Afternoon summary
- Jeremy Corbyn’s office has insisted that the Labour leader’s much-scrutinised tax return is “complete and accurate” and accused “media barons” whose papers have criticised him over this of hypocrisy. (See 3.49pm.)
- Karen Bradley, the culture secretary, has told MPs that if she does refer Rupert Murdoch’s bid for Sky to Ofcom, as she is “minded” to do, Ofcom will be able to take into account the phone hacking scandal when deciding whether or not to approve the bid. (See 4.51pm.)
- Amber Rudd, the home secretary, has said she wants the UK to remain part of the European arrest warrant after Brexit. And other EU countries want that too, she said. Speaking at Home Office questions, she told MPs:
I certainly agree with the principal that the European Arrest Warrant is an effective tool and is absolutely essential to delivering effective judgment to the murderers, rapists and paedophiles that we have managed to seek judgment on.
It is a priority to ensure that we do remain part of it and I can also reassure honourable colleagues throughout the House that this is something that our European partners would like to achieve as well.
-
Robert Goodwill, the immigration minister, has told MPs that more than 130,000 EU nationals and their family members applied for UK permanent residency in the six months after the Brexit vote.
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
And this is what Tom Watson said in his response to Karen Bradley’s statement about the Fox chief executive James Murdoch (Rupert’s son) and what phone hacking said about the Murdochs’ record on corporate governance. He told MPs:
A “commitment to broadcasting standards” test is not a “fit and proper person” test.
Will Ofcom’s assessment of 21st Century Fox’s “commitment to broadcasting standards” include in its scope the following facts?
That six senior employees of News International have been convicted of phone hacking and another of perverting the course of justice.
That over 30 police and public officials have been convicted of accepting corrupt payments from employees of News International, which were approved at a high level.
That one News International journalist has been convicted of making unlawful payments and another of handling stolen property, namely a mobile phone belonging to [Labour MP Siobhain McDonagh], from which private information was taken unlawfully by Sun journalists at the request of several Sun executives.
That a former editor and the former head of legal affairs at the News of the World were held in contempt of Parliament for lying to a select committee during its investigation into phone hacking.
That the standards and privileges committee cast further light on the culture of paying hush money to employees guilty of criminal offences to deter them from co-operating with the police and prosecution authorities.
That it seems likely therefore that a number of News Corporation employees gave false information under oath to the Leveson Inquiry.
That another conspiracy to hack phones between 2005 and 2006 has been admitted by News Corporation, and a journalist has been convicted.
That News International has admitted phone hacking in several hundred claims so far and has made payments to victims and lawyers amounting to $600 million.
And that is without mentioning the many outstanding civil claims against newspapers owned by News International, or the fact that allegations have been made in open court that James Murdoch was involved in the email deletion programme at News International which has made it more difficult to get to the truth.
Ofcom would be able to consider phone-hacking scandal in ruling on Fox/Sky takeover, MPs told
This is what Karen Bradley said in response to Tom Watson when he asked if Ofcom would consider the phone-hacking scandal when making a decision as to whether Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox was a suitable owner for Sky. She said that Ofcom would be able to consider these matters if there was a referral.
She told MPs:
But if I can just turn to the evidence that Ofcom will look at, to be clear, I’m not ruling any evidence in or out.
If I do decide to intervene, then Ofcom will then report to me on any matters they consider relevant. And, on commitment to broadcasting standards, there is no exhaustive list of evidence. Ofcom can look at whatever they think is right.
As I’ve said, Ofcom have sufficient powers and they can investigate anything they think is appropriate. And I thank [Watson] for the points that he has made. I am sure that they will be part of what Ofcom does consider.
Ofcom does have a fit and proper test for broadcasting licences. That is a different test to the one that will be considered on this merger, but the same evidence may be relevant to both.
Finally, my letter (see 4.09pm) sets out a number of matters that I consider relevant and warrant further investigation and this includes facts that led to the Leveson inquiry, for example corporate governance at News of the World. It will be open to Ofcom to look at all relevant areas and I am not ruling out any areas if I decide to intervene.
Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader, says he welcomes Bradley’s good intentions. But he says the Murdochs are now way fit to take over Sky on the basis of their record.
Will the fit and proper test be completed in the timescale allowed for the Ofcom review?
And, if not, will the government change the law so that whether someone passes a fit and proper test can be a factor for an Ofcom referral.
Bradley says Miliband is talking about two different tests. The fit and proper person test is an ongoing one, she says.
The Conservative Jacob Rees-Mogg urges Karen Bradley not to have anything to do with the “socialist witch hunt” against Rupert Murdoch.
Bradley is responding to Watson.
She says the consultation on whether to go ahead with part two of Leveson is over. But she says it is subject to judicial review, so she cannot comment on it.
And she says that Ofcom will be free to consider all issues.
Tom Watson, the shadow culture secretary and deputy Labour leader, says he understands why Bradley will not be able to discuss this in detail. But he hopes she will listen to the concerns of MPs.
On media plurality, he says this deal would make the Murdoch empire even bigger.
And, on standards, he says the most troubling issues raised by this proposal are to do with James Murdoch’s character.
He says the broadcasting standards test is not a fit and proper persons test.
He asks if Ofcom’s decision on this will take into account what happened during the phone hacking affair.
He says, if Ofcom cannot take these factors into account, Labour will work with the government to ensure it can.
He asks if Ofcom will apply a fit and proper person test to James Murdoch.
He says some of what happened during the phone hacking affair is not known because part two of the Leveson inquiry has not gone ahead. It should, he says. He says Ofcom must not do its work with one hand tied behind its back.
Bradley says will return to the Commons to announce her decision.
But, because she has to make this decision in a quasi-judicial capacity, she will not be able to discuss the details of her concerns.
Bradley says her department has received 8,700 representations from the public on this.
She explains why she is minded to refer to Ofcom. (See 4.09pm.)
Karen Bradley, the culture secretary, is making her statement now.
She says formal notice of the bid was lodged on Friday. She wrote to the parties saying she was minded to refer it to Ofcom.
She has not taken a final decision, she says.
She says she will aim to come to a final decision within 10 working days of the notification.
She will take the decision following a process that is scrupulously fair, she says.
Karen Bradley's Commons statement about Murdoch's takeover bid for Sky
Karen Bradley, the culture secretary, is about to make a statement to MPs about Rupert Murdoch’s £11.7bn takeover bid for Sky. As the Guardian reported at the end of last week, she announced on Friday that she was minded to refer the bid to Ofcom and that she would make a statement to MPs at the first available opportunity.
Here is the press notice she issued on Friday. And here is an extract.
On the basis of [preparatory work carried out by officials] I have issued a ‘minded to’ letter to the parties [21st Century Fox and Sky] on two of the public interest grounds specified in section 58 of the Enterprise Act 2002.
The first public interest ground on which I am minded to intervene is media plurality. That is, specifically, the need for there to be a sufficient plurality of persons with control of the media enterprises serving audiences in the UK.
The second public interest ground on which I am minded to intervene is commitment to broadcasting standards. This ground relates to the need for persons carrying on media enterprises, and for those with control of such enterprises, to have a genuine commitment to attaining broadcasting standards objectives.
This is not an announcement of my final decision in relation to intervention, but an indication of what I am presently minded to do.
And here is the text of the letter she sent to 21st Century Fox and to Sky about her thinking (pdf). She posted it on the culture department’s website.
Corbyn accuses 'media barons' of hypocrisy over tax transparency
A spokesperson for Jeremy Corbyn has issued a fresh statement about Corbyn’s tax return, addressing questions that have been raised by Jolyon Maugham (see 10.08am) and others.
Here is the statement in full. The spokesperson said:
Jeremy’s tax return is complete and accurate. He has declared all income and paid the appropriate amount of tax.
The payment he received in 2015-16 as leader of the opposition of £27,192 appears on the return as a ‘benefit’ rather than as pay because that is how it is categorised by HMRC.
This figure is calculated after deducting the waivers Jeremy has made of earlier increases to the benefit. These waivers were also made by his predecessor, Ed Miliband. A parliamentary pension contribution of £3,395 was also deducted (see note).
We are disappointed the Cabinet Office did not clarify this and explain the figure used on the P60 yesterday in answer to media inquiries they received.
It is also a matter of concern that some media organisations made entirely false claims without verifying or confirming the facts, and we expect these now to be corrected.
The owners of the media companies that have attempted to cast doubt over Jeremy’s transparent and accurate tax return are of course among those who could stand to lose from the tax transparency and justice the British people demand.
Jeremy believes firmly in transparency. These media barons have tax questions of their own to answer. Tax avoidance and evasion deprive the public purse of billions in revenue for vital services and is unfair on those with much lower earnings who pay a higher proportion of their income in tax.
And here are the key points.
- Corbyn criticises some media organisations and the Cabinet Office for fuelling “entirely false claims” that he did not fill in his tax form properly. (In fairness to the media, it is worth pointing out that Corbyn’s office was unable to explain last night why the tax return was filled out in the way it was.)
- He accuses media barons of hypocrisy over tax transparency.
Labour has agreed the timetable to select a candidate in Manchester Gorton, the seat represented by the late Gerald Kaufman.
Applications for the nomination open today and close a week today.
The national executive committee will then longlist candidates by Thursday 16 March, before interviewing candidates for the shortlist on Monday 20 March.
Local hustings and the final selection are due to take place on Wednesday 22 March.
The provisional NEC selection panel is quite leftwing. It comprises NEC chair Glenis Willmott, TSSA representative Andi Fox, Momentum activist and Islington councillor Claudia Webbe, a former advisor to Ken Livingstone, shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and Labour MP Shabana Mahmood.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, has put out a statement condemning the latest North Korea ballistic missile launches.
The UK firmly condemns North Korea’s latest ballistic missile launches. These are in violation of multiple UN security council resolutions. We are working with international partners, including in the UN security council, of which the UK currently holds the presidency.
We urge North Korea to stop its provocative actions, which threaten international peace and security. North Korea should instead re-engage with the international community, and take credible, concrete steps to prioritise the well-being of its own people instead of the illegal pursuit of its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.
Lunchtime summary
- Downing Street has said that Theresa May will not allow MPs and peers a proper veto over her Brexit deal in case it gives the EU the incentive to offer the UK bad terms. (See 12.57pm.) This is based on the assumption that EU leaders would offer the UK a bad deal in the hope that parliament would reject it and Britain would remain in the EU, an outcome most EU leaders would prefer. But most MPs and peers pressing for a “meaningful” vote on the final Brexit deal are not arguing for parliament to have the right to vote to keep the UK in the EU; instead, they just want parliament to be able to influence the exit terms.
- Lord Lamont, the Conservative former chancellor, has given a speech criticising those peers who are trying to amend the article 50 bill. He said:
Amendments should not be used as a cover by those who are seeking to oppose the results of the referendum. I hope that my colleagues in the House of Lords will see sense and I look forward to article 50 being triggered as soon as possible.
- Jeremy Corbyn has hit back at critics of his tax return, saying all his taxes are “fully paid”. (See 9.15am.)
No 10 lobby briefing - Summary
Here is a full summary of the Number 10 lobby briefing, including what Downing Street said in a separate statement earlier about the sale of Vauxhall.
- Downing Street ruled out MPs being able to amend the Brexit deal when they vote on it at the end of the Brexit talks. Peers will vote tomorrow on an amendment to the article 50 bill that would commit the government to giving parliament a proper vote on the final deal. Theresa May has promised MPs and peers a vote on the final deal, but the government is opposed to including this commitment on the face of the bill. Asked about this issue, the prime minister’s spokesman effectively confirmed that the final vote May was offering was a “take it or leave it vote” (my phrase, not his) because May did not want to give MPs the chance of voting to change the outcome of the negotiations. The spokesman said:
On the issue of a meaningful vote, the prime minister believes we should not commit to any process that would incentivise the EU to offer us a bad deal ... If we are in a position where any deal negotiated by the prime minister could be rejected by MPs, then obviously that strengthens the hand of the other parties in the negotiation.
The spokesman also said that the vote at the end of the process would be on whether to accept the deal negotiated by the government or to leave the EU without a deal. His comments have been interpreted as Downing Street upping the stakes ahead of a vote in the House of Lords on an opposition amendment to the article 50 vote committing the government to offering MPs and peers a vote on the final Brexit deal. The government is expected to lose that vote. This is from the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn.
PM raises rhetoric on Lords ahead of Brexit deal vote tmrw. No10 suggests Parliament veto would "incentivise the EU to offer us a bad deal".
— Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) March 6, 2017
But the Lords amendment does not insist on MPs and peers being given the chance to amend the Brexit deal. As you can see from the wording, it is consistent with parliament just being offered a “take it or leave it” vote.
#Article50Bill #MeaningfulVote amendt, as tabled by our @HayteratLords - with formal support from others in the Lords. Debate/vote, Tues pm pic.twitter.com/SiTynwviMG
— LabourLordsUK (@LabourLordsUK) March 2, 2017
- The spokesman would not say whether the government was committed to giving MPs a vote even if the Brexit talks conclude without a deal. Britain and its EU partners want the two-year talks process to end with a deal, but it is possible that the two sides could fail to agree and that Britain could just leave without a deal. When the article 50 bill was in the Commons David Jones, the Brexit minister, said that in those circumstances there would be no Commons vote, because there would be nothing to vote on. Asked if this was still the government’s case, the spokesman said that he was not in a position to answer but that he would clarify later. This issue is significant because one of the lines in the “meaningful vote” amendment that peers are expected to back tomorrow says that there should be a vote in parliament even if there is no deal to vote to. See above for the text.
- Karen Bradley, the culture secretary, will make a statement to MPs this afternoon at 3.30pm about Rupert Murdoch’s takeover bid for Sky.
- Downing Street said May believed that the sale of the General Motors European arm, including Vauxhall, to the French PSA Group could strengthen the Vauxhall brand. Outside the lobby briefing a spokesman said May had spoken to Mary Barra, the GM chairman and chief executive, on Sunday. He went on:
The prime minister set out to Ms Barra the importance of the Vauxhall brand to the UK and reiterated her desire for the jobs at both plants to be secured for the long term.
Ms Barra made clear that Vauxhall would remain a British brand and that the deal would recognise and respect all agreements regarding the workforce.
Both the prime minister and Ms Barra expressed their confidence that the deal had the potential to strengthen the Vauxhall brand and allow for further growth, supported by the government’s Industrial Strategy and the continued strength of the automotive sector in the UK.
- Number 10 hinted that Theresa May would not be publishing any further details of her tax returns. Jeremy Corbyn has undertaken to publish his tax returns annually. But at the lobby briefing the prime minister’s spokesman said May published hers in July, during the Conservative party leadership contest. He went on:
There was no commitment given [to publish further returns] and there is no long-standing convention to publish and no plans to do so.
- Downing Street defended the government’s decision to go ahead and announce the abolition of housing benefit for under-22s at the end of last week. The Conservative MP David Burrowes has told Huffington Post that this could have a “catastrophic” impact on some young people. But the prime minister’s spokesman said that this was a long-standing commitment and not a new policy, that it was intended to ensure that “young people do not slip straight from school into a life on benefits” and that there were a series of exemptions for vulnerable people.
- The spokesman brushed aside claims that the budget on Wednesday will see the tax burden rising to its highest level since the 1980s. Many people have been taken out of tax altogether, the spokesman said, and low earners have been helped by the “national living wage”. Asked if May believed in a low tax system, the spokesman said that she “believes in a system which is fair”.
- Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, has launched a consultation (pdf) on a new compensation scheme for some of those affected by the infected blood scandal.
No 10 rules out MPs being able to change Brexit deal when they vote on it at end of Brexit talks
I’m just back from the Number 10 lobby briefing. The main line was that Number 10 clarified its stance on the vote that Theresa May is planning to offer MPs on the final Brexit deal.
- Downing Street ruled out MPs being able to amend the Brexit deal when they vote on it at the end of the Brexit talks. Peers will vote tomorrow on an amendment to the article 50 bill that would commit the government to giving parliament a proper vote on the final deal. Theresa May has promised MPs and peers a vote on the final deal, but the government is opposed to including this commitment on the face of the bill. Asked about this issue, the prime minister’s spokesman effectively confirmed that the final vote May was offering was a “take it or leave it vote” (my phrase, not his) because May did not want to give MPs the chance of voting to change the outcome of the negotiations. The spokesman said:
On the issue of a meaningful vote, the prime minister believes we should not commit to any process that would incentivise the EU to offer us a bad deal ... If we are in a position where any deal negotiated by the prime minister could be rejected by MPs, then obviously that strengthens the hand of the other parties in the negotiation.
The spokesman also said that the vote at the end of the process would be on whether to accept the deal negotiated by the government or to leave the EU without a deal.
I will post a full summary from the lobby briefing shortly.
10 things we've learnt from the YouGov poll of Labour party members
Ian Warren, the psephologist who runs the Election Data consultancy, has this morning published the full results (pdf) of an extensive poll of Labour party members he commissioned from YouGov. Some of the findings were broadcast on ITV’s Peston on Sunday yesterday, but some have only been released this morning. It is a very extensive poll (the tables run to 39 pages) and the results are fascinating.
People are understandably sceptical about polls. But YouGov have an extensive database, which means they can easily contact a large number of Labour members for their internet polls, and their record during last year’s leadership election suggests their findings are very reliable.
Here are 10 things we’ve learnt from this poll.
1 - More than one third of Labour members disapprove of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader, the poll suggests. This figure has more than doubled (from 17 points to 37 points) since Labour members were asked in a similar poll a year ago.
Exclusive Labour leadership polling @itvallegra's screen. Carried out by @election_data & @yougov more info: https://t.co/qjk1qY1vGi #Peston pic.twitter.com/PZ8nXe4GTX
— Peston on Sunday (@pestononsunday) March 5, 2017
On @pestononsunday Allegra put up an approval chart for Mr Corbyn. Here are the underlying changes: @YouGov pic.twitter.com/IGevPlvmQ1
— Election Data (@election_data) March 5, 2017
2 - Almost 70% of Labour members would support holding a second referendum on Brexit, the poll suggests. The Lib Dems are backing a second referendum, but Corbyn has opposed one. During last summer’s leadership election Owen Smith backed a second Brexit referendum. That proposal did not seem to do him much good in the election, which he lost by 62% to 38%, and at some hustings it went down badly, but the YouGov poll raises the possibility that perhaps Labour thinking on this has shifted in recent months. (Or perhaps Smith failed as a candidate despite backing a second referendum, not because of it, because of his other weaknesses.)
I asked @UKLabour members whether they would support a second EU referendum to reverse or confirm Brexit. This is what they said: pic.twitter.com/WGng74RIyD
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
3 - More than half of Labour members think Corbyn has handled the Brexit issue badly, the poll suggests. The poll also finds that, alongside health, Brexit is seen by Labour members are the most important issue facing the country, which perhaps helps to explain why Corbyn’s overall ratings with members have fallen so much within the last year.
I asked @UKLabour members how they felt Mr Corbyn had handled Labour's position on Brexit since last June. They said: pic.twitter.com/sMxVluppiy
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
4 - Almost half of Labour members think Corbyn is doing badly as leader, the poll suggests.
I asked @UKLabour members whether they thought Mr Corbyn was doing well or badly as Labour leader. This is what they said: pic.twitter.com/gpVteLLH36
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
5 - Half of Labour members think Corbyn should either stand down now as leader, or before the election, the poll suggests. These 50% outnumber the 44% who want him to lead the party into the next election. A year ago 63% of members wanted him to lead the party into the next election.
I asked @UKLabour members whether they thought Mr Corbyn should continue as leader and fight the next general election. They said: pic.twitter.com/IHA1myVsvh
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
6 - Only 52% of Labour members would definitely or probably vote for Corbyn in a future leadership contest, the poll suggests.
I asked @UKLabour members how likely or unlikely it was that they would vote for Mr Corbyn in a future leadership contest. They said: pic.twitter.com/2p9YLxygyr
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
7 - Only 35% of members think that Labour is likely to win the general election with Corbyn as leader, the poll suggests.
I asked @UKLabour members how likely they thought it was that Labour wins the next general election if Mr Corbyn remains. They said: pic.twitter.com/BnV6wTXNQl
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
But the proportion of members who think the party would be likely to win the next election if Corbyn were replaced is virtually identical (36%), although there is more uncertainty about what would happen under a new leader. “Only” 47% say victory would be unlikely under a new leader, compared to 56% with Corbyn as leader. A much higher proportion say they just don’t know what would happen under an alternative leader.
I asked @UKLabour members how likely they thought it was that Labour wins the next general election if Mr Corbyn was replaced. They said: pic.twitter.com/RVMIRxJKLe
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
8 - Corbyn would be more popular than any other single figure if there were another leadership contest, the poll suggests.
I asked the @UKLabour members to name which 3 or 4 candidates they would consider voting for in a future leadership election. They said: pic.twitter.com/ldRL2yFZLH
— Election Data (@election_data) March 5, 2017
When members were asked which single person they would be most likely to vote for, Corbyn came top, on 38%, way ahead of Chuka Umunna, Clive Lewis and Yvette Cooper, all on 8%, and Sir Keir Starmer and Hilary Benn, both on 7%.
9 - John McDonnell and Yvette Cooper would be the joint most popular potential candidates in a future leadership contest if Corbyn were not standing, the poll suggests. The polling was carried out before McDonnell told the Andrew Marr Show yesterday that he would never stand in a future leadership contest.
I asked @UKLabour members which three or four potential candidates they would consider voting for if Mr Corbyn stood down. They said: pic.twitter.com/4DLPMkd39l
— Election Data (@election_data) March 6, 2017
When members were asked which single person they were most likely to vote for in a leadership contest without Corbyn as a candidate, McDonnell came top, on 18%, followed by Clive Lewis, on 12%, Chuka Umunna, on 10%, and Yvette Cooper, on 10%.
10 - Members are more likely to blame Corbyn than any other single factor or person for the loss of Copeland in the byelection.
I asked @UKLabour members who they thought was responsible for the by-election defeat in Copeland. They said this: pic.twitter.com/1so7iBC7GA
— Election Data (@election_data) March 5, 2017
I am just off to the Number 10 lobby briefing now. I will post again after 11.30am.
Jolyon Maugham, the tax barrister, Labour blogger and Corbyn critic, has been tweeting about Jeremy Corbyn’s tax return. He thinks Corbyn’s office still has some questions to answer.
1. His office seems to be contending he recorded the leader of the opposition supplement to his salary as a pension. https://t.co/ONOZBlINoD
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
2. This would be a rather bizarre thing to do because it's not a pension. It's a supplement to his salary.
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
3. But let's accept that people sometimes do strange things. Perhaps his accountant did just stick it in the wrong place? Can we tell?
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
4. One way to tell is to compare the amount *said to be* the supplement with what we know the supplement should be.
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
5. He became leader on 12 September 2015, when there were 205 days left in the 2015/16 tax year.
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
6. The supplement in that year is given as £58,000 or £62,440 (https://t.co/JrBSzz5WGM) (https://t.co/iRrqyGc7wB).
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
7. If you take the lower figure you get accrued earnings of £32,575. If you take the higher you get £35,069.
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
8. The Government accounts also (apparently) show a figure of £30,587. https://t.co/5gdocoFcDQ
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
9. The number that Corbyn has declared is £27,192.22 - considerable lower than any of these numbers: https://t.co/foHvnKx9Rf
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
10. As to the info going in the wrong box, either Corbyn or his accountant has made a declaration that shouldn't have been made. pic.twitter.com/JbaYXetpxA
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
11. There may be an innocent explanation - the timing of payments of the supplement and a muddle with the boxes - but I remain sceptical.
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
12. If anyone from Corbyn's office wants to contact me and explain it all I'd be very happy to put out a clarification.
— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) March 6, 2017
My colleague Graeme Wearden is covering the sale of Vauxhall to the PSA Group in detail on his business live blog.
Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem former business secretary, told the Today programme this morning that Brexit meant there was a “serious question mark” over the future of the Vauxhall plants in the UK in the medium term. He said:
There is one big doubt, which is the future of the customs union, the single market arrangements. Car components have to go backwards and forwards across frontiers and they will require tariffs and checks.
Vauxhall particularly is exposed to this, about 80% of its exports are to the European Union, most of its components are.
If you are a hard-headed car executive looking at the competitiveness of Britain versus German plants, Britain I’m afraid is going to slip down the ranking in future.
Corbyn hits back at his critics over his tax return
Jeremy Corbyn published his tax return yesterday. But if he was expecting universal acclamation, it did not quite work out like that because rightwing papers like the Sun and the Daily Mail suggested he had failed to declare the top-up to his MP’s salary that he receives for being leader of the opposition.
This lead to his office having to release a further statement late last night explaining that the extra salary had been declared, but in a different section of the tax return.
Jeremy Corbyn supports tax transparency and welcomes scrutiny of his own #taxreturn, but some reports have been misleading. For the record: pic.twitter.com/sqnqILkdkR
— Labour Leader Media (@LOTOcomms) March 6, 2017
The BBC’s Norman Smith explains the clarification.
So.. Corbyn tax returns; Seems leader element of his salary included under Pensions/benefits -as not salary.
— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) March 6, 2017
Corbyn tax returns 2; the £36,045 pensions/benefits income includes £27,000 of leader salary.
— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) March 6, 2017
Corbyn tax returns 3; The leader income is only £27,000 as tax return for 2015/16 and he only became leader in Oct 2015.
— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) March 6, 2017
And this morning Corbyn has tweeted this, welcoming scrutiny of his tax return (the whole point of publishing a tax return is to stimulate a debate about tax) and insisting that his taxes are “fully paid”.
Transparency invites scrutiny. I welcome it as should all those seeking highest office. My taxes fully paid, nothing missing, nothing hidden
— Jeremy Corbyn MP (@jeremycorbyn) March 6, 2017
And he can point to at least one PR success from this. Somewhat surprisingly, the Daily Mail’s parliamentary sketchwriter Quentin Letts, who is not normally a Corbyn fan, to put it mildly, has taken his side.
If J Corbyn has made a boob on his tax return we may only warm to him all the more. Those forms are never easy.
— Quentin Letts (@thequentinletts) March 6, 2017
Here is the agenda for the day.
11am: Number 10 lobby briefing.
11.45am: Lord Lamont, the Conservative former chancellor, gives a speech on Brexit.
2.30pm: Amber Rudd, the home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
5pm: Rudd and Sir Mark Lyall-Grant, the national security adviser, give evidence to the Lord national security strategy committee.
As usual, I will also be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.
You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.
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.
Updated
