.

Around 1.9 million citizens from other EU countries are working in the UK today, many from central and eastern European countries, as a result of Tony Blair’s open-door policy - a decision that was praised in Brussels at the time. Germany, France and most other EU countries kept their labour markets closed, using temporary controls.

Cameron might be pleased that some EU diplomats agree with his assessment of Blair’s policy, but he will not be comforted by the fact that the emergency brake will not be available until almost a year after referendum day.

The emergency brake requires a brand-new EU law, not just agreement among the EU’s heads of state and government. The best estimate is that the emergency-brake law could take nine months to agree. That is speedy by the laborious standards of crafting EU laws, but could be a tricky timeline to sell on the doorstep.

The issue highlights that Cameron will have to work hard to make friends in the European parliament. Martin Schulz, the German Social Democrat, who leads the European parliament, is expected to be at the negotiating table with EU leaders at the Brussels summit on 18-19 February.

Officially, Schulz has no formal status; the deal has to be agreed by unanimity among the EU’s 28 heads of state and government.

But he, and his team of sherpas, will have significant sway over the negotiations, as MEPs must sign off the emergency brake legislation. The advice from Brussels is that the prime minister will have to start making friends. “David Cameron and his team will not have a break now, they will have to work the phones.”

The LSE’s BrexitVote blog has some good reaction to the EU renegotiation from academics and thinktanks.

Here are some tweets they are flagging up.

From Richard Whitman, director of the Global Europe Centre at Kent University

From Benjamin Leruth, a Kent University researcher

From Simon Tilford, the Centre for European Reform’s deputy director

From Nicolai von Ondarza, an academic based in Germany

The Financial Times is reasonably positive about David Cameron’s deal. This is from Lionel Barber, its editor.

EU renegotiation – the view from Berlin

While Angela Merkel’s office has declined to express its views on Donald Tusk’s draft proposal so far, her silence can likely be read as a nod of approval.

German and French fears that Britain would secure special blocking rights over financial regulations turned out to be unfounded. A “red card” that requires as much as 55% support from parliaments across the bloc is a threat that the German government appears happy to live with.

A float featuring a depiction of the German chancellor Angela Merkel is ready for a carnival in Cologne.
A float featuring a depiction of the German chancellor Angela Merkel is ready for a carnival in Cologne. Photograph: Oliver Berg/EPA

And while British demands for an “emergency brake” may not have gone down well with the German public as it grapples with a much more pressing emergency, the refugee crisis appears to have made German politician more, not less open to unorthodox measures.

Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the German parliament’s committee on foreign affairs, described the draft proposal as a “good and fair compromise, and a convincing outcome that Cameron can present to the British public”.

“It is pleasing to see that Britain has found a creative solution that addresses its concerns but doesn’t question the fundamentals of free movement,” the member of Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic party told the Guardian.

Asked whether he thought the draft would be enough to sway the British public to vote to remain in the EU, Röttgen said: “The outcome of these negotiations will above all make a difference among members of the Tory party who haven’t made up their minds. When it comes to the referendum, I expect that risk aversion among the British public will prove a decisive factor.”

He is not alone in asking whether minor tweaks to the small print in an EU treaty is enough to avert the threat of Brexit. In an interview with German radio ahead of the Tusk announcement, Martin Schulz, the Social Democrat president of the European parliament, said: “My impression and my experience with referenda is that the people vote on everything possible but mostly not on the content of what has been negotiated”.

Updated

This is from Lars Løkke Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister. David Cameron is going to see him on Friday.

Here is some more business reaction to the draft EU renegotiation plan.

Chris Cummings, chief executive, TheCityUK, said:

Donald Tusk’s proposals for a new settlement for the UK within the EU is a key milestone in the reform negotiations to date. While there is still a long way to go, this provides a good basis for the Council of Ministers meeting in two weeks’ time.

John Longworth, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said:

While Brussels-watchers will pore over every draft and every statement, most business people will want to wait to see a final UK-EU deal before assessing carefully the impact on their businesses and their vote. A lot can change in the weeks ahead. Like others, we will be evaluating these proposals against the prime minister’s initial letter to Mr Tusk, and against the business priorities we have articulated.

Terry Scuoler, chief executive of EEF, the manufacturers body, said:

The prime minister has, at face value, achieved some success in his ongoing renegotiation which will strengthen the UK’s hand in reaching an agreement for Britain later this month. Taken together the reform measures should also benefit other EU states, especially the drive for greater competitiveness, at a time when the EU needs significant reform.

This is from the Daily Mail’s Jason Groves.

Britain Stronger in Europe accuses Out campaigners of 'idiotic hypocrisy' over renegotiation

Britain Stronger in Europe is accusing Out campaigners of hypocrisy. It says they have criticised David Cameron’s EU renegotiation deal even though it has delivered many of the things that in the past they have supported.

This is from Sir Nicholas Soames, the Conservative MP and Stronger In (to use the shorthand that the group itself uses) campaigner.

In the past, Leave campaigners have called for wide-ranging reforms to Britain’s place in Europe. Yet today they have lambasted the reforms put forward by Donald Tusk before the negotiation is even complete. This is idiotic hypocrisy. These reform proposals are the very areas for change that Leave campaigners have long called for. They have rejected a deal before it has even been secured.

Today it’s clear that there is a deep hypocrisy at the heart of the Leave campaigners’ criticisms: they are the only people who have given up on reform and want to walk away from Europe come what may.”

It’s clear now that the Leave campaigns have pre-emptively rejected the final renegotiation package because they want to walk away from Europe come what may. The leave campaigns’ hypocrisy will put the many benefits we gain from being in Europe – trade, jobs, low prices, investment – at risk.

There is a 12-page document setting out example of what Soames is referring to here (pdf).

Updated

Sky’s Faisal Islam has been doing a vox pop on the EU in Chippenham, where David Cameron delivered his speech. He found evidence that people think David Cameron’s recommendation will make a difference.

Lord Ashcroft explored this issue in a very detailed report on public opinion on the EU issue published in December last year, Leave to Remain (pdf). It combines polling with focus group research, and is well worth reading if you are following this issue closely.

Here is the key chart. It shows what people in various groups say when asked if having David Cameron say he had secured a better deal for Britain in the EU would make them more likely to vote to stay or to leave.

EU poll
EU poll Photograph: Ashcroft/Lord Ashcroft Polls

“Nothing to Lose” are diehard anti-Europeans, accounting for 23% of the population. Most of them say Cameron claiming he has got a good deal will make no difference to how they vote, while 30% say it will make them more likely to vote Out. (That is hard to believe; people in this group are fairly determined to vote Out anyway.)

But almost half the people in “Global Britain”, the second group strongly inclined to vote out, accounting for 13% of the population, say a Cameron recommendation could make them more likely to vote to remain.

Ashcroft has divided those broadly undecided into two groups: “Hard-pressed undecided” (19% of the population) and “Listen to DC” (13%). A clear majority of “Listen to DC”, unsurprisingly, say would be more likely to vote In on the basis of a recommendation from Cameron, and a quarter of the “Hard-pressed undecideds” say the same.

The other three groups, “If it ain’t broke” (12%), “I’m alright Jacques” (11%) and “Citizens of the world” (9%), are all inclined to vote In. Amongst the first two, a Cameron recommendation would make a big difference. Cameron would have less impact on “Citizens of the world” but that may be because they are strongly inclined to vote In anyway.

EU renegotiation – the view from Rome

Stephanie Kirchgaessner, a Guardian correspondent in Rome, says the Italian government considers the UK’s renegotiation as something of a “petty” distraction from the real problem facing the EU: the migration crisis.

An Italian official said the office of the prime minister and foreign ministry were “attentively examining” the proposed deal to avoid the UK leaving the European Union, but had no immediate comment.

Matteo Renzi.
Matteo Renzi.

Donald Tusk’s long-awaited text was released as the prime minister, Matteo Renzi, speaking from Ghana, called on the European commission to come up with a long-term strategy to tackle the migration crisis instead of fixating on “petty squabbles”. He also lamented in a speech before the Ghanaian parliament that the EU was “very distant” from the values of its founders.

This followed news that the European commission had opened an infringement procedure against Italy for not properly processing and identifying thousands of asylum seekers. “The time when Europe told us what we should do is over,” Renzi said.

Antonio Villafranca, research coordinator and head of the European programme at the ISPI thinktank in Milan, said he saw nothing revolutionary in the proposal. “I think that maybe the only objection from Italy could come from the point on free movement. Maybe access can be limited in an extraordinary situation, but if this is to be a rule forever, I don’t think Italy or other states would accept it.”

Updated

Here’s is James Forsyth’s Coffee House blog on the Commons urgent question on the EU renegotiation. And here’s an extract.

In Cameron’s absence, [David] Lidington—one of the safest pairs of hands in the government—batted away questions. In response to a question from Nigel Dodds of the DUP, Lidington wouldn’t outline any areas where the government wanted to improve the deal that Tusk has outlined. This combined with Cameron’s assertion that he would choose to join the EU on these proposed terms is a clear indication that the government is happy with what is currently on the table. It was telling, though, that when pressed on detail by Jacob Rees-Mogg, Lidington was quick to change the subject.

The CBI has welcomed the draft EU renegotiation plans. This is from Carolyn Fairbairn, its director general.

This is an important milestone on the way to a deal that could deliver positive changes to the EU that will benefit not just the UK, but the whole of Europe.

Business will want to see more details when the negotiations are concluded, but the prime minister’s ambitions to create a more competitive and outward-looking EU are making clear progress.

In particular the package to cut red tape, especially for smaller businesses, could make a real difference to ambitious firms looking to grow and create jobs. Business will also welcome proposals to strengthen national parliaments’ control over regulation.

George Osborne, the chancellor, was speaking at a Federation of Small Businesses conference today. He urged businesses to speak up in favour of Britain’s membership of a reformed EU. He told them:

We are going to have a referendum in this country, I want to make sure that you as small businesses have your voice heard because you are going to be on the sharp end of the economic consequences of the decision the country takes and the potential uncertainty that may follow.

So make sure that the small business community, as well as businesses large and small, take part in this discussion, because it’s all about our country’s future and you are central to our country’s future.

Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, told Sky News that he would be “very surprised” if there was significant opposition to the Tusk plan from other EU member states. He said:

I would imagine that Donald Tusk would have consulted with key groups of EU leaders and key countries in the EU as he’s been discussing this emerging text with us. So I would be very surprised if we have significant negative reaction across the EU to the text that’s been tabled.

The Institute of Directors has described the draft EU renegotiation package as “better than we expected”. In a statement Simon Walker, its director general, said:

The top reform priorities for IoD members are to stop the flow of unnecessary red tape from Brussels, make clear the UK is not on a path to more political integration, and make the more EU competitive. There are proposals on these areas in Tusk’s draft which hold promise, although no one should get carried away just yet.

Arron Banks, the co-founder of Leave.EU, has dismissed the draft EU renegotiation plan as “worthless”. In a statement he said:

Even an escapologist as slippery as David Cameron, no stranger to breaking promises on the EU, cast-iron or otherwise, found himself unable to defend his worthless package of so-called reforms at today’s press conference.

The idea that an emergency brake on benefits will do anything to reduce immigration, already dismissed by the Office for Budget Responsibility, would be laughable enough even if we didn’t have to get Brussels’ permission to pull it. Controlling a brake is a pretty poor second to having your hands on the steering wheel!

His empty, post-dated promise of an opt-out from ‘ever closer union’ after the referendum is insulting, and it will evaporate as soon as the EU gets a ‘Remain’ vote. Cameron says depositing it with the UN will make it legally binding, but this is totally untrue. The European Court of Justice has explicitly stated that it is not bound even by UN Security Council resolutions, and Brussels cheerfully tore up a number of UN-deposited guarantees which were given to Denmark in the 1990s.

He’s right on one thing: this will be our choice, “not the politicians’, not the MPs’, not the Cabinet ministers’.”

So let’s say thanks but no thanks to their bottle of snake oil, forget the brake and hit the ejection seat.

Here is a Guardian video of Jeremy Corbyn asking his urgent question in the Commons earlier about the EU renegotiation.

Alan Johnson, who chairs Labour In For Britain, has put out this statement about the draft EU renegotiation plan.

Britain’s membership of the EU is much bigger than any changes David Cameron hopes to make.

The sooner these reforms are agreed, the sooner we can we can step up the campaign to keep Britain in Europe and end the uncertainty around our EU membership.

At the outset of this process, Labour were clear that David Cameron must not use these reforms to damage protections at work guaranteed through our EU membership. The Tories have been prevented from hitting British workers’ rights to minimum paid leave, rights for agency workers, guaranteed paid maternity and paternity leave and protection from discrimination.

Labour is campaigning to keep Britain in the European Union because our membership brings jobs, prosperity and Britain’s influence in the world as well as protecting British workers and keeping us safer.

This is from Lars Løkke Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister. He says the Tusk plan is a “good basis for negotiations”.

Cameron says 'hand on heart' he has achieved his manifesto commitments

David Cameron has laid the ground for a short referendum campaign to keep Britain in a reformed EU as he declared that, “hand on heart”, he has achieved his Conservative manifesto commitments.

The prime minister dismissed a chorus of criticism from eurosceptic Tories, who say that proposals set out by the European Council president Donald Tusk fall well short of his original demands, to say that he would even recommend EU membership if the UK were outside the union.

Declaring that Tusk’s proposals on the most contentious area of welfare reforms were “very strong and powerful package”, the prime minister said:

Sometimes people say to me if you weren’t in the EU would you opt to join the EU? And today I can give a very clear answer: if I could get these terms for British membership I sure would opt in to be a member of the EU because they are good terms and they are different to what other countries have.

The prime minister, who was speaking at the Wiltshire branch of Siemens, stressed that the deal is not yet finalised and will have to be approved by EU leaders at their next summit on 18-19 February. But he said that he would campaign for a Yes vote in the referendum, which he hopes will be held before the 2017 deadline.

David Cameron giving a speech on the EU renegotiation in Chippenham
David Cameron giving a speech on the EU renegotiation in Chippenham Photograph: Ben Pruchnie/Getty Images

Crispin Blunt.
Crispin Blunt.

Crispin Blunt, the Conservative MP and chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee, told the World at One he was “marginally” in favour of voting to leave the EU at the moment, but that he was still considering how much damage the loss of the UK would cause to the EU itself. He implied that he could end up voting to remain in because he did not want to undermine it as an institution.

The area that is causing me concern is just how bad would it be for the EU if we leave, and if the EU is a much weaker institution, much less able to resolve its conflicts with a good dose of British practical common sense at the centre of its counsels, how much of a problem would that be for a UK that was outside the EU. I don’t think I have yet taken enough evidence on that to be confident of coming to the answer.

But Graham Brady, the Conservative MP who chairs the party’s backbench 1922 committee, said he expected to vote for Brexit. He told the same programme:

I don’t want to be churlish because I think David Cameron has clearly achieved some important improvements, but not on a scale that begins to address the concerns that I have.

Updated

Nigel Farage, the Ukip leader, told the World at One that the reforms negotiated by David Cameron were “pathetic”. He went on:

Remember this all started back with the Bloomberg speech and talk of fundamental change and reform of the treaties and Britain getting back powers. None of those things have happened and I’m quite amused to hear Mr Cameron in the last few minutes saying that he would now vote to join the European Union on the basis of this document.

Well, I tell you what, if the referendum was do we join an organisation that leaves our parliament no longer supreme, that means our courts can be overruled, that costs us over £50m a day – I’m pretty certain I know which way the British public would vote.

Updated

In the Commons, the urgent question on the EU renegotiation ends with Liam Fox asking the Speaker, John Bercow, to look into whether the potential for the House of Lords being able to ‘veto’ the Commons in any attempt to show the EU a ‘red card’ could raise questions of constitutionality.

Bercow refers Fox to the parliamentary manual, but ruefully says he suspects the issue is one that the chamber will revisit.

Updated

Frances O’Grady, the TUC’s general secretary, has described David Cameron’s red card idea as “just another way for him to try and stop people in Britain getting better rights and protections at work from future EU agreements.”

She also criticised the focus on cutting benefits for EU migrants.

It’s understandable for people to worry about the impact of migration on their communities. But instead of blaming migrant workers the Prime Minister should deal with the root problems, like bad bosses who use migrants to undercut other workers. And corporations who don’t pay their fair share in tax to fund our public services should be dealt with too.

Caroline Lucas.
Caroline Lucas.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP who is in favour of Britain staying in the EU, has criticised the proposal to cut benefits for EU migrants. She said:

Taking away in-work benefits for EU citizens working in the UK is both unfair and unlikely to be effective. People who come here from other EU countries pay more in tax than they take out in public services. You won’t hear it from government ministers but the fact is that EU nationals are actually less likely to claim benefits than British people.

Updated

EU renegotiation - the view from Paris

France ultimately wants to do everything it can to help the UK stay in the EU – a Brexit would be a “drama”, the prime minister Manuel Valls warned last month.

While Paris does have its clear red lines, these appear to have been taken into account in Tusk’s proposals.

Manuel Valls, the French PM.
Manuel Valls, the French PM. Photograph: Stephane de Sakutin/AFP/Getty Images

A key issue for France is the eurozone and the single currency. When Cameron had requested to have a say in or even a veto over eurozone decisions, Paris put its foot down. Tusk’s current offer is that non-euro countries can raise concerns and be given “necessary reassurances” about eurozone decisions. This appears to have calmed French nerves.

Tusk stressed that non-euro countries would not be able to “veto” or “delay urgent decisions” by the eurozone. But further detail on this needs to be discussed. Paris says it will “carefully examine” Tusk’s proposals before the summit.

In general, the current mood between Paris and London is positive — Cameron’s support on Syria and the UK’s vote to join airstrikes against Islamic State in December was symbolically very important for the French president, François Hollande.

Addressing French ambassadors and diplomats last month, Hollande said that France wanted the UK to stay in Europe, but that he would be “particularly vigilant” to make sure that the eurozone countries could continue to deepen their own ties. On the British negotiations, he said “nothing is insurmountable” but “principles must be respected” – namely the right to free circulation.

Hollande would ideally like to see the issue wrapped up this month.

The notion of a Brexit is politically extremely significant in France because it will dominate the runup to next year’s political election. Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right Front National, would hail a UK no-vote as a victory for her own critical stance on the EU.

Updated

On the World at One Tomas Prouza, the Czech Europe minister, said that the Czech Republic would have concerns if the “emergency brake” allowing the UK to stop EU migrants claiming benefits was in place for seven years or more.

The BBC’s James Lansdale has found a very pertinent paragraph in the Conservatives’ 2015 manifesto.

Alan Travis's snap analysis of the EU renegotiation document

At first sight it would seem the application of the emergency brake would have only a marginal impact on the level of net EU migration to Britain, which stands at 180,000 over the past 12 months.

DWP data shows there were 266,000 EU migrants in Britain claiming in-work benefits in March 2014, the latest data available. It is this figure that has led the prime minister to claim that 43% of EU migrants receive UK benefits while living in Britain. But most of these people have probably been living in Britain for years, some for decades, and won’t be affected by any decision to deny access to benefits, graduated or otherwise.

Donald Tusk is greeted by David Cameron on 31 January 2015.
Donald Tusk is greeted by David Cameron on 31 January 2015. Photograph: Leon Neal/AFP/Getty Images

The key question is how many of that 266,000 EU migrants who are claiming benefits are within the first four years of their arrival. The prime minister has not yet published his figures. One chart cited by the former DWP economist, Jonathan Portes, here showing East Europeans claiming working tax credits by year of arrival suggests that on average fewer than 15% each year of those who arrived in the past four years would be affected. If, as the EU draft suggests, they should be given gradual access to benefits from an initial complete exclusion then the numbers will be even smaller.

The government has consistently failed to provide extensive proof of “benefit tourism” to Britain from other EU countries and it is highly likely that those who do qualify for in-work benefits because they are in lower paid jobs will continue to come anyway. The government’s promised introduction of the “living wage” will in any case offset the need for some in-work benefits and probably leave Britain just as attractive jobs market as before.

The draft document suggests the other grounds to trigger the emergency brake would be “serious and persistent” difficulties in the labour market or excessive pressure on the proper functioning of public services. But with Britain’s near record levels of employment it is difficult to see how the UK would qualify on that heading.

As for “excessive pressure on public services” although there are localised pinchpoints in terms of housing, education or health, it is widely recognised that EU migrants staff are keeping the NHS on its feet and their positive net fiscal contribution is helping fund other public services.

Updated

Q: How long will EU migrants have to wait until they start getting some benefits?

On the four-year scheme, he says the details need to be worked out. But four years is in the document, he says.

Q: Do you think this plan will enable the government to get immigration down below 100,000 a year?

Cameron says he thinks these changes will make a difference to net EU migration.

But the government also need to cut immigration from outside the EU.

Q: Since you are now campaigning for Britain to stay in the EU, are other ministers now allowed to campaign for Brexit?

Cameron says this is very simple. There is a manifesto commitment to hold a renegotiation and get a deal. That is the position of the whole government.

If it gets a deal in February, or March, or later, the government will campaign for Britain to stay in. He wants it to have a clear position.

At that point, if ministers want to campaign for Britain to leave, they will be allowed to.

But the government itself will have a clear view, he says.

And that’s it. Cameron’s speech and Q&A are over.

I will post a summary soon.

Q: You have highlighted the flaws in the EU. You have got reforms, but they are quite technical and impenetrable. How can you persuade people to stay in the EU when you seem equivocal about it?

Cameron says he thinks Britain will be better off in a reformed EU.

He does not accept that these changes are difficult to explain.

Everyone can understand that, if there is more than one currency, all currencies need to be treated fairly.

And they can understand that non-eurozone countries should not have to bail out eurozone countries.

The big argument boils down to prosperity and security, he says.

We should be in the single market, with some say over how it it works.

Cameron says in the modern world you need partnerships with neighbours and friends, so that you cooperate on issues like terrorism.

Cameron says that, if EU countries do not accept this deal, he “rules nothing out”.

He says if he does not get this on February 18, he will take “as long as I need”.

Then he will go around the country and argue his case with passion, he says.

Updated

Q: You said people get fed up when politicians promise one thing, but deliver something else. On four years, child benefits and treaty change, you have had to water down your demands. And can you say, hand on heart, you think these plans will cut the number of EU migrants coming to the UK?

Cameron says he can say hand on heart he has delivered what he promised. And if you cut by £5,000 or £10,000 the amount workers get in benefits, they will be less likely to come.

People said he would never actually deliver a referendum. But it is happening.

He says he hopes after February 18 people will take this into account.

This is the culmination of some very hard work.

Cameron's Q&A

Q: Your manifesto said no child benefit would be sent abroad, and that EU migrants would not get benefits for four years. But both these aims have been watered down. And you wanted treaty change, but that is not happening.

Cameron says he asked for no more something for nothing, no more instant access to the welfare system until people paid in. He wanted that to last for for years. And four years is in the document.

And these documents would have legal force. They would be deposited at the UN. And there will be treaty change at some point in the future.

These documents are “a legal instrument”.

Cameron’s speech is over.

He is now taking questions.

David Cameron’s speech in Chippenham.
David Cameron’s speech in Chippenham. Photograph: BBC

Cameron says he is not going to argue that the EU is a perfect, unblemished organisation.

There will still be many frustrations with it, he says.

But he will be able to show that Britain is, on balance, better off and more properous inside this reformed European Union.

Britain will still be a full member of the single market.

And it will be there at the table, able to take action against countries like Russia and Iran.

But Britain will never be in the single currency, or in Schengen.

He says Britain will be able to argue it has the best of both words.

There are only a few months to go until the referendum, he says.

Updated

Boris Johnson casts doubts on Tusk’s EU renegotiation plan

Boris Johnson.
Boris Johnson.

Despite Downing Street hailing the deal as promising, Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, said he had his “doubts” about the red card scheme to give national parliaments more sovereignty over EU law.

“I think what would be better would be if we had a brake of our own that we were willing to use and that we were more willing to say ‘Britain is an independent sovereign country and we don’t agree with this particular piece of legislation or regulation and we want to stop it’, and that’s what we should be able to do,” he told LBC Radio.

Updated

Cameron says he hopes the EU referendum campaign 'will start soon'

Cameron says he hopes the EU referendum campaign “will start soon”.

Cameron says “strong, determined patient negotiation has achieved a good outcome for Britain”.

People sometimes ask, if you were not in the EU, would you opt to join.

Cameron says, if he could get the terms offered today, he definitely would opt in.

Updated

Cameron is now talking about immigration.

He was told he would never get a four-year ban on EU migrants claiming benefits.

But that is in the document, he says.

He also says that child benefit for children living outside the UK will be paid at local rates (ie, the rate in Poland, or wherever) not at the UK rate.

He says he has also wanted to address concerns like sham marriages. This plan will allow Britain to do that.

In the Commons, the Tory MP for Wycombe, Steve Baker, asks Lidington to admit that he has been “polishing poo” when it comes to spinning the Tusk plans.

The leading Eurosceptic says it “looks funny, smells funny” and “though it might be shiny, poke it in the middle and it’s soft”.

Lidington politely replies that he imagines that no matter what the document may have contained, Baker would have used the same line.

Updated

On competitiveness, Cameron says the Tusk plan addresses what Britain wants.

And, on sovereignty, Cameron says the Tusk plan makes it clear that non-eurozone countries will not be discriminated against.

And, if Britain has concerns, there is a mechanism for raising objections.

Updated

There is a live feed of the speech at the top of the blog.

David Cameron's speech

David Cameron is speaking now.

He is going through his renegotiation aims.

On sovereignty, he says Britain now has a specific opt-out from “ever closer union”. (See 12.54pm.)

He says people told him he would not get the red card mechanism. But he got that.

He says that he has also ensured that power flows back to national parliaments where it can. That is what the word “subsidiarity” refers to, although it is a word that people do not understand, he says.

He says there will be an annual review looking at whether powers should flow back to national parliaments.

Tusk plan analysis - Sovereignty

The third section in Cameron’s letter to Tusk covered Sovereignty. Here Cameron’s proposals were quite specific.

What Cameron wanted

First, I want to end Britain’s obligation to work towards an “ever closer union” as set out in the Treaty. It is very important to make clear that this commitment will no longer apply to the United Kingdom. I want to do this in a formal, legally-binding and ireversible way.

Second, while the European Parliament plays an important role, I want to enhance the role of national parliaments, by proposing a new arrangement where groups of national parliaments, acting together, can stop unwanted legislative proposals. The precise threshold of national parliaments required will be a matter for the negotiation.

Third, I want to see the EU’s commitments to subsidiarity fully implemented, with clear proposals to achieve that. As the Dutch have said, the ambition should be “Europe where necessary, national where possible”.

In addition, the UK will need confirmation that the EU institutions will fully respect the purpose behind the JHA Protocols in any future proposals dealing with Justice and Home Affairs matters, in particular to preserve the UK’s ability to choose to participate.

National Security is — and must remain — the sole responsibility of Member States, while recognising the benefits of working together on issues that affect the security of us all.

What Tusk offers

This is what the Tusk document says about “ever closer union”.

References in the Treaties and their preambles to the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe are primarily intended to signal that the Union’s aim is to promote trust and understanding among peoples living in open and democratic societies sharing a common heritage of universal values. They are not an equivalent to the objective of political integration.

Therefore, the references to an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe do not offer a basis for extending the scope of any provision of the Treaties or of EU secondary legislation. They should not be used either to support an extensive interpretation of the competences of the Union or of the powers of its institutions as set out in the Treaties.

And this is what it says about the red card.

Where reasoned opinions on the non-compliance of a draft Union legislative act with the principle of subsidiarity, sent within 12 weeks from the transmission of that draft, represent more than 55 % of the votes allocated to the national Parliaments, the Council Presidency will include the item on the agenda of the Council for a comprehensive discussion on these opinions and on the consequences to be drawn therefrom.

Following such discussion, and while respecting the procedural requirements of the Treaties, the representatives of the Member States acting in their capacity as members of the Council will discontinue the consideration of the draft legislative act in question unless the draft is amended to accommodate the concerns expressed in the reasoned opinions.

The document also contains a strong commitment to the principle of subsidiarity (the idea that EU decisions should only be taken at an EU level where necessary. And it says countries should only be bound by justice protocols if they choose.

Snap analysis

There is a debate to be had about whether the red card mechanism will make much difference in practice, but the Tusk plan is very much in line with what Cameron wanted. And although “ever closer union” remains in the treaties, the Tusk document makes it clear that Britain has an exemption. Crucially, it also says that this phrase should not be used by the European Court of Justice to justify extending the reach of EU law.

Updated

David Lidington, the Europe minister, appeared to attempt to calm restive Tory backbenchers unhappy with Tusk’s draft plan by reminding the Commons that the government was “in the middle of a live negotiation and in a very crucial stage”.

He added that ministers should not be expected to “provide a running commentary” on the process and repeats Cameron’s line that there is still a lot of work to be done on the renegotiation.

Corbyn responds by saying it is rather strange that the PM is not in the house, but rather in Chippenham – “the town in which I was born” – rather than discharging his duties to report to the House of Commons.

He addresses Lidington’s point about not doing a running commentary by saying that the PM is doing exactly that – just to a more appreciative audience.

Corbyn also makes the cute point about Eurosceptics wanting the Westminster parliament to be above all others, yet Cameron seems to be undermining the sovereignty of that very parliament with his actions.

Updated

Tusk plan analysis - Competitiveness

Camerons’s second heading, in his November letter to Tusk, was Competitiveness. This was the easiest part of his renegotiation because, as he acknowledged, much of what Britain wants is being pursued by the European Commission anyway under the better regulation agenda being championed by Frans Timmermans, the commission vice president.

What Cameron wanted

Although Cameron said the European Commission was already making progress in this area, he said he wanted it to “go much further”.

In particular, for all we have achieved in stemming the flow of new regulations, the burden from existing regulation is still too high. So the United Kingdom would like to see a target to cut the total burden on business. The EU should also do more to fulfil its commitment to the free flow of capital, goods and services.

The United Kingdom believes we should bring together all the different proposals, promises and agreements on the Single Market, on trade, and on cutting regulation into a clear long-term commitment to boost the competitiveness and productivity of the European Union and to drive growth and jobs for all.

What Tusk offers

This is what the main Tusk document says about competitiveness.

To this end, the relevant EU institutions and the Member States will make all efforts to strengthen the internal market and to adapt it to keep pace with the changing environment. At the same time, the relevant EU institutions and Member States will take concrete steps towards better regulation, which is a key driver to deliver the above-mentioned objectives. This means lowering administrative burdens and compliance costs on economic operators, especially small and medium enterprises, and repealing unnecessary legislation as foreseen in the Declaration of the Commission on a subsidiarity implementation mechanism and a burden reduction implementation mechanism, while continuing to ensure high regulatory standards. And the European Union will pursue an active and ambitious policy of trade.

Snap analysis

This is in very much in line with what Cameron wants. There is no explicit target to cut the total regulatory burden on business, as Cameron requested, although arguably the commitment to “lowering administrative burdens and compliance costs” and “a burden reduction implementation mechanism” amounts to the same thing.

Updated

Jeremy Corbyn is asking his urgent question in the House of Commons now.

Tusk plan analysis - Economic governance

In his letter to Tusk Cameron set out his first set of demands under the heading Economic governance. It focused on measures to protect the non-eurozone countries like Britain from being outgunned by eurozone countries, particularly on financial matters.

What Cameron wanted

This is what Cameron said explaining his demands.

We do not want to stand in the way of measures Eurozone countries decide to take to secure the long-term future of their currency. But we want to make sure that these changes will respect the integrity of the Single Market, and the legitimate interests of non-Euro members.

I am confident we can achieve an agreement here that works for everyone. Britain is not seeking a new opt-out for the UK in this area — we have the opt-out from the single currency we need. Nor are we looking for a veto over - what is done in the Eurozone. What we seek are legally binding principles that safeguard the operation of the Union for all 28 Member States — and a safeguard - mechanism to ensure these principles are respected and enforced.

And here are the four specific demands he made.

These principles should include recognition that:

    • The EU has more than one currency.
    • There should be no discrimination and no disadvantage for any business on the basis of the currency of their country.
    • The integrity of the Single Market must be protected.
    • Any changes the Eurozone decides to make, such as the creation of a banking union, must be voluntary for non-Euro countries, never compulsory.
    • Taxpayers in non-Euro countries should never be financially liable for operations to support the Eurozone as a currency.
    • Just as financial stability and supervision has become a key area of competence for Eurozone institutions like the ECB, so financial stability and supervision is a key area of competence for national institutions like the Bank of England for non-Euro members.
    • And any issues that affect all Member States must be discussed and decided by all Member States.

What Tusk offers

This is what Tusk says in his statement.

On economic governance, the draft Decision of the Heads sets out principles to ensure mutual respect between the Member States taking part in further deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union and those which do not. By doing that we can pave the way for the further integration within the euro area while safeguarding the rights and competences of non-participating Member States.

The respect for these principles is backed up by a draft Decision establishing a mechanism that while giving necessary reassurances on the concerns of non-euro area Member States, cannot constitute a veto nor delay urgent decisions. The exact conditions for triggering this mechanism remain to be further discussed.

The more detailed document also says clearly that British taxpayers’ money can never be liable to support the eurozone and that supervision of financial institutions in non-eurozone countries will remain a matter for their national governments.

Snap analysis

In broad terms this addresses Cameron’s concerns. The main document does make it clear that “not all member states have the euro as their currency”. But it is not at all clear what impact the “necessary reassurances” that Tusk describes will have in terms of enabling the UK to stop eurozone countries ganging up to impose financial measures that would disadvantage the City (Cameron’s key concerns). There is nothing as explicit as the double majority rule introduced for the European Banking Authority to protect non-eurozone members.

UPDATE: I’ve corrected the paragraph above to say that the main Tusk document does make it clear that “not all member states have the euro as their currency”. Earlier I wrongly said this point was not made explicitly.

Updated

Plans 'do not come close' to what Cameron promised, says Liam Fox

Liam Fox.
Liam Fox.

The first thoughts of the former defence secretary Liam Fox, one of the most prominent Eurosceptics in the Tory party, will not make happy reading in Downing Street – particularly if he has captured the mood of similarly minded backbenchers.

Fox – a VoteLeave supporter – said Tusk’s proposals did not “come close” to the changes voters had been promised. These quotes are from the Press Association:

The very limited set of demands from our government have been watered down by the EU in every area. The British people want to take back control and end the supremacy of EU law over our economy, our borders and our parliament.

“None of these changes even come close to the fundamental changes promised to the public. We are being asked to risk staying in the EU based on the back of empty promises from the EU that are not even backed up in Treaty. The only safe option is to Vote Leave.

As well as failing to get all he asked for on in-work benefits, Cameron’s proposal to stop EU workers being able to claim benefit on behalf of children living abroad was also watered down. Instead, the UK will be able to index it to living standards in the country where the child resides.

For more background on this, you could read our news story from a few weeks ago that explains the issue.

According to HMRC data, there were 20,400 claims of child benefits used for children living in another European country in December 2013, accounting for around 0.3% of the total 7.55 million families receiving child benefits at the time.

Donald Tusk says “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed,” according to my colleague Jennifer Rankin, who has been looking through the documents.

Tusk announced his proposals for “a new settlement” between the UK in the EU, with a twist on Hamlet’s famous line: “To be or not to be together … that is the question.”

In a letter to all 28 EU member states, Tusk said his proposals went “really far” in addressing Cameron’s concerns, but “he could not cross the principles on which the European project is founded.”

He added: “This has been a difficult process and there are still challenging negotiations ahead. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. I am convinced that the proposal is a good basis for a compromise.”

Updated

Tusk plan analysis - Immigration

In his letter to Donald Tusk in November last year David Cameron set out his demands under four headings. As is often the way, he left the most tricky topic, Immigration, until last, and it was fourth in his list. But we’ll start with it because it is not just the issue that has generated most interest, but also the one where the gap between what Cameron wanted and what he was likely to get seemed widest.

What Cameron wanted

This is what Cameron said about his overall aim.

Britain has always been an open, trading nation, and we do not want to change that. But we do want to find arrangements to allow a Member State like the UK to restore a sense of fairness to our immigration system and to reduce the current very high level of population flows from within the EU into the UK.

And here are the specific demands he made.

We need to ensure that when new countries are admitted to the EU in the future, free movement will not apply to those new members until their economies have converged much more closely with existing Member States.

We also need to crack down on the abuse of free movement, an issue on which I have found wide support in my discussions with colleagues. This includes tougher and longer re-entry bans for fraudsters and people who collude in sham

It means addressing the fact that it is easier for an EU citizen to bring a non-EU spouse to Britain than it is for a British citizen to do the same.

It means stronger powers to deport criminals and stop them coming back, as well as preventing entry in the first place. And it means addressing ECJ (European Court of Justice) judgments that have widened the scope of free movement in a way that has made it more difficult to tackle this kind of abuse. But we need to go further to reduce the numbers coming here. As I have said previously, we can reduce the flow of people coming from within the EU by reducing the draw that our welfare system can exert across Europe.

So we have proposed that people coming to Britain from the EU must live here and contribute for four years before they qualify for in-work benefits or social housing. And that we should end the practice of sending child benefit overseas.

What Tusk offers

This is what Tusk says in his statement.

On social benefits and free movement, we need to fully respect the current treaties, in particular the principles of freedom of movement and non-discrimination. Therefore the proposed solution to address the UK concerns builds on the clarification of the interpretation of current rules, including a draft Commission Declaration on a number of issues relating to better fighting abuse of free movement.

The draft Decision of the Heads notes, in particular, the Commission’s intention to propose changes to EU legislation as regards the export of child benefits and the creation of a safeguard mechanism to respond to exceptional situations of inflow of workers from other Member States. A draft Commission Declaration also relates to this mechanism. This approach, as well as the exact duration of the application of such a mechanism need to be further discussed at our level.

But what matters is the details. In section D of the main document, paragraph 2(b), Tusk sets out how the rule allowing the UK to stop EU migrants claiming benefits for four years would work.

A Member State wishing to avail itself of the mechanism would notify the Commission and the Council that such an exceptional situation exists on a scale that affects essential aspects of its social security system, including the primary purpose of its in-work benefits system, or which leads to difficulties which are serious and liable to persist in its employment market or are putting an excessive pressure on the proper functioning of its public services. On a proposal from the Commission having examined the notification, the Council could, by means of an implementing act, authorise the Member State concerned to restrict access to in-work welfare benefits to the extent necessary. The implementing act would authorise the Member State to limit the access of Union workers newly entering its labour market to in-work benefits for a total period of up to four years from the commencement of employment. The limitation should be graduated, from an initial complete exclusion but gradually increasing access to such benefits to take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market of the host Member State. The Council implementing act would have a limited duration and apply to EU workers newly entering its labour market during a period of [X] years, extendable for two successive periods of [Y] years and [Z] years.

He also says that EU migrants getting child benefit for children living outside the UK would be paid at a level appropriate to the member state where the child resides; that members states can take further action against tackle sham marriages and fraudulent immigration claims; and that members states can take action against citizens who represent a serious threat to security.

Snap analysis

This is not quite what David Cameron wanted. The phrase about “gradually increasing access to such benefits to take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market” means that EU migrants would not face a total ban on in-work benefits for four years. And the Tusk proposal would not “end the practice of sending child benefit overseas”, just limit the amount of child benefit sent overseas.

The gaps in the document - marked by X, Y and Z in square brackets - also illustrate the extent to which the debate about how long the UK would be allowed to apply its “emergency brake” (allowing it to stop EU migrants claiming benefits) is unresolved.

Updated

George Osborne.
George Osborne.

The chancellor, George Osborne, has given his first thoughts. And they read an awful lot like those of the prime minister.

At a Federation Of Small Businesses conference in Westminster, he said:

When you look at what has been achieved so far you will see real progress in changing the EU, reforming the EU and reforming our relationship with the EU.

But there’s more work to be done. We have got some hard negotiations over the next couple of weeks, important details to nail down.

Updated

VoteLeave is already calling Cameron out, before he’s even addressed the document in detail. The Eurosceptic group says the PM “has failed to deliver” his key promise on a four-year freeze on in-work benefits for EU migrants.

Sky’s Faisal Islam has picked out the key paragraph ( 2B section B) where Tusk asserts that current conditions in the UK are already considered “exceptional” enough to justify triggering the controversial emergency brake on paying in-work benefits.

This is Mark Smith taking over the live bit of the blog while Andrew reads Tusk’s draft document in more detail.

David Cameron has tweeted saying Tusk’s framework “shows real progress” in the four main areas in which the UK is seeking reform, but admits there is “more work to do”. He is due to give his full response to the document at 12.30pm – the same time as David Lidington will be answering an urgent question in the House of Commons. We’ll be covering both in this blog.

Updated

The restrictions on in-work benefits for up to four years will not be an outright ban as originally demanded by Cameron but a “graduated” limitation to “take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market of the host member state”.

Read Donald Tusk's introduction text to his draft EU renegotiation plan

Updated

Donald Tusk’s overall statement is here.

And he has published six detailed documents, which are all here too. Together they run to 32 pages.

Updated

Donald Tusk is getting all Shakespearian as he publishes his plan ...

Updated

Tom Newton Dunn, political editor of the Sun, says David Cameron’s demands have been watered down.

But he thinks there is a win for Theresa May in the document.

What the draft EU renegotiation plan says about the 'emergency brake'

This is what the document says about the “emergency brake” - the plan to allow the UK to stop EU migrants claiming in-work benefits.

- a proposal to amend regulation no 492/2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the union which will provide an alert and safeguard mechanism that responds to the situations of inflow of workers from other members states of an exceptional magnitude over an extended period of time. A member state wishing to avail itself of the mechanism would notify the Commission and the Council that such an exceptional situation exists on a scale that affects essential aspects of its social security system, including the primary purpose of its in work benefit system or which leads to difficulties which are serious and liable to persist in its employment market or are putting an excessive pressure on the proper functioning of its public services. On a proposal from the commission having examined the notification the council could by means of an implementing act, authorise the member state concerned to restrict access to in work welfare benefits to the extent necessary. The implementing act would authorise the member state to limit the access of union workers newly entering its labour market to in work benefits for a period of up to four years from the commencement of employment. The limitation should be graduated from an initial complete exclusion but gradually increasing access to such benefits to take account of the growing connection of the worker with the labour market of the host state,

Donald Tusk publishes his draft EU renegotiation document

The top of Donald Tusk’s draft EU renegotiation document.
The top of Donald Tusk’s draft EU renegotiation document. Photograph: European council

Donald Tusk’s draft EU renegotiation document is out. And my colleague Rowena Mason has been in the lock-in. (See 11.07am.) Here is her first take:

Britain would be able to request an emergency brake on in-work welfare benefits for EU migrants for up to four years subject the permission of other members states under proposals from Brussels to address David Cameron’s demands.

The text, put forward by EU Council president Donald Tusk, contains measures relating to all four areas requested by the UK - economic governance, competitiveness, sovereignty and social benefits.

The proposal to restrict in-work benefits with an emergency brake could be requested by any member but would have to be approved by the whole EU Council, either by unanimity or a qualified majority vote. The text also does not make explicit how long the emergency brake could apply for.

It partially meets Cameron’s demands for limits to benefits but critics are likely to be unhappy with an effective veto by the EU council over the emergency brake.

The key points proposed by Tusk, which will need to be approved by all member states, are:

  • Social security: an emergency brake on in-work benefits for up to four years if there is pressure on a particular member states, which would have to be approved by the EU council; child benefit would be indexed to the level of member state where the child resides.
  • Other immigration measures: members states can take further action against tackle sham marriages and fraudulent immigration claims, members states can take action against citizens who represent a serious threat to security.
  • Economic governance: British taxpayers money can never be liable to support the eurozone; supervision of financial institutions in non eurozone countries will remain a matter for their national governments.
  • Competitiveness: a clear long term commitment to increasing competitiveness and taking concrete steps towards better regulation and reducing administrative burdens.
  • Sovereignty: a red card system to allow national parliaments making up more than 55% of votes on the council to be able to veto EU legislation; spells out that “ever closer union” cannot be used to justify more political integration.

Updated

The Spectator’s James Forsyth has a good point about David Cameron not answering Jeremy Corbyn’s UQ.

Labour Whips, an official party Twitter account, says it is “incredible” that David Cameron is refusing to make a statement to the Commons himself about the EU renegotiation plan.

My colleague Patrick Wintour thinks Cameron wants to wait until tomorrow before facing the Commons to allow time to square his backbenchers.

David Lidington.
David Lidington. Photograph: Mindaugas Kulbis/AP

David Lidington, the Europe minister, will probably reply to the Labour urgent question about the EU renegotiation on behalf of David Cameron, I’m told.

Updated

Denis MacShane, a former Labour Europe minister, thinks domestic politics in Poland could disrupt David Cameron’s EU renegotiation.

This is the story the Financial Times wrote about the Smolensk story last week (subscription), and here is how it starts.

Poland will try five officials from the previous government over the 2010 Smolensk air crash that killed the country’s president, reopening a national tragedy that has engendered a deeply partisan political fight.

Members of Poland’s new ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) have long alleged that Donald Tusk, prime minister at the time of the crash and current president of the European council, shoulders some blame for the disaster, which killed all 96 people on board. Among the dead was then-President Lech Kaczynski, twin brother of the PiS leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

A decision this week to embark on the first trial over the crash means Mr Tusk’s former chief of staff, two of his aides while he was prime minister and two other former officials will face accusations of negligence in their arrangements for the doomed flight. It crashed in thick fog on the approach to an airport in Smolensk, Russia.

Updated

Speaker grants urgent question to Jeremy Corbyn on EU renegotiation plan

John Bercow, the Speaker, has granted Labour an urgent question on the EU renegotiation plan.

Normally David Cameron would reply to an urgent question from Jeremy Corbyn, but Cameron is out of London giving a speech. It is not clear yet who will reply.

Updated

The report is now due at 11.30am.

Robert Oxley from the Vote Leave campaign has revealed that journalists in London have been invited to read the Tusk document at a “lock-in” – an event where journalists are shown a document on condition that they do not report it until the embargo is lifted.

Oxley thinks this is unfair.

Updated

This is from Sky News’s Faisal Islam.

This is from the Times’s Bruno Waterfield.

(It doesn’t sound like a huge concession.)

David Cameron is to visit Poland on Friday, it is being reported.

David Cameron shakes hands with his Polish counterpart Beata Szydło during a meeting in Warsaw in December.
David Cameron shakes hands with his Polish counterpart Beata Szydło during a meeting in Warsaw in December. Photograph: Radek Pietruszka/EPA

Updated

According to Politico’s Tara Palmeri, Donald Tusk’s draft EU renegotiation may propose giving the UK the right to use an “emergency brake” to stop EU migrants claiming benefits - but with the crucial details of how long this might apply for left unresolved.

Here’s an extract from her story.

According to two EU officials, Tusk has been leaning towards leaving blank the number of years for which an emergency brake would apply.

Tusk would prefer to keep the number for the negotiations,” a diplomat said. “He checked with some eastern European states on the welfare issue, some of the member states said ‘don’t put in a figure until it’s confirmed’.

Updated

Vote Leave, probably the most prominent Out campaign, has dismissed the red card proposal as trivial. In a statement Matthew Elliott, its chief executive, said:

What the government is asking for from the EU is trivial - these proposals will not take back control from the EU. These gimmicks have been ignored by the EU before and will be ignored again as they will not be in the EU treaty.

The government are asking us to trust the promises of the EU commission and EU Judges rather than taking back control. If the public want parliament to have the power to block damaging EU laws then the only safe option is to Vote Leave.

We’re having a problem with the comments today. I’m sorry about that. Colleagues are trying to sort this out as soon as possible.

Ian Traynor on the key issues to be resolved in the draft EU renegotiation plan

It’s bated breath time in Brussels as tout le monde awaits the oracle in the form of a detailed paper from Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, which will generally set the terms for Britain’s continued membership of the European Union, subject to the outcome of David Cameron’s referendum.

Tusk is to release his settlement proposal in little more than an hour. Key points to watch for:

  • Whether it specifies timings and deadlines for Cameron’s freeze on in-work benefits for EU migrants. The UK insists on a four-year freeze and wants the mechanism to be valid over a longer period. Will Tusk agree and detail these dates or leave them open for further negotiations over the next fortnight?
  • How is the “emergency brake” facilitating the benefits freeze structured, determining how quickly it can be implemented? The UK says Brussels has already agreed that immigration conditions in Britain constitute an “emergency”, signalling that it can start freezing benefits promptly. But the emergency brake will require legislation or legislative amendments. These take time. The commission has sole right of initiating legislation in the EU and the European parliament may also need to be involved. Fast-tracking legislation would still take several months and that’s being optimistic given the glacial speed of the European lawmaking process.
  • George Osborne’s determination to redefine the balance of power between the 19 countries of the eurozone and the those, like Britain, not in the currency is another big issue. Britain wants to be able to “escalate” contested decisions on financial regulation and economic policy to summit level if it believes eurozone caucusing is harming single market and UK interests. What to look out for? How will this work? If it goes to summit level, how are vexed issues resolved, are there deadlines?

Updated

Boris Johnson says 'much, much more needs to be done' in the EU renegotiation

Boris Johnson, the Conservative MP and mayor of London, has been holding his LBC phone-in, and eventually he was asked about David Cameron’s EU renegotiation.

He did not sound very impressed.

He started with some classic Boris sarcasm.

I am, unfortunately, not able to give you a full read-out because I haven’t yet been able to absorb the full, quivering magnitude.

And he ended saying that “much, more more” needed to be done.

David Cameron has done a very good job at negotiating at huge speed a very difficult package of measures. What I think everybody would want is to see more progress. Let’s see where we get. So far he has been doing a very, very good job of getting people to see things his way. I think there is much, much more, however, that needs to be done.

Asked specifically about the red card plan (see 9.34am), he said it would be much better for the UK to have a unilateral veto on EU laws.

We’ll have to see how it is explained to us. I have not yet got a firm view on it ... I think what would be better would be if we had a break of our own that we were willing to use and that we were more willing to say, Britain’s an independent sovereign country and we don’t agree with this particular piece of regulation or legislation and we want to stop it. And that’s what we should be able to do.

Last week the Sun reported that David Cameron now believes that Johnson will end up campaigning for Britain to remain in the EU. That may well be the case, but, based on what he told LBC, Johnson does not want anyone to think yet that his mind is made up.

Boris Johnson on LBC
Boris Johnson on LBC Photograph: LBC

Farage says it is 'ludicrous' to present the red card proposal as a victory

Here is Nigel Farage, the Ukip leader, on the red card proposal. (See 9.34am.) He thinks that, in practice, it will not make much difference.

The idea we are being sold that a joint “red card” is some sort of victory is frankly ludicrous ... Essentially what we have is almost the current situation at the Council of Ministers where a majority can block new legislation.

As Nicholas Watt explained in his overnight story, Number 10 has been saying that David Cameron has persuaded Donald Tusk to back his proposal for a red card system that would allow national parliaments to block EU laws. Here is an extract from his story.

No 10 sought to highlight progress by saying that the prime minister has secured agreement on one of his demands set out in the Conservative general election manifesto – a red card system that will allow a group of national parliaments to club together to block EU legislation.

Under Tusk’s draft agreement, 55% of the EU’s national parliaments could force the European council to stop or amend legislation they believe is unnecessary. A No 10 source said: “This will strengthen the power of Westminster to stop unnecessary EU laws and addresses concerns that the current yellow card system has not proved strong enough. It ensures that the European commission cannot just ignore the will of national parliamentarians and delivers greater democratic control over what the EU does.”

On the Today programme Anne-Marie Trevelyan, a Conservative MP and a member of Conservatives For Britain, which is close to the Vote Leave campaign, said this was “really rather trivial”. She said:

Sixteen countries have got to gang together against whatever the new idea is in order for it to be stopped. We are not seeing anything that allows us to take control of our country so I think I will be ending up voting to leave.

Chris Bryant, the shadow leader of the Commons, said a red card system should involve MPs voting on EU laws.

Gawain Towler, a Ukip communications chief, said Britain should have a unilateral veto over EU laws.

There is a good discussion of the red card idea, and all David Cameron’s EU renegotiation demands, in this report from the Centre for European Reform (pdf) last year which analysed them in detail. It points out there that there is already a yellow card/orange card mechanism that allows national parliaments to join together to object to EU laws, forcing the commission to think again. And it suggests that, in practice, a red card rule would not make much difference.

Yellow and orange cards have been available to national chambers for the last six years, but parliaments have reached the threshold for a yellow card only twice and are yet to show an orange card. A new arrangement would be unlikely to result in an avalanche of red cards but would allow Cameron to claim he has empowered national parliaments.

Updated

This is from the BBC’s Norman Smith.

Here is my colleague Jennifer Rankin’s explainer on the EU renegotiation.

Just over three years ago, in what became known as the Bloomberg speech, David Cameron unveiled his plan to renegotiate Britain’s terms of membership of the European Union and then hold an in/out referendum. The strategy was contingent on his winning the 2015 general election, but he passed that hurdle and commenced the renegotiation. Today we are going to get the draft result, almost certainly paving the way for a referendum in June. It will be the first referendum on Europe in the UK since 1975 and, with Cameron claiming this should settle the issue for a generation, for many voters it could conceivably be the only time they ever get to vote on the matter.

What we will get today is a document from Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, setting out draft proposals for discussion at the EU summit on Thursday 18 and Friday 19 February. It is expected to be between 15 to 20 pages long, and it should be quite technical. It will be up to EU leaders to negotiate the final package, and some details may change, but Tusk would not be publishing this plan if he did not think it was a basis for consensus and the eventual outcome is likely to be very similar to what gets published today.

Many in the UK have already made up their minds. But roughly a third of the electorate are open to persuasion one way or another, and the renegotiation should have some impact. They will be swayed not so much by the detail (some of which will be very complex) as by overall judgments as to whether or not Cameron has secured “a good deal”.

And the Tusk text matters for another reason; if Britain does vote to stay in the EU, the rules governing our relationship with Brussels will be different. The changes may not be massive and radical, but they won’t be meaningless either.

Here is our preview story.

Here are the key timings.

9am: Boris Johnson hosts his LBC phone-in. The Conservative MP and mayor of London is an influential voice in this debate, and I will be monitoring what he says about the renegotiation.

After 11am: Donald Tusk publishes his EU renegotiation plan.

Around 12.30pm: David Cameron gives a speech explaining the plan.

Today I will be focusing almost exclusively on this story, although I will pick up other stories when I do a summary.

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

I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time. Alternatively you could post a question to me on Twitter.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
People Claim To Have Found The Exact “Moment” Sharon And Kelly Osbourne Started Taking Weight Loss Medication
Netizens were convinced they could see the exact moment Sharon and Kelly Osbourne allegedly began using weight‑loss medication.
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
The Heartbreaking Story Of Stephen Baldwin’s Biggest Struggle, And How He Poked Fun At It In New Ad
In the new video, Stephen Baldwin joked about his dependence on substances, which is an issue that his daughter Hailey Bieber has also spoken about.
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
Is John Cena Facing Health Issues? Fans Notice 'Awkward Posture' After Retired WWE Star's Struggle to Walk
Fans are speculating about John Cena's health after viral clips appeared to show the retired WWE champion struggling with his posture and mobility.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Slavery exhibit is changing at the African American history museum as a loan agreement ends
The National Museum of African American History and Culture is removing a rare slave ship timber from its “Slavery and Freedom” exhibit and sending it back to South Africa
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Jack Osbourne names baby daughter Ozzy to honour late father
TV star announces birth of Ozzy Matilda Osbourne on social media, alongside image of cuddly bat
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Surely if you rule the manosphere, you can be your own boss? These influencers aren’t even that
Content creators claim they’ve escaped the 9 to 5, yet as Louis Theroux’s new show reveals, they are mere serfs to algorithms and audiences, says freelance journalist Elle Hunt
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play