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

Syria debate: Boris Johnson calls for protests outside Russian embassy - Politics live

Boris Johnson: I would like to see protests outside Russian embassy

Boris Johnson's speech on Syria - Summary and analysis

This was Boris Johnson’s first speech in a debate in the Commons in his role as foreign secretary, and also an opportunity to get some flavour of what the May government’s (non-Brexit) foreign policy is going to be like. Johnson famously wrote a biography of Winston Churchill and at one point this afternoon the the ultra-hawkish Labour MP John Woodock urged Johnson to adopt a Churchillian approach to Russian aggression in Syria. (See 2.56pm.) As mayor of London and a Telegraph columnist Johnson generally tended to be on the more interventionist end of the scale, and so perhaps MPs were expecting him to adopt a rather more muscular approach to Syria policy than was adopted by his predecessor, Philip Hammond.

If so, they will have been disappointed. Johnson’s language was probably a bit more condemnatory than Hammond’s would have been in a debate like this. But if you listened carefully to what he said, he was actually adopting a rather cautious, dovish stance. This may be more a reflection of May’s views than Johnson’s. (Nick Timothy, her co-chief of staff and philosophical alter ego, is on record as saying foreign policy should “value stability, “respect sovereignty” and avoid ideological crusades.) But it meant that if any MPs were hoping for Churchill, what they got instead was more Stanley Baldwin.

Here are the key points from his speech.

  • Johnson tentatively backed the call for Syria and Russia to be investigated for war crimes by the international criminal court. But he played down prospects of anything happening quickly, saying some ICC prosecutions only take place decades after the offences are committed. He told MPs that the targeting of hospitals in Aleppo amounted to a war crime.

Every hospital in eastern Aleppo is believed to have been bombed, some of them more than once, and several have been put out of action. Hospitals have been targeted with such frequency and precision that it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that this must be deliberate policy. The House will know that intentionally attacking a hospital amounts to a war crime. It is time, I think, for all these incidents to be fully and properly investigated with a view to assembling the necessary evidence to ensure that justice is done. And yes, to answer the question that has been raised by several honourable and right honourable members, we do think there could be advantages in the [international criminal court] procedures. And I would remind this House that in recent history war criminals have been successfully prosecuted decades after their offences.

He also expressed some support for the French bid to get the ICC to launch an investigation into Syria and Russia, saying he was “personally very attracted to the idea of holding these people to account before the international criminal court”. But later, at the Number 10 lobby briefing, Downing Street sounded a bit less keen.

  • He played down the prospect of backing no-fly zones over Syria. Andrew Mitchell, the Conservative former international development secretary who called the debate, demanded the creation of no-fly zones and other MPs backed the idea too. Johnson said he had “every sympathy” for what they were proposing and that he would consult allies on the idea. But he also signalled strongly that he would eventually say no. Pointing out that the Commons was opposed to sending troops to Syria, he added:

But we cannot commit to a no-fly zone unless we are prepared to ... shoot down planes or helicopters that violate that zone. We need to think very carefully about the consequences.

The Labour MP John Woodcock read his comments as a move towards no-fly zones.

But the Independent’s John Rentoul probably has a more realistic interpretation of Johnson’s words.

  • Johnson said he would like to see people protest about Syria outside the Russian embassy. The Labour MP Ann Clywd proposed this earlier (see 2.27pm) and Johnson said he agreed with her.

I agree with [Ann Clywd]. I would certainly like to see demonstrations outside the Russian embassy. Where is the Stop the War Coalition at the moment? Where are they?

  • He said he was worried that “the wells of outrage [about events in Syria] are growing exhausted”.
  • He said Russia was in danger of becoming an “international pariah” because of what was happening in Syria.

If Russia continues in it current path, then I believe that great county is in danger of becoming a pariah nation. If President Putin’s strategy is to restore the greatness and the glory of Russia, then I believe he risks seeing his ambition turn to ashes in the face of international contempt for what is happening in Syria.

  • But he said the “best hope” was to persuade Russia to “do the right thing”. Johnson said the UK had urged the EU to adopt a tough line on sanctions against Russia, but he pointedly refused to commit the UK to pushing for tougher sanctions. He also declined to back a call from Labour’s Toby Perkins for the international community to boycott the 2018 World Cup in Russia because of what is happening in Syria. Summing up his position Johnson said:

In the long term the only realistic solution is to persuade both sides to have a ceasefire and then to work through to a political solution ...

Our best hope is to persuade the Russians that it is profoundly in the interests of Russia to take the initiative, to win the acclaim of the international community, do the right thing in Syria, call off their puppets in the Assad regime, stop the bombing and bring peace to Aleppo and have a genuine ceasefire. That is the way.

  • He said the Aleppo siege was the worst in the civil war.

At this moment the 275,000 inhabitants of eastern Aleppo are under siege. They are isolated from the outside world, subjected to constant bombardment and prevented from receiving humanitarian aid. Their power and water supplies have been cut off in what has become a signature tactic of the Assad killing machine, to besiege civilian populations. And what we are now seeing in eastern Aleppo is the biggest and potentially the deadliest siege since the outbreak of Syria’s civil war over five years ago.

Boris Johnson in the Commons.
Boris Johnson in the Commons. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Updated

Russia defends its record in Syria

The Russian embassy in London has been using Twitter today to defend its record in Syria. One of its tweets is specifically directed at the Ministry of Defence (@DefenceHQ).

Updated

Emily Thornberry intervenes to ask what can be done to get rid of the jihadi fighters from easter Aleppo.

Johnson says this cannot happen while the city is still being bombed.

He says the best hope is to persuade Russia to do the right thing.

He says he will look at Staffan de Mistura’s plan to lead out the jihadist fighters. That sounds emminently sensible, he says.

And that’s it. Johnson’s speech, and the debate, is over.

I will post a summary soon.

Johnson says the only possible solution is to have a negotiation.

The government has not give up hopes of this happening, he says.

Johnson plays down prospect of imposing no-fly zones over Syria

Johnson says many MPs urged Britain to go further.

Some people called for no-fly zones.

He says he has “every sympathy” for these proposals.

But the government does not support putting boots on the ground. And you cannot have no-fly zones unless you are willing to shoot down planes and helicopters.

Johnson says he will consult people about this, including those involved in imposing no-fly zones over Iraq in the 1990s.

  • Johnson plays down prospect of imposing no-fly zones over Syria.

Johnson says, if Russia continues on its path, it risk becoming a pariah nation.

Johnson says he would like to see protests outside Russian embassy over Syria

Johnson says “all the available evidence” points to Russia being responsible for the recent attack on an aid convoy.

He says he is worried that “the wells of outrage are growing exhausted”.

He says there is no commensurate horror about Russia. Where are the Stop the War protests outside the Russian embassy, he asks.

  • Johnson says he would like to see protests outside the Russian embassy over Syria.

It is up to us in government to show a lead.

He says he thinks the government is having an effect. Russia has had to use its veto five times in the UN security council to protect its position.

Updated

Johnson says there is a case for taking Syrian war crimes to international criminal court

Johnson says the citizens of eastern Aleppo are under seige. Their power and water supplies have been cut off. This is a signature tactic of the Assad killing machine. It is the biggest and potentially deadliest siege since the civil war started.

He says every hospital in eastern Aleppo has been bombed, some more once, and several have been put out of action.

This must be deliberate policy, he says. He says intentionally attacking a hospital is a war crime.

He says these attacks must be investigated with a view to taking a case to the international criminal court.

  • Johnson says there is a case for taking Syrian war crimes to international criminal court.

He says some cases get taken to the ICC years after they have been committed.

He says he hopes the Commons will take a different view from the one it took in 2013, when it decided not to intervene.

Updated

Boris Johnson's speech

Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, is responding to the debate now.

It it is his first speech in a Commons debate as foreign secretary.

Burnham says May misreading referendum because most Britons oppose a hard Brexit

Andy Burnham, the Labour candidate for mayor of Greater Manchester and the former shadow home secretary, is speaking at the New Economics Foundation conference this afternoon. (See 3.05pm.) He will urge Theresa May to set up a Brexit committee of the nations and regions to ensure Brexit policy is not just decided by London. He will say:

Theresa May has got the Brexit negotiations off on entirely the wrong foot and needs to change direction. She is working on the assumption that the country voted for a hard, confrontational Brexit when there is no evidence to support this. In fact, it would seem that the opposite is true – a majority of people were against a hard Brexit.

There is a big risk that her handling of these crucial talks could widen the divides in our country, not heal them. We need to open our eyes to these risks and ensure that all voices and perspectives are fully involved in shaping the Brexit negotiations.

Devolution in England was never conceived as part of the answer to Brexit but now it must be fully embraced as such. Brexit will have a differential impact on different parts of the country and a hard Brexit would hit the poorest areas hardest of all. Great effort will be expended to protect the financial sector and the City of London, which, while understandable, could lead to trade-offs that will damage other sectors.

These issues need to be openly debated and that is why I am asking the prime minister to establish a Brexit committee of the nations and regions, with places for the devolved governments and the elected mayoralties. The aim of that committee should be to seek a fair Brexit that balances the needs of all parts of the country. It is essential that Greater Manchester has a place at this table.

Andy Burnham.
Andy Burnham. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA

Bernie Sanders backs Green candidate in Witney byelection

There has been a controversy about British politicians like Nigel Farage intervening in the US presidential election, but intervention is not all one-way. Bernie Sanders, the runner-up to Hillary Clinton in the contest to be the Democratic presidential candidate, has recorded a YouTube video backing the Green party candidate in the Witney byelection. It’s the least he could do. The Green candidate, Larry Sanders, is his brother.

Bernie Sanders backs the Green candidate in the Witney byelection (his brother).

I’m down at the rather nerdy relaunch of the New Economics foundation thinktank, at a community centre in Waterloo, where among others Ed Miliband and Vince Cable are groping for a progressive interpretation of the vote-winning Brexit slogan “take back control”.

At the post-lunch session, Miliband, who’s been energised by the battle to secure a parliamentary vote on article 50, told the audience the left should seize the opportunity of Brexit, which he said was a vote for radical change, and warned against focusing only on the detail of the deal with the rest of the EU.

If Brexit just becomes about the negotiations, we’re going to be stuffed, because all of the weight of the mandate will be borne by the rules on free movement and so on. We have got to have a bigger vision for where the country’s going.

Of course, Theresa May’s already fleshed out what kind of mandate she thinks the Brexit vote gives her, including legitimising a much tougher immigration regime - and Cable was much blunter. He said:

The electorate has moved to the right, which was reflected in a rather brutal way in the referendum.

He said voters he spoke to during the last general election combined fear of a left-wing government, with identity politics - patriotism/nationalism. “We have to try and find a way of breaking through the tribal divisions on the centre left,” he said, adding that many of the 48% of voters who rejected Brexit feel “horribly dispossessed”.

Miliband tellingly said the left must find a way to “surmount” identity politics; Cable said Harold Wilson and Tony Blair managed to articulate a left-of-centre version of patriotism.

Back in the debate the Labour MP John Woodcock says Britain must be willing to stand up to Russia over Syria. He says the Labour party is making itself “more and more of an irrelevance with every pronouncement from the front bench” on this. And he urges Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, to learn from the example of how Winston Churchill stood up to aggressors.

Reforms to pensions and savings announced since 2010 could cost the public finances around £5bn a year by 2034-35 according to the budget watchdog, the Press Association has reported. Here is the story it has filed.

The Office for Budget Responsibility analysis found that the reforms had made pensions less attractive than other forms of savings, particularly to higher earners.

Although the reforms provided a small benefit in the medium-term, over the longer period there would be a small cost, potentially adding 3.7% of GDP to public sector net debt over a 50-year period.

The paper looked at a series of changes to the tax treatment of pensions and savings, together with the freedoms given to people to access their retirement nest eggs introduced by George Osborne when he was chancellor.

“In recent years, the government has made a number of significant changes to the tax treatment of private pensions and savings and introduced a variety of government top-ups on specific savings products.

“In doing so, it has generally shifted incentives in a way that makes pensions saving less attractive - particularly for higher earners - and non-pension savings more attractive - often in ways that can most readily be taken up by the same higher earners,” the report said.

The OBR estimates suggest that “the small net gain to the public finances from these measures over the medium-term forecast horizon becomes a small net cost in the long term”.

The benefit from the reforms would peak at £2.3bn in 2018-19 before turning negative from 2021-22, rising in cash terms to reach £5bn by 2034-35.

Back in the Commons Labour’s Alison McGovern has just finished her speech. She said a no-fly zone applying just to helicopters could save up to 90% of casualties.

At the end of her speech McGovern almost choked up as she said she had replaced her friend Jo Cox, who was killed earlier this year, as the co-chair of the all-party group on Syria.

Turning away from the Syria debate, here is John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, commenting on the leaked Treasury report saying leaving the EU without a trade deal could cost the Exchequer up to £66bn a year. (See 9.10am.)

The Tories should be sticking to their manifesto promise and fighting tooth and nail for access to the single market. Instead they are abandoning Britain’s clear national interests by putting narrow party political concerns first.

And here is the SNP’s international trade spokeswoman, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, commenting on the same story.

This leaked report not only shows the deep divisions at the centre of Theresa May’s Government, but also clearly demonstrates that Cabinet ministers like Liam Fox, who advocate a hard Brexit, value ideological purity over economic competence or the greater public good.

It’s little wonder that, by abandoning all economic reason, the Tories are running scared from any proper parliamentary scrutiny of their damaging plans.

And here is the Guardian’s latest story on the leak.

At the end of her speech in the Syria debate Ann Clywd said she would like to see people demonstrate outside the Russian embassy until the bombing in Aleppo stops.

Sadiq Khan says a 'hard' Brexit could be 'disastrous' for the economy

Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, has been giving a speech to a CBI lunch today. He used it to warn that the “hard” Brexit approach that the government seemed to be adopting could be “disastrous” for the economy.

Here is the key extract.

There’s been a lot of tough talk from the government in recent days with what looks like a lurch towards a ‘hard Brexit’ approach. It seems some people at the heart of government are willing to lead us ever closer to the cliff edge.

Not only would hard Brexit be the wrong approach for our country, but the strong rhetoric from ministers - and the unnecessary rush to trigger article 50 - is sending all the wrong signals to investors during this uncertain period.

For if we were to leave the single market - without an agreement in place for privileged access for British business – the consequences could be disastrous. Not just to London, but to the whole of the British economy – hitting jobs and growth.

A hard Brexit approach could never be defended as being done in the name of principle or ‘taking back control’, as the clear motivation would be political expediency in an attempt to turn an extremely complex argument into a simple one. An approach that would not only be deeply irresponsible, but could cause significant economic damage.

We need the government to really be on the side of business and the City of London as we go into the Brexit negotiations – something that seems to be lacking at the moment.

So I’ll be working with businesses in the days, weeks and months ahead to put pressure on the government, to make sure London’s voice is heard loud and clear and to make the case for a proper, sensible solution to this complicated challenge.

To coincide with today’s Syria debate, Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party, has said Russia and Syria should face an war crimes investigation at the international criminal court. Hywel Williams, Plaid’s leader at Westminster, said:

The case against Russia and Syria is clear and backed by firm evidence. The UK government must add its weight to calls already being made by France and the US for an ICC investigation.

Plaid Cymru voted against bombing Syria. We were told that such bombing would be carefully controlled to exclude danger to civilians but it is clear that neither Russia nor Syria are taking such precautions. Indeed, it seems as though they specifically target civilians. Taking them before the ICC for such actions would therefore be consistent with UK policy on air strikes.

Jonathan Ashworth has come off Labour’s national executive committee, making way for the Jeremy Corbyn supporter, Kate Osamor. The issue is a decision for the shadow cabinet, rather than the leader, but there was no disagreement during their meeting today.

There have been reports that Ashworth was given a choice between a promotion to the shadow health job or his NEC place, which he had as part of his role as a shadow minister for the cabinet office. However, sources have suggested that the MP would have lost his seat whatever as his alternative was being sacked completely.

The issue is contentious in Labour because the NEC has been so finely balanced between Corbyn supporters and critics, and is critical at setting rules for the party, including over leadership elections. But one source insisted that this decision would not have dramatic impact on the overall make up.

Back in the Commons Ann Clwyd, the Labour MP, says Britain does not have to wait for the international criminal court to investigate Russian war crimes in Syria. She says the government could be collecting evidence now. She said the Indict campaign, which she chaired, used to collect evidence of atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

Labour peers have ended their boycott of Corbyn’s shadow cabinet with Baroness Angela Smith and Lord Steve Bassam attending the meeting this morning.

A spokesman for the party in the House of Lords said: “In light of recent developments, they have spoken to a wide range of colleagues in the Labour Peers Group – the body which elects them to the post of Leader and Chief Whip respectively.

“With major votes coming up in the Lords – and our Peers continuing to play a key role in scrutinising legislation, and advising on Brexit – both Angela and Steve will resume attending Shadow Cabinet and speak for our Group.”

Patrick Grady, the SNP’s spokesman on international development, is speaking now.

He says the SNP has consistently opposed military intervention in Syria.

What people in Syria need is bread, not bombs. And if we have the technology to drop bombs, we have the technology to deliver bread, he says.

Patrick Grady.
Patrick Grady. Photograph: BBC/BBC News

Burt says he hopes Boris Johnson in his speech will make it clear whether there is a point at which the government will not longer put up with what is happening in Syria.

Alistair Burt, the Conservative former Foreign Office minister, is speaking now. He says the vote against military action in 2013 was a mistake. That was a chance to get President Assad back to the negotiating table, he says.

He says just as intervention has consequences, non-intervention has consequences too.

Here is a Guardian picture gallery showing the destruction in Aleppo.

Thornberry says, like Andrew Mitchell, she thinks the government should back the plan from the UN special envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura who has said he would personally go to eastern Aleppo to escort jihadists out of the city if that would stop the fighting.

Emily Thornberry.
Emily Thornberry. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

UPDATE: Here is my colleague Patrick Wintour’s take on Emily Thornberry’s speech.

Updated

Ben Bradshaw, the Labour MP, says he has not heard an unequivocal condemnation of Russia’s action in Syria.

Thornberry says of course the actions of Russia in Syria could well be seen as war crimes. There are the war crimes of Assad and Russia, and the war crimes of the jihadists. In time these must be taken to the international criminal court, she says.

Asked if she backs military intervention, Thornberry says she is not a pacifist, but that it is questionable whether further military intervention in Syria would improve the situation.

According to my colleague Patrick Wintour, the Labour party’s briefing for its MPs leaves open the question of whether the Russians are targeting civilians in Aleppo.

Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, is now speaking.

She praises Mitchell’s record as international development secretary.

The situation of civilians in Aleppo is “hell on earth”. It is beyond our comprehension. Those responsible, whether the Assad regimen and Russia, or the jihadist forces, are equally guilty, she says.

She says they must be held account for their actions.

But that must not stop Britain work with the Russian government to restore the ceasefire.

Labour’s Toby Perkins says it is ludicrous that the World Cup is being held in Russia in 2018 given its record.

Mitchell says he agrees.

He says he hopes Boris Johnson will consider this.

Mitchell says the international community faces a choice. Is it so cowed, so pole-axed, by Iraq that it cannot intervene.

He says we have a choice.

We can turn away from the misery and suffering in Aleppo, and appease Russia.

Or we can take a lead, and explore energetically and with determination every possible way of ending this barbarity and tyranny, he says.

And that’s the end of Mitchell’s speech.

Andrew Mitchell
Andrew Mitchell Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Labour’s Ben Bradshaw says he would back a no-fly zone. He thinks other Labour MPs would vote for the idea too.

Mitchell says that is welcome.

He urges Boris Johnson to meet John Major to discuss his experience of imposing a no-fly zone over Iraq in the 1990s.

Mitchell goes on with questions for Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary.

What work is being done to catalogue human rights abuses in Syria?

What has been done to investigate the feasibility of imposing a no-fly zone in northern Syria? Does he accept that this would be perfectly possible?

Mitchell says he has some questions for the foreign secretary.

What is the government doing to increase sanctions on Russia?

Will the Foreign Office be working with Eastern European allies to block a new pipeline for Russia?

Labour’s John Woodcock says that, if the world does not face up to what Russia is doing, the UN could suffer the same fate as the League of Nations (ie, collapse.)

Mitchell says that is the point he was making.

Mitchell says the Russians in Aleppo are like the Nazis at Guernica

Mitchell says Russia is doing to the UN what Germany and Italy did to the League of Nations in the 1930s.

And what they are doing in Aleppo is like what the Nazis did at Guernica, he says.

  • Mitchell says the Russians in Aleppo are like the Nazis at Guernica.

Labour’s Mike Gapes says there should be a united condemnation, from the government and from Labour, of what Russia is doing.

Mitchell says he agrees.

Nadhim Zahawi, a Conservative member of the foreign affairs committee, intervenes. He says it is in Russia’s gift to control Assad. They should not be aiding a war criminal like the Syrian president, he says.

Mitchell says President Obama has adopted an isolationist approach.

Russia is behaving like a “rogue elephant” in Syria, abusing international law and using its UN veto to protect itself from investigation, he says.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, asks if Mitchell thinks the UK should refer Russia to the international criminal court.

Mitchell says he does agree with that.

He says the attack on the aid convoy marks a new low. The Russians are not attacking military formations in Aleppo. They are attacking hospitals, he says.

A hospital last week was attacked by bunker bombs and cluster bombs.

He says there is no doubt that attacking that hospital was a war crime. Its location was known to all combatants, he says.

Mitchell says the final barrier to progress has been the reception of refugees in Europe.

Many of them have ended up in the hands of the modern equivalent of slave traders.

He says this will either end through victory, or negotiation.

He says military victory is unlikely, and so the priority is to create the space where negotiation can take place.

John Redwood, the Conservative, intervenes. Isn’t the tragedy that we cannot imagine a Syria with a government powerful enough to take charge, and wise enough to govern well.

Mitchell says he will address this later.

Mitchell says the next big failure has been the failure to acquire unfettered access to Syria for the UN.

Mitchell says President Obama’s decision not to enforce his red lines on President Assad’s use of chemical weapons was disastrous.

And the failure to create safe havens in Syria has been a terrible mistake, he says.

Syria has a population of 22m. Today nearly half of them are on the move, he says.

Mitchell says what is happening in Syria as important to UK as Brexit

Andrew Mitchell, the Conservative former international development secretary, requested this emergency debate. He is opening the debate now.

He says he requested an emergency debate with the backing of the all-party group on Syria.

The impact of what is happening in Syria on our children and grandchildren will be as big as the impact of Brexit, he says.

  • Mitchell says what is happening in Syria as important to UK as Brexit.

MPs hold emergency debate on Syria

MPs are about to start an emergency debate on Syria.

Here is Patrick Wintour’s preview story.

Osborne and Heseltine at the Commons business committee

Here are the main points from the Commons business committee hearing with George Osborne and Lord Heseltine.

  • Osborne said he backed Philip Hammond, his successor as chancellor, in thinking Britain needs the “closest possible economic relationship” with the EU. But Osborne avoided saying whether it was essential for the UK to remain a full member of the single market. He said that he wanted to see Britain increase trade with countries like Australia outside the EU, but that this should not be at the expense of trade with countries in the EU like Germany.
  • Lord Heseltine mocked the appointment of Boris Johnson, David Davis and Liam Fox, the so-called three Brexiteers. (See 11.49am.)
  • Osborne played down, but did not deny, that he originally opposed plans to decentralise power from Whitehall in published by Lord Heseltine in a report for the government in 2012. When Iain Wright, the committee chairman, asked about a passage in David Laws’ book quoting Osborne dismissing the ideas (see 11am and 12pm), Osborne said what Laws wrote did not account with his own recollection. But Osborne did not explicitly say the Laws account was wrong. Osborne said that he and David Cameron always thought the “best of the Conservative tradition” combined the interventionist views of people like Heseltine with the economic rationalism of people like Nigel Lawson. Heseltine said that if Osborne was initially opposed to his plans in 2012, that would not surprise him because “there has been a growing understanding of the potential [of decentralisation]”. But he also said that he thought the Laws account was simplistic because Cameron and Osborne knew what to expect when they commissioned Heseltine to write his report.
  • Osborne played down claims that Theresa May was pursuing a new industrial policy, saying her approach was “very similar” to the Cameron’s government. When he was asked about May’s claim that she wanted a proper industrial strategy, implying the last government did not have one, he replied:

Whenever you get new politicians in post, they always want to announce new things. Broadly, the approach I can see them pursuing in energy, regional policy and the like is very similar.

It is human nature that new people in new jobs want to do new things. But the key is to look at is what is essentially the agreed strategy adopted by the new team.

The agreed strategy that has been adopted by the new team is that we should have an industrial strategy, that certain sectors should receive active government support, that government should be pro-business, that devolution should continue, that the Northern Powerhouse should be supported.

I would look behind the blizzard of press releases to the continuity of the policy, and I see a lot of continuity.

  • He said governments in the past had been too slow to build new airports. Asked if the last government should have acted more quickly to expand Heathrow, he replied:

Our country has collectively over 60 years dragged its heels on airport expansion. At least the Cameron government has set us up for a decision over Heathrow or Gatwick, but we have got to take it as a country.

And that’s it. The hearing is over.

I will post a summary soon.

Iain Wright is now asking about the David Laws book. (See 11am.) It looks like he has been reading my blog.

Wright reads out the extract I quoted earlier.

Q: [To Osborne] Why did you change your mind about Heseltine and his ideas?

Osborne says this does not account with his recollection of events.

He says he and David Cameron commissioned Michael Heseltine to write the report because they thought the best Conservative tradition combined the dry economic rationalism of someone like Nigel Lawson, with the intervention of Michael Heseltine.

Osborne says it was an “alleged conversation”. He does not remember it, he says.

He says the vast majority of the report has been implemented.

Q: [To Heseltine] There were 89 recommendations in your report. Are you happy they were implemented?

Heseltine says you do not get 100% of anything in life. But the scale of the take-up has been amazing.

He says the quotations do not surprise him, because there has been a growing recognition of the importance of devolution.

But he says he does not believe them, because he had “form” on intervention and devolution. He had spoken of intervening before breakfast, lunch and dinner. So Cameron and Osborne knew what they were getting when they commissioned him to write a report.

He says Cameron and Osborne gave his report a warm welcome. You can describe that as “big beastism”. But the process he proposed has been adopted.

  • Osborne refuses to deny claims he originally opposed Heseltine’s decentralisation plans.

Q: If you have £1 to spend on transport, do you spend it on alleviating congestion in the south east, or do you spend it on boosting productivity in the north?

Osborne says a static analysis will always say the money should be spent in the centre of London (because of the advantage to the economy). But in government you have to ignore that, because you need to boost the economy in the north too, he says.

Heseltine mocks appointment of the 'three Brexiteers'

This is what Lord Heseltine said when the Conservative member of the committee, Richard Fuller, asked about Brexit and the single market, and how important it was for Britain to be able to secure free trade agreements. (See 11.30am.)

He mocked the appointments of the three Brexiteers (Boris Johnson, David Davis and Liam Fox). He replied:

We have three ministers now in charge, a brilliant set of appointments in my view because they can come up with the answers which have escaped me ... The ability to trade seems to me an important part of our future ... We have to find places to trade. And if there are all these markets that have escaped the attention of British exporters, it will be marvellous to have it pointed out to them by the new minister responsible.

Lord Heseltine giving evidence to Commons business committee.
Lord Heseltine giving evidence to Commons business committee. Photograph: Parliament TV

This is from the Independent’s Rob Merrick.

And this is from my colleague Rowena Mason.

Q: Should we be in or out of the single market?

Osborne says the UK wants to do more trade with countries like Australia. But that should not mean less trade with a country like Germany.

Q: Wouldn’t it be helpful if you two, who have had an important influence on trade policy, said what the government should do on this issue.

Osborne says Britain should try to avoid having to make a binary choice between trade with the EU, and trade with countries outside the EU.

You want to be trying to do both.

This is going to be “one of the interesting challenges” for the EU renegotiation, he says.

  • Osborne sidesteps question about whether the UK should prioritise single market membership in the Brexit talks.

Hooray. We are at last on Brexit.

Richard Fuller, a Conserative, asks about the single market.

Heseltine says he is glad that three Brexit ministers have been appointed, because they will be able to come up with answers to questions that he has not managed to find.

Perhaps they will find countries to trade with that we have not already found, he says.

Osborne says he agrees with the stance set out by his successor, Philip Hammond.

George Osborne has been giving evidence to this committee of an hour now, but he still has not been asked anything about Brexit. Admittedly, the hearing is supposed to be focusing on industrial strategy. But MPs on select committees do often go “off topic” and ask about subjects in the news. If Keith Vaz had been chairing this discussion, we would have had 60 minutes on Brexit.

Osborne says he was the chancellor who got the Star Wars movies to be made in the UK. Britain was in direct competition for the work with places like Vancouver, he says. He says the decision to film them here has brought film work worth $1bn to the UK. It is a good example of where a minister should get directly involved in attracting investment, he says.

Back in the committee Heseltine says an education policy is an absolute sine qua non for a successful industrial policy.

Osborne says he agrees.

And Heseltine jokes Osborne always agrees with him. (Heseltine clearly hasn’t read the Laws book either - see 11am.)

What the committee should be asking Osborne

Lord Heseltine has been a long-term advocate of devolving power from Whitehall to the regions and in 2012 he published a report for the government, No Stone Unturned, containing ambitious plans for decentralisation. In his evidence a few minutes ago he praised Osborne for, well, agreeing with him. (See 10.39am.)

Sadly, no one on the committee seems to have read David Laws’ book Coalition. Laws was a Lib Dem minister in the coalition, and when he was writing the book he had access to Nick Clegg’s private notes. As a result, the book is well-sourced.

And the book reveals that Osborne was a) initially sceptical about devolving powers to the region and b) opposed to Heseltine’s No Stone Unturned report.

Here is the key extract.

At the end of October [2012], the Heseltine report was published, urging the government to devolve more economic powers from the centre to the regions. George Osborne didn’t seem very impressed. At a meeting, he described the Heseltine report as a ‘very personal’ report, and a ‘bid to steal every department’s capital budget’.

David Cameron joked that the whole thing sounded like a ‘fourth-term priority’. The ever-sharp George Osborne added: ‘Yes, a fourth-term priority - but for a different government!’

The prime minister urged that we should be diplomatic in responding to the Heseltine report as ‘Michael is a very big beast in the political jungle. Upsetting him over this would be as risky as interrupting a silverback while he’s mating.’ It was an interesting and vivid image.

Later in the parliament, George Osborne seemed to become a belated supporter of more localism. For now, he certainly seemed rather sceptical. Even in early 2013, when the chancellor first started to advocate the devolving of money from central government to local areas, one seasoned government adviser told me: ‘George’s view is that the money will either be wasted by central government or by local government. He thinks the only advantage of devolution is that you can slice 10% off the money as you devolve it, so that the Treasury pays out less.’

Q: Should you have gone quicker in government on airport expansion?

Osborne says the country collective has dragged its feet on this. He says at least the Cameron government set the country up for a decision.

Heseltine says he thinks devolution of power outside Westminster needs to be led by the committee. David Cameron set up a committee to look at this, he says. But it was not as active as it could have been. He says he hopes Theresa May will push this agenda more.

Osborne says the devolution of the health service to Greater Manchester is “really dramatic”. He says this has not been really acknowledged in Westminster.

For example, in Manchester they are engaged in a hospital reconfiguration. These programmes are always controversial, he says. But it is going ahead more easily in Manchester because it is locally led, he says.

Osborne says the UK lost the capacity to build submarines in the 1990s. Getting that capacity back was “incredibly expensive”, he says. Some long-term thinking would have helped.

Q: In your book (from the 1980s) you said the trade secretary needed to be more powerful. Do you think the chancellor hinders industrial policy?

Heseltine says Osborne was “exceptional” as chancellor compared to other chancellors he has known. Osborne believed in devolving power, he says.

Heseltine says no government has focused enough on industrial policy

Wright addresses Lord Heseltine.

Q: With all your experience, which government do you think has done industrial policy best?

Heseltine says no government has done it on the necessary scale. But the Cameron government did it on a bigger scale than any previous government.

  • Heseltine says no government has focused enough on industrial policy.

Q: Why has it not been done properly?

Because of ideological differences between the parties, he says.

He says the Thatcher government started to develop industrial policy. And, under John Major, Heseltine was allowed to take if further, he says.

But he says it did not progress under the Cameron government.

Q: In his first speech Greg Clark, the new business secretary, said previous industrial policies treated every place the same. That sounded like a criticism of your approach.

Osborne says he did not read it like that. He says the last government was adopting different policies for different areas.

Q: Does that create uncertainty for business. Should not there be more long-term thinking?

Osborne says it is natural that people want to announce something new. But, behind the blizzard of publicity, you should look for continuity.

Osborne says May’s industrial policy is 'very similar' to his own

Iain Wright, the committee chairman, opens the questioning.

Q: Did you have an active industrial strategy in the last government?

George Osborne says he thinks he did have one. And he thinks the whole cabinet supported it.

Q: Theresa May talks about having a proper industrial strategy. Are you narked that she seems to be trashing your record.

Osborne says that whenever you get new politicians, they want to announce a new approach. But the key point is that there is continuity. He thinks the approach May is adopting is “very similar” to what he was trying.

  • Osborne says May’s industrial policy is “very similar” to his own.

Updated

Osborne's evidence to the Commons business committee

George Osborne and Lord Heseltine are about to give evidence to the Commons business committee.

You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.

As for the rest of the papers, here is the Politics Home list of top 10 must reads, and here is the ConservativeHome round-up of all today’s politics stories.

And here are four articles I found particularly interesting.

One of Britain’s biggest exporters is to quit the CBI in protest at its stance against Brexit.

Anthony Bamford of JCB is believed to have decided to pull out over apocalyptic warnings that leaving the EU could cost £100billion and lead to 950,000 job losses.

It is understood the firm will remain in the pro-Brussels group only until its membership expires next year.

Dominic Cummings, campaign director of Vote Leave, said that without the Ukip leader’s intervention, the Brexit side would have won by 60 per cent to 40.

In the end, Leave won a narrow victory of less than 52 per cent to 48.

Mr Cummings wrote on Twitter: ‘Farage and the idiots around him came within a whisker of losing us the Referendum.’

He said if Mr Farage had been in charge of the Leave campaign, up to 70 per cent of people would have voted to Remain.

If we want to properly control immigration we must take this opportunity to end free movement of people from the EU to the UK. Yet when employment is at a historic high, and unemployment at its lowest levels in a decade, businesses are understandably concerned about placing constraints on the number of workers entering the labour market.

One way to increase the labour supply, while still reducing immigration, is to provide more opportunities for British disabled people who want to work but don’t get the chance ...

There are significant numbers of disabled people who are capable of working, would like to work, but have some sort of barrier or difficulty that makes it harder to get a job. Helping them move into work will require more effort and imagination from businesses, together with some support from government. This help, both financial and practical, perhaps through existing schemes such as Access to Work, is surely a worthwhile investment.

Helping British disabled people who want to work to get jobs, expanding our domestic labour market, and controlling immigration, would be a great first step in delivering a successful Brexit and a country which really does work for everyone.

When decisions are taken at official level, the UK, with its cadre of high-quality civil servants, has frequently got its way. When elevated to the altitude of ministers or heads of state, the culture of British politics — sectarian, raucous, aggressive — is inimical to the kind of painstaking, often painful, deliberation in Brussels.

The centralised British state, with a weak legislature and strong executive, lends itself to intense public debate in an excitable national press, followed by last-minute decision-making and quick implementation. In the EU, the dispersed nature of power means policies have to trudge wearily between the commission, national capitals and, increasingly, the European and national parliaments before being adopted.

Neither is necessarily superior. The eurozone’s inept handling of its sovereign debt crisis was an object lesson in what happens when iterative processes do not match the realities of 21st-century capital markets. Yet when British politicians are trying to achieve something in Brussels or with other EU governments, they need to play by continental rules — building out attacks slowly from defence rather than just punting the ball to the strikers.

The comments are now on BTL. Originally they were left off by mistake. I’m sorry about that.

The Commons business committee hearing has now started. Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem former business secretary, is giving evidence. You can watch the hearing here.

I will be monitoring the hearing, but I will cover it in more detail when George Osborne starts giving evidence.

Here is the Labour peer Stewart Wood commenting on Twitter on the Times story.

Wood used to work as an adviser to Gordon Brown, so presumably he knows a thing or two about what happens when the Treasury goes rogue.

The pound is falling again. My colleague Graeme Wearden has the details on his business live blog.

In the Commons yesterday David Davis, the Brexit secretary, said that if the government got what it wanted in the Brexit negotiations, there would be “no downside to Brexit at all”. Setting out the government’s four aims, he said:

One is to regain control of our borders. Another is to get back control of our laws. The one I did not list was our aim to keep our justice and security arrangements at least as strong as they are. Finally, and most importantly in this context, the United Kingdom must aim to maintain the best possible open access to European markets and vice versa. If we can achieve all that, there will be no downside to Brexit at all, and considerable upsides.

But the Treasury is not so optimistic. This morning the Times is splashing on the leak of a Treasury paper saying that, if the UK leaves the EU without negotiating a trade deal, and has to rely on World Trade Organisation rules for trading with Europe, the government could lose up to £66bn a year in tax revenue. This is based on forecasts in the Treasury paper on Brexit published before the EU referendum. But the Treasury reportedly is standing by its analysis from earlier this year.

Here is the Guardian’s version of the story.

By a happy coincidence George Osborne, the former chancellor, is giving evidence to a Commons committee this morning, and so we may find out what he has to say about this. He is supposed to be talking about industrial strategy, but it would be odd if Brexit does not come up. After all, Brexit is going to have a huge impact on industrial policy - and everything else.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9am: The cabinet meets.

9.30am: Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem former business secretary, gives evidence to the Commons business committee about industrial strategy. At 10.15am George Osborne, the Conservative former chancellor, and Lord Heseltine, the Conservative former deputy prime minister and a business adviser to the last government, give evidence.

Around 12.40pm: MPs begin an emergency debate on Aleppo and Syria.

2pm: Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem leader and former deputy prime minister, campaigns for the Lib Dems in Witney ahead of the byelection.

2.15pm: Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee on antisemitism.

3.45pm: Andy Burnham, the Labour candidate for Greater Manchester mayor, speaks at a New Economics Foundation conference.

As usual, I will be covering the breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.

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

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
‘My dasher…told me to cancel’: Atlanta local spots DoorDash ‘restaurant.’ Then they realize it’s run by an unhoused person and see the ‘kitchen’
A TikToker pointed out that an Atlanta business listed on DoorDash, Nasty Azz Cheeseburger, was actually a street cart with very poor sanitary conditions.
The Mary Sue
The Mary Sue
Usher, Justin Bieber Feud: Burn Singer Breaks Silence Amid 'Exaggerated' Claims of Heated Confrontation
Usher responds to rumors of a feud with Justin Bieber following an Oscars after-party, emphasizing that the story has been exaggerated.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Is The Beckham Feud Over? Nicola Peltz Shares Private Message From Brooklyn Amid Docuseries Talks
Nicola Peltz and Brooklyn Beckham present a united front as a handwritten love note, family tensions and rumours of a Hulu docuseries keep the Beckham feud in the spotlight.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Miley Cyrus Drops Disney Bombshell: 'He Was My Boyfriend' — Secret Romance With Dylan Sprouse Finally Confirmed
Miley Cyrus has confirmed long-standing rumors about her early love life, revealing she secretly dated fellow Disney star Dylan Sprouse during the Hannah Montana era.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Stephen Colbert and son will co-write a 'Lord of the Rings' movie
Stephen Colbert, famous devotee to J
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
I Watched The Beauty Season 1 Finale, And Here's Why I Loved One Twist
It has finally sparked my attention.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play