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 Nicola Slawson

May refuses vote on article 50 after conceding debate - as it happened

Corbyn presses May on ‘shambolic Tory Brexit’ at PMQs – video highlights

In other Brexit-related news, Tesco is running low on stocks of Marmite (and other products, but let’s face it that’s the only one we care about).

The supermarket’s main supplier, Unilever has halted deliveries of a range of goods blaming the fall in the pound. A source accused Unilever of “using Brexit as an excuse to raise prices”.

Read more on that from my colleague Sarah Butler here.

Pound drops further after Davis hints UK could leave single market

Here’s an excerpt from my colleague Phillip Inman’s piece on how the pound has dropped even further:

A brief rally in the pound was quickly reversed on Wednesday after the government refused to make tariff-free access to the European Union’s single market a red line in Brexit negotiations with Brussels.

Investors sold the pound after Brexit minister David Davis told MPs it was “not black or white” whether the UK would stay in the single market.

Sterling fell two cents to $1.21 on the currency markets in afternoon trading, reversing a jump to $1.23 overnight that followed Theresa May’s concession for parliament to hold a debate on the government’s stance on talks with the EU.

The U-turn in agreeing to a debate initially lifted markets, but the refusal of ministers to clarify the government’s position provoked a swift reversal in sentiment and the pound ended the day at $1.22.

Thangam Debbonaire, a Labour MP, used her speech to discuss the importance of freedom of movement.

She ended her speech by saying:

If the government want to jettison all of that, the secretary of state should at least have had the courtesy to inform the British people what they were risking. The government should respect the sovereignty of this Parliament, which Brexit campaigners made so much of. Does the secretary of state really want to throw all that away?

It is clear to me that they have no plan for the future of this country, and if they throw it all away, without debate, without proper scrutiny and without the full participation of the British people, my constituents and the country will never forgive them.

Updated

Former cabinet member and Conservative MP, Maria Miller, is concerned that the British parliament is coming across as arrogant.

She said this during her speech earlier:

There is an arrogance creeping into the debate today that we should take great care about, because only one certainty is coming from the referendum decision in June: the vote to leave the EU – I put it on record that I was a remainer – and nothing else is certain at this point. Members on both sides have advocated membership of or freedom to trade in the single market, freedom of movement, or no freedom of movement.

Our EU partners listening today may be forgiven for thinking that there is more than a touch of arrogance coming from the British parliament, but the truth is that it is all up for grabs, and it is not for us to determine the outcome at this stage.

We may well continue trading in the single market – I certainly hope so – but that is what this negotiation is all about.

In his speech earlier, Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Conservative MP, said it only appeared like his constituency voted to remain because the result had been “infected” by the votes cast in the city of Bath.

The leading leave campaigner was told by Labour’s Chris Bryant that his north east Somerset constituency had voted to stay in the EU. But Rees-Mogg blamed “urbanites” for the result.

Intervening on Rees-Mogg, Bryant said:

“You and I are in rather similar positions. The Rhondda voted to leave but I support remain. north east Somerset voted to remain but you supported leave. Do you fully accept that given what you have said about sovereignty that all of us in this house are not sent as delegates, we are here as representatives and we owe to our constituents our conscience as much as our vote?”

But Rees-Mogg prompted laughter across the House as he replied:

You should check the record. Unfortunately north east Somerset was not counted separately. We were infected by the votes of people in Bath. I’m pretty confident that the wise people of rural Somerset voted to leave whilst the urbanites in Bath voted to remain.

He’s been accused of being an isolationist by Labour MP Liz McInnes on Twitter.

Updated

The motion passed unopposed

The debate is over now. The motion, which was changed to include the government’s amendment, was passed unopposed. I will continue to post highlights from earlier speeches. Here’s more from Dominic Grieve, a Conservative MP:

I don’t have a prescriptive view as to what it should be, I’m quite happy to debate those issues and to listen to colleagues.

But what I am not prepared to do, and I say this with emphasis, is to have options closed down by diktat from wherever that may come, and I’m sorry to have to say, whether that be colleagues or the executive, on this matter.

They will have to be debated in this House, and this House will have to give its approval.

Mr Grieve also said he was worried at the “accepted euphoria that has followed this process” and warned of the legal quagmire that lays ahead.

He said:

“I have to say – I hope I am not too gloomy – that I see it as fraught with risk. There is the risk of the economic damage.

I have to say as a lawyer I see the repeal process and our leaving as being a legal nightmare, one that is going to take up an endless amount of this House’s time, and to the prejudice of many of the other priorities on which we should be focused.

It undoubtedly impinges on the devolution settlements and competence, we have a duty to maintain legal certainty and the rule of law which will be jeopardised in the process, there are private legal rights that are likely to be affected – some of which may lead to litigation and claims for compensation.”

Updated

Spelling out in fine detail what goes on in the negotiations is not realistic, says David Jones.

He says they have already set out the broad terms of what Brexit will look like.

The house, he says, will be engaged in the process. The government agrees a balance needs to be struck.

Updated

David Jones, minister of state for exiting the European Union, is speaking now.

We all have a duty to respect and not seek to frustrate the will of the people, he says. He is pleased that most MPs appear to agree on this.

Updated

Barry Gardiner, shadow international trade secretary, is speaking now.

He says he accepts that we can’t have a running commentary on the Brexit process but the prime minister must provide a coherent and reasoned picture of what sort of future it wants for its citizens.

Everyone expects that negotiations will be tough but this does not stop the government from being clear about its objectives, he says.

Parliament must be part of the process, he adds.

Stephen Kinnock, another Labour MP, is speaking now.

Rebuilding public trust in politicians and healing a fractured and divided society, must both be at the top of the government’s agenda, he says.

Demanding a parliamentary vote on Brexit is not a ploy to overturn the referendum vote, he says as his Labour colleagues nod. It must happen but it must be subject to the democratic process.

This is what Chris Bryant, a Labour MP, said in his speech earlier:

“Not only was I a Remainer, I am a Remainer and I’ll remain a Remainer until my dying day.”

Updated

Nic Dakin, a Labour MP, says nobody knows what Brexit actually means. Like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder, he says.

People want to come out but they don’t want to lose out, he says.

People expect MPs to manage these contradictions and try and square the circle. We must listen to those who didn’t vote to leave, he says. That doesn’t mean overturning the vote but doing what’s in the best interests of everybody.

He ends his passionate speech mid-sentence by saying, I think that will do actually, and sits down.

Updated

The people of Teesside voted to leave the EU but they did not vote to give the government a blank cheque, says Anna Turley, Labour MP for Redcar, who just made her speech.

She wants to know that the British steel industry will be protected and rebuilt post-EU, and that parliament will have a say in trade deals.

A hard Brexit could be disastrous for Teesside, she says. Adding that subsidies supporting Teesside’s economy will still be crucial.

Updated

Liz Kendall, the Labour MP, is speaking now. She is reminding everyone of the state of the sterling. The government should pay attention but they are not, she says. She also reminds everyone that this will have an impact everyone, not just those going on foreign holidays.

The prime minister, she says, has failed to recognise that the fall in sterling has benefitted the asset-rich while those who are poor suffer as the cost of everyday products rise.

Updated

As promised earlier, here is an extract from Ed Miliband’s speech near the start of the debate. He said the country was “deeply divided” and politicians had to try to bring it together.

It is up to all of us to try to heal the divisions. Now, from my side, remain, and for my part, I believe it mean we should accept the result of the referendum as part of trying to bridge that divide. The people voted, and we should accept the result. But, if I can put it this way, the humility of those who lost should be matched by the magnanimity of those who won.

As I think about my responsibilities, I do say to the people who voted leave and were successful, they should think about the remain people in our country who feel lost and wonder is there a place for them in Britain after Brexit.

Responsibilities lie on both sides. And, if I can say in passing, we should stop impugning the motives of each other. The vast majority of those who voted to leave did not do so because of prejudice. And those who are now advocating proper scrutiny and consent of this parliament are not doing so, as the Daily Mail says today, because they want to reverse the vote. It’s for much deeper reasons than that. It’s about the mandate from this referendum.

That’s all from me, Andrew Sparrow, for this afternoon. My colleague Nicola Slawson is taking over now to cover the rest of the debate.

Here is the Hansard of today’s debate. At the moment it goes up to Stephen Gethins’s speech, but it will be updated as the evening goes on.

Kwasi Kwarteng, the Conservative MP, is speaking in the debate now. He tells the Speaker that he must feel as if he is presiding over a group therapy session.

My colleague Rowena Mason, who has been keeping a tally, says Alistair Burt was the seventh former Conservative minister to express concern about the government’s Brexit policy in the debate.

Here is my colleague Rowena Mason’s story on the opening of the debate.

And here is how it starts.

A string of Tory and Labour MPs have warned David Davis, the Brexit secretary, that businesses and financial markets are being spooked by his lack of a plan for leaving the EU.

Claire Perry, a Conservative former minister, said on Wednesday she was extremely concerned about the state of the pound and accused him of putting “narrow ideology” ahead of the national interest, while Ken Clarke, the former chancellor, said no foreign companies would invest until there was more clarity about the UK’s future relationship with the outside world.

Chris Philp, a Tory backbencher, urged the Brexit secretary to give away more details, saying there was a “danger some [businesses] may take decisions in the next two or three months” to pre-emptively scale back investment and move jobs.

Others to raise concerns included the serial rebel Anna Soubry, a former business minister who attended cabinet, who demanded a yes or no answer as to whether the UK would be in the single market.

Alistair Burt, the Conservative former minister, is speaking now. He said he supported remaining in the EU during the referendum and he strongly attacked what was said about the EU by some of its opponents during the campaign.

I told my electors that, contrary to popular opinion, not all Conservative MPs are reluctant Europeans. I believe that this country prospered in the European Union. I believe that our sovereignty and independence were always intact. I believe that we were enhanced by our membership of the European Union just as the European Union was enhanced by our membership of it. With a political lifetime of relationship with colleagues from different countries, remembering what they have been through over the past century to build the European Union and all that it meant, I listened with despair and sometimes shame to the mischaracterisation of the EU and the way it was by the drip, drop of poison for too long, often from those lips that should have known a damned sight better.

And here’s a quote from Ken Clarke’s speech earlier.

It’s a pity that the secretary of state is obviously still quite unable to say whether the objective of the government is to stay in the single market or in the customs union or not. Every other member state will make it quite clear to its parliament, its people, what attitude it is taking during these negotiations towards the single market, and we are not ...

We still have got no offer of a vote and we need some clarity about the policy the government’s going to pursue because the government is accountable to this House.

Angela Eagle, the former shadow business secretary, is speaking now. She says Britain did not vote to take back control from Brussels only to hand it over entirely to the prime minister and her “increasingly ridiculous three Brexiteers”.

Updated

A few minutes ago Anna Soubry, the Conservative former business minister, said she did not accept that the EU referendum vote meant immigration had to be slashed. She said if politicians were prepared to make the case for immigration, people would understand. And she said that the government should abandon its immigration target.

There seems to be some nonsensical idea that, with a bit of upskilling here, and a bit of upskilling there, we will find the millions and millions of people who came and they work, not just in low-skill jobs but right the way through to the highest levels of research and development, the great entrepreneurs. We should be making it clear that we are open for business and that we are open to people, as we always have been, because they contribute to our country.

She also said Brexit was causing real economic damage.

What’s happening out there in the real world is that British business is in a very difficult and serious predicament. We’ve heard about the value of the pound at this record 30-year low. What does that mean? It means that a friend of mine last night sent me a text that her small business is now on the verge of going under. That is the reality of what is happenin.

It means a great company like Freshcut Foods in my constituency is seeing its best EU workers leaving. They feel they have no place here. They are finding, as the University of Nottingham said to me, that they can no longer recruit, they’ve lost some of their best academics, because they feel no longer welcome and valued in our country. And I’m sorry, it has to be said, we should be holding our heads with shame.

Here is an extract from the speech from Stephen Gethins, the SNP’s Europe spokesman, earlier.

I’m a new member of parliament, but maybe other members can tell me: is it normal that a secretary of state can spend so much time at the despatch box without telling us anything. He spent a lot of time there and I’m none the wiser about where we are at the moment. It seems remarkable.

They tell us that they are having negotiations ... And they can’t answer a simple question. And that strikes me; when you do spend time with our European partners, and you do start your negotiations. What are you saying to them? What could you possibly be telling them? We don’t even have a starting point.

Nicky Morgan, the Conservative former education secretary, is speaking now.

She says the Conservatives are fully committed to the single market as far as she is concerned.

She says she was worried to hear at the Conservative conference that the cabinet did not discuss Theresa May’s decision to set a timetable for invoking article 50.

She also says she resents the suggestion that she and others like her who want to scrutinise the Brexit process are trying to overturn the EU referendum result.

Turning away from the Brexit debate for a moment, the Times’ Sam Coates has a good Twitter summary of what Tom Scholar, permanent secretary at the Treasury, told the Treasury select committee this afternoon.

Hilary Benn, the former shadow foreign secretary, is speaking now.

He says the government should make it clear, as soon as possible, that if it cannot secure a trade deal with the EU during the two-year withdrawal process, it will negotiate a transitional trade deal so that businesses do not face a sudden shock when the UK leaves.

He also strongly criticises Liam Fox’s decision to describe the EU nationals in the UK as a “card” to play in the negotiations. Words matter, he says. And it is wrong to describe people like this. He says they listen to the language, because they know ministers are talking about them.

Hilary Benn.
Hilary Benn. Photograph: BBC

John Redwood says he was Margaret Thatcher’s adviser at the time the single market was set up. He says he advised her not to give up the British veto when it was launched. She ignored his advice, he says. But she came to regret that, he goes on.

John Redwood, the Conservative former cabinet minister and arch-Eurosceptic, is speaking now. He says the UK does not actually want anything from Europe. It wants to be allowed to carry on as an independent country, and it wants to allow the EU countries to carry on doing their own thing.

Sky’s Faisal Islam has also been told that David Davis did not mean to imply that the government would publish a Brexit green paper.

Clegg effectively accuses May of hypocrisy over allowing parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit

Clegg is still speaking, and now he is talking about precedent.

Why is is that no one on the government benches has acknowledged that John Major came to the Commons before Maastricht negotiation to get a mandate for what he wanted. That was a “stance taken with courage and delivered with clarity”.

He says under the coalition a secretary of state came to him to ask about negotiating the opt out from EU judicial and home affairs rules.

Clegg was told by this minister that at the start of the negotiation there had to be a full debate and vote in the Commons. And another at the end. They took place, he says, on 15 July 2013, and on 10 November 2014.

He says Theresa May was the minister who insisted on those debates.

If a debate was necessary on the JHA [justice and home affairs opt outs], why isn’t one essential on Brexit, he says.

  • Clegg effectively accuses May of hypocrisy over allowing parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit.
Nick Clegg.
Nick Clegg. Photograph: BBC

Updated

Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem leader, is speaking now.

He says the government does not have a mandate on how to leave the EU.

The Tories are reinventing history and ignoring precedent.

He says the Tories are saying the EU referendum was “an overwhelming vote” for Brexit. But it was relatively close, he says.

He says the Tories are now claiming to know why people voted to leave. They are saying it was all about immigration.

And they are casting aspersions on the 16.1m people who voted to stay in the EU. He says, if you believe in internationalism, Theresa May is calling you a “citizen of nowhere”. That amounts to insulting 16m of her follow citizens, she says.

I’ve missed good speeches from the SNP’s Stephen Gethins, the former Tory chancellor Ken Clarke and the former Labour leader Ed Miliband while doing the summary. But I will post highlights from them soon.

Brexit debate - Summary so far

Here are the key points from the opening of the debate so far. It has been a rather odd occasion - not a debate about Brexit, but a debate about how parliament debates Brexit - but given that we now live in world where the pound can rally following the publication of government amendments to opposition day motions (see 11.50am), these procedural wrangles matter.

  • MPs are set to approve a motion with cross-party support saying the Commons must have a “full and transparent” debate on the government’s plans for Brexit before article 50 is invoked, but ministers are refusing to commit themselves to giving parliament an actual vote on the matter. Theresa May made this clear at PMQs (see 12.36pm) and David Davis, the Brexit secretary, would not promise a substantive vote either in his speech at the start of the debate. It may well be the case that eventually MPs do get a vote, but any vote on a substantive motion would constrain the government, and also allow the possibility of Tory MPs rebelling with Labour, and May seems determined to resist it if at all possible. In his impressive debut as shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer confimed that Labour was not explicitly demanding a vote in its motion because it wanted to maximise the chances of MPs voting for it tonight. (See 1.37pm.)
  • Davis has played down suggestions that the government will publish a white paper or a green paper on Brexit. When it was put to him that a fellow minister, George Eustice, said a Brexit white paper was likely to be published, Davis dismissed the idea. Later he seemed to hint that one could be published.

I should also tell the House ... I have asked the chief whip to ensure we have a series of debates so that the House can air its views. And it would be again very surprising if we had those debates without presenting to the House something for them to debate.

But a source in the department for Brexit said that Davis was not intending to suggest that policy papers would be published before the debates. Davis was just referring to the fact that ministers would keep MPs updated, the source said.

  • A Conservative former minister has accused the government of pursuing a Brexit policy driven by ideology, not national interest. In a question to Davis Claire Perry, the former transport minister, said:

I am extremely concerned by what has happened to sterling and what has happened to interest rates since the prime minister’s comments at the conference last week. And I think the problem [David Davis] is not acknowledging is that many people in the country do not think that there is a policy to put the national interest first. They think there is a policy to put people’s narrow ideological interests first. And what we should be setting out is quite clearly how we are going to protect British jobs and businesses and put ideology in the past where it belongs.

Davis rejected this claim.

  • Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative former work and pensions secretary, has withdrawn a claim he made on Monday that Starmer is a second-rate lawyer. He said he was being “clumsy” and that his comment was not intended to apply to Starmer, a former director of public prosecutions.

Can I unreservedly withdraw allegations that I made on Monday, only on the basis that it was clumsy, it was not meant about you, it was meant about advice. I don’t doubt for one moment your capabilities as a lawyer.

Starmer said he considered the matter closed.

I’m grateful for that and I can assure you and the House that I wasn’t in the slightest bit concerned. I consider the matter closed.

  • Davis refused to confirm that powers over fishing and agriculture currently exercised by Brussels would currently devolve to the Scottish parliament. These were matters that would have to be discussed with Edinburgh, he said. Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minister, said that under current law these matters would automatically get devolved to Scotland, regardless of what Davis said, unless the devolution arrangements were changed. He told Davis:

Agriculture and fisheries are not reserved, therefore they are devolved. Unless the government intends to change that position it’ll be automatic that agriculture and fisheries powers go to the Scottish government.

Davis replied:

This is an area where we have not addressed or talked to the devolved administration at all yet. We will do so before we get to bringing it back.

  • Starmer said Labour was not trying to overturn the EU referendum result and that it had to be “respected and accepted”.

Updated

Davis says Starmer said the British people did not vote for any particular model of Brexit.

They voted to leave the EU, Davis says.

They expect the government to get the best possible terms, he says.

And that’s Davis’s speech over.

Peter Bone, a Conservative, says he thinks MPs are actually agreed on this. There will be parliamentary scrutiny, he says.

Nick Herbert, a Conservative, says MPs like him who want the Commons to scrutinise the government’s plans are not trying to block Brexit.

Patrick Grady, the SNP MP, asks if powers over fisheries will get handed to Scotland.

Davis says matters will have to be considered.

Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minister, says if matters are not reserved, they are devolved to Holyrood. He says that means Scotland will get power over agriculture and fisheries.

Davis says the government will have to discuss this with the Scottish parliament.

  • Davis refuses to confirm that Scotland will get full power over agriculture and fisheries after Brexit.

Davis says if you tell the person you are negotiating with what you want, the price goes up.

That would apply if you were buying a house.

Equally, if you indicated in advance that you are willing to compromise on something, you reduce the value of that concession.

Davis says this parliament will be at least as informed about the government’s Brexit negotiations as the European parliament.

That will be the minimum, he says. But the government will be “considerably beyond the minimum”, he says.

He says he has asked the chief whip to ensure there are a series of debates so MPs can express their views.

And it would be odd to have those debates without having “something before the House”, he says.

  • Davis hints the government will publish a paper or papers on its Brexit negotiating stance.

UPDATE: I’ve been told Davis did not mean to give this impression. See 3.05pm.

Updated

Andy Burnham, the former shadow home secretary, says David Cameron’s refusal to make contingency plans for Brexit was “a serious dereliction of duty”.

Davis says he will do many things from the despatch box, but not criticise Cameron.

Anna Soubry, a Conservative, asks if the government has turned its back on membership of the single market.

Davis says this intervention illustrates the problems with the language over this. People talk about hard and soft Brexit, which mean little. There is “a whole spectrum” of options available.

We won’t go for a Norwegian or Swiss or Turkish option. We will go for a British option, he says.

Davis says ministers will be appearing regularly in the Commons to discuss Brexit.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, asks if changes to environmental laws will become subject to a Commons vote.

Davis says the government will have to win a vote in the Commons to change environmental law.

Starmer intervenes. Will we get a plan?

Davis says he will address that later in his speech.

Jack Dromey, the Labour MP, says George Eustice, the environment minister, has just said on TV or radio this lunchtime that the government will probably publish a white paper or a green paper on its negotiating stance. Is that the latest U-turn, he says.

No, says Davis.

(It is not clear whether he is saying there will not be a white paper, or that publishing one would not be a U-turn.)

Davis says he will put the national interest first, listen to the devolved bodies and, wherever possible, reduce uncertainty. That is what the great repeal bill is about.

Claire Perry, a Conservative, says she is “extremely concerned” by what has happened to sterling and interest rates since the Tory conference. Many people think there is not a policy to put the national interest first. They think the government is putting ideology.

Davis says he is not being ideological.

Davis says he can “broadly welcome” the Labour motion, “but with important caveats”.

He says it is important that parliamentary scrutiny does not undermine the government’s negotiating position, or thwart leaving the EU.

Labour’s Ian Lucas asks if parliament will get a vote on the “opening position” of the government.

Davis says he will not allow any party to have a veto on leaving the EU.

Labour’s Emma Reynolds says this veto argument is a red herring. She says seven out of 10 Labour MPs represent constituencies that voted to leave the EU.

David Davis's speech

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, is now responding to Starmer.

He says today he received a list of 170 Brexit questions from Labour. It was a stunt, he says.

He says the government will allow proper scrutiny of its plans. But it will not allow the Commons to have a veto.

David Davis asks if the Labour motion is demanding a vote.

Starmer says the Labour motion is about scrutiny. But he is pressing for a vote too, he says.

I am anxious that we have first proper scrutiny, and then a vote.

But he does not want to jeopardise the scrutiny but having a vote against a vote, he says.

And that’s it. Starmer has finished.

NOTE: In other words, Starmer is saying Labour deliberately did not demand a vote in its motion because it did not want to give the Tories an excuse to vote against the principle of MPs having the chance to scrutinise the government’s Brexit plans.

Updated

Starmer says no one voted on 23 June to take an axe to the economy.

The government must put the national interest first, and not give in to pressure to have a hard Brexit.

It must prioritise the best possible access to the single market, he says.

The government should publish its plans for Brexit, and get the backing of the Commons.

Starmer quotes what Liam Fox said at the Conservative conference about EU nationals in the UK being a negotiating “card”.

He says that is not good enough. EU nationals living in the UK deserve better than this, he says.

Jonathan Edwards, the Plaid Cymru MP, asks what Labour’s policy is on single market membership.

Starmer says Labour wants the best possible access to it.

Claire Perry, a Conservative, says many Tories will try to retain the benefits of single market access for the sake of firms in their constituencies.

Duncan Smith withdraws 'second-rate lawyer' jibe at Starmer

Johanna Cherry, the SNP’s home affairs spokesman, intervenes, saying it is a pleasure to listen to a first-rate lawyer.

That is a reference to Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative former work and pensions secretary, calling Starmer a “second-rate lawyer” in the Commons on Monday.

Davis intervenes. He says he does not consider Starmer “second-rate lawywer”.

Now Duncan Smith intervenes. He says his comment on Monday was no intended to refer to Starmer. He was trying to make a general point about laywers, he says. He says he was “clumsy”. He says he wishes to withdraw the suggestion that this was aimed at Starmer.

Starmer says he was not bothered anyway. He considers the matter closed.

  • Duncan Smith withdraws ‘second-rate lawyer’ jibe at Starmer.

UPDATE: This is what Duncan Smith said on Monday.

Updated

Starmer says Davis said, in a Commons statement in September, that he would strive to build a national consensus for the government’s approach.

But how can you build a consensus if you will not disclose what your approach actually is, he asks.

Starmer says even if the royal prerogative permits the government to withhold its plans from parliament, it does not require it to.

And he says the political imperative is for parliament to be consulted.

Bernard Jenkin, a Conservative, says there has already been a vote on this - at the referendum.

Starmer says the referendum did not set the terms for EU withdrawal.

Starmer says the development of the convention governing this is obvious; the more important a decision, the more essential that parliament gets consulted.

Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, says there is a convention that major treaty changes have to be put to the Commons for an affirmative vote. He says that is only a convention. But conventions have to be followed, he says. He says the notion that governments resign after losing a vote of confidence is only a convention, but MPs would be very surprised if that were ignored.

Chris Bryant, the Labour MP, says parliament should get a vote on treaties. This is something originally proposed by the Labour government in the 1920s, he says. He says it is worrying that ministers want to rely on the royal prerogative to take Britain out of the EU.

Starmer says UK should not just copy existing model for post-Brexit relationship with EU

Starmer says four models for leaving the EU have been most discussed: the Swiss model, the Norwegian model, the Turkish model and the Canadian model.

It is unlikely that any of those models will be exactly replicated. And nor should they, he says.

  • Starmer says UK should not simply copy an off-the-peg model for the UK’s relationship with the EU. This is Theresa May’s position too.

Starmer says once the negotiating process has started, the government will not want to give any information to the Commons about its stance.

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, intervenes. He says he told a Lords committee recently that parliament would get at least as much information as the European parliament about the renegotiation.

Labour’s Toby Perkins says the CBI thinks the government is heading for a cliff edge. Many people in business are worried about the lack of commentary from the government.

Starmer says there is “great uncertainty” in the country at large about the government’s plans.

A Tory MP asks if Labour will set out its negotiating position.

Starmer says Labour is not in government. He would happily swap places with David Davis, he says.

Starmer says the fact that the government has tabled an amendment suggests it is moving in the right direction.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, says MPs need to have not just a debate, but a vote too.

Starmer says he will address this point later.

He says the government must agree to publish some plans.

MPs debate parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit

The main debate on parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit is now starting.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is opening for Labour.

He says the decisions being taken by the government in the next few months will have a profound impact on the UK. The Commons has probably never had to decide so many big issues since the end of the second world war.

He says the vote to leave the EU has to be “respected and accepted”, even though people like him were opposed to leaving.

  • Starmer says vote to leave EU must be “respected and accepted”.

But the nature of the EU withdrawal was not on the ballot paper.

And the government has not set out its opening terms for negotiation.

Here is some Twitter comment from journalists and commentators on PMQs.

(It is quite a limited round-up by normal standards because I’m short of time.)

The Financial Times’s Sebastian Payne says a Guardian story may have led Theresa May to think Emily Thornberry was backing a second referendum on the EU.

On a point of order Michael Fabricant says Jeremy Corbyn implied that Fabricant had received special treatment from the NHS during PMQs. (See 12.08pm.)

Corbyn objects. He says that is not what he was saying. He says he loves the NHS.

Thornberry accuses May of misleading MPs about her Brexit stance

Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, has accused Theresa May of misleading MPs when she said Thornberry wanted a second EU referendum. (See 12.23pm.)

PMQs has now finished. It ran 10 minutes over time today.

Updated

Alison McGovern, the Labour MP, asks if the government will compensate the women who will lose out from the accelerated state pension age increase.

May says women were informed about these changes. She says pension arrangements for women will improve under the government’s plans.

May refuses to promise MPs a vote on Brexit before article 50 is invoked

Labour’s Angela Eagle asks if MPs will get a vote on Brexit before article 50 is invoked.

May says the idea that parliament would not debate or scrutinise Brexit was wrong. Parliament is going to have every opportunity to debate this issue.

  • May refuses to promise MPs a vote on Brexit before article 50 is invoked.

Victoria Prentis, a Conservative, asks about maternity services in a hospital in her constituency. May says what matters is having a safe service.

Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, says May has sided with the protectionists and nationalists who have taken over her party, just as Labour has been taken over by Momentum. She has chosen a hard Brexit. When will she put the interests of British people first. Almost no one voted for a hard Brexit.

MPs from both sides seem to be jeering Farron. He is having difficult being heard.

May says she will put the interests of the British people first.

Fiona Bruce, a Conservative, asks May for an assurance that parents will get the right school place for their child.

May says the whole aim of the government’s policy is to ensure that there are good school places for every child.

And the government does want to lift the ban on selective schools expanding.

Labour’s Ben Bradshaw asks if May will join France in saying those responsible for war crimes in Syria to be investigated by the international criminal court.

May says it is for the ICC to decide what it investigates. On the no-fly zone, she says the scenes in Syria are appalling. But there are many questions about how a no-fly zone could operate. What everyone knows is that the only solution is a political transition. It is time Russia accepted that.

May says devolution deals are having a transformative effect. Suffolk is looking at such a deal.

Liz Saville Roberts, a Plaid Cymru MP, asks about a couple in her constituency where median incomes are very low. This is affecting a couple who are having difficulty meeting visa requirements because of family income rules. Why should people in her constituency find it harder to meet rules allowing people to come to the UK.

May says she will respond in writing about the constituents’ case. But she says the government consulted carefully about the income rules.

May says government investment has enabled growth in Pendle to be unlocked.

PMQs - Snap Verdict:

PMQs - Snap Verdict: Corbyn never quite put the ball in the back of the net, but this wasn’t May’s finest moment either, and the Labour leader did quite usefully catalogue some of the weaknesses in the government’s position on Brexit. The very fact that Corbyn focused on Brexit was striking, because since the referendum (and for some time before) he has generally avoided the topic. But, as usual, he asked strong questions but failed to follow them up. (In tennis terms, he has an adequate serve, but no return.) He also failed to press May on the one question that is really topical today; in the light of her U-turn last night on a Brexit debate, can she now commit to giving MPs a vote on a substantive motion? May responded competently, but not brilliantly, to Corbyn’s questions, and interestingly she avoided some of the gratuitous Labour-bashing that has marred some of her earlier PMQs, although she did finish with a neat point about Labour getting the same answer when they ask a question for a second time. (Although this was premised on a claim that Emily Thornberry has called for a second referendum on the EU, which as far as I’m aware she hasn’t.)

Corbyn says the government seems to be turning its back on the single market, even though a commitment to this was in the Tory manifesto. Will May risk a shambolic Brexit just to appease the people behind her.

May says she will negotiate the best deal for the UK. She is ambitious about delivering it.

Corbyn says Ken Clarke often has a mot juste to help in these debates. He says the pound was heading south because no one has an idea what the government will put in place. The government has no plan for Brexit, and no strategy. The jobs and income of people are at stake. May says she will not give a running commentary. But she cannot run away from this.

May says she is optimistic about Britain’s prospects after Brexit. Labour did not want a referendum, she says. The Tories gave them one. Labour did not like the result. The Tories are delivering. And Emily Thornberry wants a second vote, she says. But Labour MPs should have learnt the lesson; if you ask the same question, you get the same reply.

(That’s a reference to the Labour leadership contest.)

Corbyn says some Tories said Brexit would generate £350m a week for the NHS. Some ministers do not have data about Brexit. David Davis said on Monday he did not know what the economic effects of Brexit would be. But the Treasury says not being in the single market could cost £66bn. Is access to the single market a priority?

May says she wants the best deal for the UK, including maximum possible access to the single market. But she is also clear that the vote to leave the EU was a vote to get control of immigration.

Corbyn says May said leaving the single market would damage trade before she became PM. He says 140,000 people in the UK work for Japanese companies. What reassurance can May give to workers worried about their jobs?

May says the Japanese firm SoftBank invested in ARM after the referendum. That was a vote of confidence.

UPDATE: I’ve corrected the final paragraph which referred to a Japanese bank. SoftBank is not a bank. May did not described it as a bank.

Updated

Jeremy Corbyn wishes Michael Fabricant well. And he hopes Fabricant got the same treatment as others.

Some MPs seem to object to this.

Corbyn says May said in her conference speech that she wanted the UK to be a country where it does not matter where you are born. But the home secretary wants to name and shame firms that employ foreigners.

May congratulates Corbyn on his leadership victory. She says there was no plan to name and shame firms, or to publish lists of workers. But the government will consult on collecting data to ensure it is tackling skills shortages.

Corbyn says he is grateful to all those that voted for him to become leader of his party. There were rather more than who voted for May. May is slightly unaware of what is going on. The home secretary said firms would be named and shamed. Then the government said the data would just be retained. Yesterday we learned pregnant women would not get ultrasound at a hospital without photo ID. Are these the actions of a country where it does not matter where you were born.

May says if the NHS is providing services, people should be eligible. If people are coming to the UK, the health service should identify them and get money from them. Of course, emergency care will be provided without people having to give that information.

Michael Fabricant, a Conservative, asks a closed question about the West Midlands economy. May says it is in good shape.

Fabricant says he recently had a well man check which showed he had a problem with his prostate. He had an operation. He is now fine. But he wants to thank the team at the Birmingham hospital. In the future there will be a shortage of prostate nurses.

May says MPs are pleased to see Fabricant back. But this is a serious issue. She commends NHS staff, and says cancer survival rates are at a record high. The government will look at the training of nurses, she says.

Labour’s Paula Sheriff says she used to work in an NHS service that went to Virgin Care. They use a system of double appointments. That is unfair for patients, and adds costs to the NHS.

Theresa May says she wants the NHS to provide the best service. It was Labour that encouraged outsourcing, she says.

May and Corbyn at PMQs

PMQs is starting in a few minutes.

Here is the list of MPs on the order paper with a question.

The nation has yet to respond to Boris Johnson’s call for protests outside the Russian embassy over Syria. Here is the scene outside the embassy gates this morning.

The scene outside the Russian embassy this morning.
The scene outside the Russian embassy this morning. Photograph: Damien Gayle for the Guardian

The pound has rallied following the government’s decision that it will give MPs a “full and transparent debate” on Brexit, my colleague Graeme Wearden reports.

This is from the IPPR’s Joe Dromey, a Labour councillor.

The Conservative MP Stephen Phillips, who voted to leave the EU but who is now one of the leading Tory “rebels” demanding full parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit, has just told Andrew Neil on the Daily Politics that he wants to government to give MPs a vote on a “substantive motion” on leaving the EU before article 50 is triggered.

The government has agreed to give MPs a “full and transparent debate”. But now the key issue is whether there will be a debate on a substantive motion that can be amended. The Commons often debates issues on the adjournment (on a motion just saying that the Commons will adjourn) or on a take note motion (saying a particular subject has been debated). Debates like this do not force MPs to decide between two positions. Having a debate on a substantive motion would allow, for example, those MPs who want the UK to stay in the single market to table an amendment saying this should be a top priority.

Phillips told the Daily Politics he would like to see a motion saying, for example, that the UK should remain in the single market and that the UK should get control of its borders. Neil said these two demands were irreconcilable, but Phillips did not accept that.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, will be opening the debate this afternoon for Labour. David Davis, the Brexit secretary, will respond.

Modern-day slaves are being failed by “substandard” crime recording which risks allowing perpetrators to offend with impunity, according to the UK’s anti-slavery commissioner, the Press Association reports. Here is its story.

Kevin Hyland criticised “chronic weaknesses” as he demanded that law enforcement agencies step up their response to the issue.

Figures compiled for the commissioner’s annual report (pdf) show 884 modern slavery crimes were recorded by police in England and Wales in 2015/16.

In the same period 3,146 referrals were made to the National Referral Mechanism, a framework for identifying potential victims.

Although it is not possible to directly link specific NRM referrals to recorded crimes using the data, analysis indicates that at best 28% of referrals may have resulted in a modern slavery crime being recorded by police in England and Wales, according to the report.

Hyland said some forces are taking a “proactive approach” to combating modern slavery but “many instances of substandard modern slavery crime recording remain”.

Government must give MPs a vote on Brexit negotiating terms, says Labour

This is what Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, said on the Today programme this morning when asked why the Labour motion on parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit (see 9.26am) did not specifically call for a vote. She said the motion implied that there would have to be a vote.

We want to have proper scrutiny, and proper scrutiny means a vote. We are absolutely clear about that.

Open Britain, the successor to Britain Stronger In Europe which is now campaigning to keep Britain in the single market, has welcomed the government’s concession that there will be a “full and transparent” debate in the Commons on Brexit. It has put out this statement from Pat McFadden, an Open Britain campaigner and the former shadow Europe minister.

It is welcome that the government has conceded that there should be proper parliamentary scrutiny of their negotiating position before they trigger article 50.

Hopefully this will put to an end the absurd accusation that anyone who asks the government questions is trying to deny the result of the referendum.

This is a significant starting point. MPs from across the House should now push for a vote on the government’s negotiation terms, which the government amendment to the motion does not compel them to hold.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP’s leader at Westminster, has said the DUP will support the government amendment tonight (see 9.26am) in the vote on parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit. He said:

It is now the government’s job to do what the public have said. It’s a serious, grown-up business, and I have every confidence that this prime minister can deliver.

No responsible negotiator does so having first publicly broadcast their bottom line in advance to those they’re negotiating with. I would not expect our government to do so, and infantile demands that they should betray a desire to frustrate the referendum result.

My party tonight will be voting to ensure Brexit means responsible, realistic government. But more than anything else, it’ll be voting to ensure that parliament respects the plainly stated will of the British people.

Updated

Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem leader and former deputy prime minister, has been on Radio 5 Live this morning. He said it would take “years and years and years” to negotiate trade deals to replace the trade arrangements that already apply with the EU and other major trading partners. It could not happen before 2020, he said.

A full all-singing all-dancing replacement trade agreement with the rest of the European Union and with our trading partners around the world (before 2020) - absolutely no way.

He also said that in the coalition Theresa May was a home secretary unwilling to delegate who never commented in cabinet on economics or foreign affairs.

[May was] a “strong if narrowly-focussed Home Secretary. I sat next to her in cabinet meetings for half a decade. I never heard her once say a thing about economics or international affairs or education ...

Home secretaries become command and control politicians. That’s fine if you’re a home secretary. It is not fine if you’re a prime minister, or dare I say it deputy prime minister, where you have to trust other people to make their own judgements.

My colleague Graeme Wearden is covering Sir Jon Cunliffe’s evidence to the Lords committee on Brexit here, on his business live blog.

The Labour party is not planning to oppose the government’s amendment on parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit, I’m told. That means there is a chance that the Labour motion, with the government amendment (see 9.26am), will be backed by the Commons at 7pm, when the debate ends, without a vote.

Updated

Sir Jon Cunliffe, deputy governor of the Bank of England, and a former British permanent representative to the EU, is giving evidence to a Lords committee on Brexit now.

You can watch the proceedings here.

I won’t be covering the hearing in full, but I will be monitoring it and posting any highlights.

Sir Jon Cunliffe giving evidence to a Lords committee.
Sir Jon Cunliffe giving evidence to a Lords committee. Photograph: Parliament TV

Johnson's call for protests outside Russian embassy dismissed by both Stop the War and former MI6 chief

Turning away from Brexit for a moment, Boris Johnson is in the unusual position of having his call for demonstrations outside the Russian embassy over its conduct in Syria dismissed by both the Stop the War Coalition and a former head of MI6.

In the Commons yesterday Johnson seemed to taunt Stop the War over their willingness to protest against the UK government but not against Russia.

On the Today programme this morning Chris Nineham, Stop the War’s vice chairman, explained why the group would not be protesting outside the Russian embassy.

The reason for that is our focus is on what our government is doing. There’s a very good reason for this, because we can make a difference to what Britain does, we can make a difference to what our allies do to a certain extent and we have done.

But, if we have a protest outside the Russian embassy it wouldn’t make a blind bit of difference as to what [President Vladimir] Putin does because we are in Britain and were are in the West.

And, not only that - a protest outside the Russian embassy would actually contribute to increasing the hysteria and the jingoism that is being whipped up at the moment against Russia.

What we are saying is there is a hysteria which is being organised by politicians and the media against Russia to see Russia as the only problem in Syria.

Sir John Sawers was on the programme an hour or so later. He is a former head of MI6 (and not, to the best of my knowledge, a member of Stop the War), but he also expressed reservations about encouraging people to demonstrate outside the Russian embassy. He said:

We all have to be a little bit careful and mindful of the security of our embassy in Moscow when we think about calling for demonstrations here in London.

We all recall what happened to our embassy in Tehran three or four years ago. I don’t think that would happen in Moscow but we need to be careful about the consequences of things that we call for.

Tory MP demands three-day debate on Brexit before article 50 triggered

According to Sky’s Beth Rigby, the Conservative MP Stephen Phillips, one of the leading Tory “rebels” demanding parliamentary scrutiny of Brexit, wants the government to agree to a three-day debate on Brexit before article 50 is triggered.

Labour produce 170 Brexit questions for the government

The Labour party has also released a list of 170 questions for the government about its Brexit negotiating stance. You can read the full list on LabourList here.

Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, and Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, have set them out in a letter to David Davis, the Brexit secretary. In it they said:

If you are able to provide satisfactory answers to all these questions, just one per day from tomorrow until 31 March next year, it might give some confidence that the government is entering the Article 50 negotiations with a clear plan.

If not, it will reinforce the sense that the government is instead blundering into this process without a clear endgame in mind, repeating exactly the same mistake that the previous Prime Minister made with his ‘renegotiation’ of Britain’s EU membership last year: working to an artificial, self-imposed timetable; with a flawed Plan A of what he wanted to achieve; and no Plan B whatsoever.

Given you have consistently spoken up throughout your career in a highly principled way about the importance of Parliamentary sovereignty, we hope you will reflect again on the decision to deny the country’s elected representatives the opportunity to debate and vote on the Government’s plan for Brexit before Article 50 is triggered.

In response to the letter a Conservative spokesperson said:

We are aiming to deliver the right deal for the United Kingdom and return control over all the decisions that affect people’s lives to the sovereign institutions of this country.

That’s what people voted for on June 23. The prime minister has been clear that it would not be in the national interest to provide a running commentary as we shape our negotiating strategy, let alone reveal every aspect of it in advance as Labour now appears to be suggesting.

Labour claims 'real victory' after May offers Brexit debate concession

MPs will debate parliamentary scrutiny of the Brexit process this afternoon and, in advance of the debate, Labour is claiming to have achieved a “real victory”. In reality, it it probably more a matter of establishing a temporary, tactical advantage, but an opposition is entitled to boast about its gains whenever it gets them.

The key point is that Theresa May has compromised to avoid the risk of a Tory revolt over giving the Commons a say on Brexit.

It’s an opposition day in the Commons (meaning Labour gets the choose the motion for debate) and the party decided to get MPs to vote on whether the Commons should be consulted on the government’s Brexit negotiating strategy. Here is the motion that it has tabled, which is also backed by the Lib Dems.

That this House recognises that leaving the EU is the defining issue facing the UK; believes that there should be a full and transparent debate on the Government’s plan for leaving the EU; and calls on the Prime Minister to ensure that this House is able properly to scrutinise that plan for leaving the EU before Article 50 is invoked.

Some Tory MPs also feel strongly that the Commons must have a say over Brexit (for reasons set out in the chamber on Monday) and, if there were a straightforward yes/no vote on whether the Commons should be consulted, Tory rebels could unite with the opposition to defeat the government. Theresa May wants to ensure the government has the final say.

But May is not asking Tory MPs to reject the Labour motion outright (which is what normally happens when MPs debate an opposition day motion). Instead the government has tabled an amendment saying what Labour proposes is fine, so long as the government’s negotiating position is maintained. The amendment reads:

At end add ‘; and believes that the process should be undertaken in such a way that respects the decision of the people of the UK when they voted to leave the EU on 23 June and does not undermine the negotiating position of the government as negotiations are entered into which will take place after article 50 has been triggered.’.

Tory MPs will be asked to vote for this amendment, before the Commons votes on the main motions. Tory MPs who feel very strongly about parliamentary scrutiny, the “rebels” like Stephen Phillips, may choose not to back the amendment, on the grounds that it is an attempt to neuter the demand for scrutiny, but that that won’t look like much of a rebellion. And then the motion as a whole will get passed, probably with the amendment attached.

That means effectively that May has conceded that there must be a “full and transparent debate” in the Commons on the government’s Brexit plan, before article 50 is invoked. Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, said last night this was “a real victory for “parliament and will help ensure there is proper democratic grip of the Brexit process.”

But the Labour motion mentions a debate but not a vote. On the Today programme Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, said that it implied a vote. But ministers will be able to say that they have not agreed to let the Commons vote on, for example, whether remaining a member of the single market must be a priority. If Labour could get May to concede that, then that really would count as a huge victory.

I will be covering this issue, and the debate, in full during the day.

Here is the agenda.

9am: Justine Greening, the education secretary, gives a speech to the Fawcett Society gender pay conference.

9.30am: Jeremy Corbyn, Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, Sir Patrick McLoughlin, the Conservative chairman, and Angus Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster, give evidence to the Commons women and equalities committee on women in the Commons after the 2020 election.

9.30am: Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, gives a speech on HS2.

10am: Sir Jon Cunliffe, the Bank of England deputy governor, gives evidence to a Lords committee on Brexit.

10.30am: Senior police figures, including Stephen Rodhouse, deputy assistant commissioner at the Metropolitan police, give evidence to a Lords committee on Brexit.

12pm: Theresa May faces Corbyn at PMQs.

12.30pm: MPs begin a debate on parliamentary scrutiny of the Brexit process.

I will be mostly focusing on Brexit today but, as usual, I will be covering the breaking political news as it happens.

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

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
Careful with the Green Salsa, Says Federal Judge
"The green salsa, which Mr. Manz admitted he never sampled, smelled, or asked an employee regarding the contents before consuming, is the source of this litigation."
Reason
Reason
Scientists discover heavier version of proton with upgraded detector
Snappily named Xi-cc-plus, Cern physicists spotted the particle in shower of debris that lit up Large Hadron Collider
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Zendaya admits 'many people' in her life were tricked by fake AI wedding photos
Zendaya has opened up about those Tom Holland wedding rumours, and revealed even those close to her have been fooled by fake AI photos going viral online.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
49 Times People Ordered From Cheap Websites And The Products Were Hilariously Bad
Online shopping can feel like a gamble. The product photos promise something sleek, stylish, and exactly what you were hoping for but sometimes what arrives at your door tells a completely different story. Recently, people online began sharing the expectation vs. reality moments from their Temu and AliExpress purchases. From…
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
'Love Is Blind' Season 11: Everything We Know
Despite lingering criticism, the Netflix reality hit doesn't seem to be ending anytime soon.
Marie Claire
Marie Claire
Kylie Jenner 'Ozempic Hands' Explained: Plastic Surgeon Reveals Truth Behind Inside 'The Kardashians' Star's Transformation
Kylie Jenner faces renewed 'Ozempic hands' rumours, but a plastic surgeon suggests her slimmer look could be normal weight loss, as the story also revisits her comments on postpartum recovery and the harsh scrutiny of women's bodies online.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play