Scottish independence debate - Summary
- David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, has indicated that the UK government will block a Scottish independence referendum until the early 2020s. (See 5.45pm.) He was speaking after the Scottish parliament voted for an SNP motion telling Nicola Sturgeon to open talks with London about holding one. The motion was passed by 69 votes to 59 votes. Mundell’s comments go significantly further than what Theresa May has said about this in the past, because she only appeared to firmly rule out a referendum before March 2019.
- The Scottish Conservatives have claimed that Sturgeon’s decision to call a referendum has backfired on her. Speaking in the debate the Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser said Sturgeon expected that she would gain popularity in Scotland when May refused her request for a second referendum. He went on:
Well, there has indeed been a surge in support. But it’s not a surge in support for independence. But it’s a surge in support for Theresa May. Because Nicola Sturgeon has achieved something remarkable for an SNP politician and the first minister of Scotland. She has boosted the popularity of a Conservative prime minister with the people of Scotland. She has created the situation where the first minister is not just less popular than Ruth Davidson. She is now less popular than Theresa May with the people of Scotland. [See 5.03pm for the figures.]
- Sturgeon has said that, if London refuses to engage in talks on a second referendum, she will return to the Scottish parliament after the Easter recess “to set out the steps the Scottish government will take to progress the will of parliament”.
That’s all from me for tonight.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
What Mundell said about how London will block Scottish independence referendum until early 2020s
This is what David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, told the BBC.
We won’t be entering into any negotiations at all until the Brexit process is complete. Now is the time for the Scottish government to come together with the UK government, work together to get the best possible deal for the UK, and that will mean for Scotland, as we leave the EU.
The key phrase is “until the Brexit process is complete”.
Mundell was then asked if that meant until the UK had left the EU.
And this is where he significantly toughened London’s stance. He said “until the Brexit process is complete” did not just mean until the UK leaves the EU (by March 2019). He said it meant until any transitional period was over too. Given that most estimates about the likely length of a transitional period are from two to five years, that means he is ruling out talks about a second referendum until the early/mid 2020s.
And an actual referendum would take even longer to arrange, perhaps a year or more, because the process of setting one up, after talks begin between London and Edinburgh, is relatively lengthy.
This is what Mundell said in response to the question about what he meant by the Brexit process being complete.
We are not entering into negotiations on whether there should be another independence referendum during the Brexit process. We don’t have a crystal ball as to how long that process will take. We don’t recognise, for example, 18 months as being a key point in the journey. It will be a journey that will involve the negotiations with the EU, it may be a journey that involves transitional measures, it may be a journey that will involve significant implementation. It is not appropriate to have a referendum while people do not know what the future relationship between the UK and the EU is. And they won’t know that until the Brexit process is complete.
Updated
UK government signals it will delay second independence referendum until 2020s
David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, has given an interview to the BBC that significantly hardens up the government’s opposition to a second independence referendum.
Until now Theresa May has just said that “now is not the time”. Her comments have been taken as meaning she would oppose a referendum while the Brexit talks are going on.
But Mundell has told the BBC that the government does not see the 18-month timetable (the expected timetable for the talks - because up to six months may ne needed for ratification at the end of the process) as significant.
Instead, he implied that the government would not talk to the Scottish government about a referendum until, not just Brexit, but until the transitional period was over too. That would put back a referendum until into the 2020s.
Here is his clip.
David Mundell on tonight's Holyrood vote pic.twitter.com/F7eHp37sQA
— Nick Eardley (@nickeardleybbc) March 28, 2017
And he has tweeted too.
#indyref2 before Brexit process is complete is unfair, so can't be agreed. Nor will there be any negotiations in response to such a request
— David Mundell (@DavidMundellDCT) March 28, 2017
- UK government signals it will delay second Scottish independence referendum until 2020s.
Updated
Scottish parliament backs Sturgeon's call for second referendum on independence
MSPs have backed the motion, as amended, by 69 votes to 59 votes.
MSPs are now voting on the main motion saying there should be a second referendum.
MSPs defeat the Lib Dem amendment by 100 votes to 28 votes.
MSPs are now voting on the Lib Dem amendment.
The Green amendment is passed by 69 votes to 59 votes. This says 16 and 17-year-olds should be able to vote in the referendum.
MSPs are now voting on the Green amendment.
The Labour amendment is defeated by 100 votes to 28.
MSPs are now voting on the Labour amendment.
The Conservative amendment is defeated by 97 votes to 31 votes.
They are voting first on Ruth Davidson’s amendment. (See 2.36pm.)
Swinney says Scotland is being marched “step by step to a hard Brexit and over the cliff”.
He says that approach does not reflect his values.
He wants the best possible future for Scotland. And that requires independence, he says.
And that’s it. They are voting now.
John Swinney, the deputy first minister, is winding up the debate now.
He says the UK government has acted in bad faith. It has refused to engage with the Scottish government and accept any of its Brexit proposals, he says.
Here is the poll Murdo Fraser was talking about. (See 4.47pm.)
This is the poll @murdo_fraser was talking about, showing @theresa_may and @RuthDavidsonMSP with higher ratings than Nicola Sturgeon. pic.twitter.com/3ReG2I8Ap1
— (((StephenDaisley))) (@JournoStephen) March 28, 2017
Fraser says the Scottish Greens originally proposed that there should be a second independence referendum only if 100,000 people backed the idea in a petition. Party managers changed that, because they did not like the idea, and the manifesto said 1m signatures would be required.
But now the Scottish Greens are backing the call for a second referendum just on the basis of one person’s decision.
Patrick Harvie, the co-convenor of the Scottish Greens, says Fraser is misrepresenting the manifesto and what happened.
Fraser says if this motion is approved, SNP teams will be on the streets at the weekend campaigning for independence. They will lose interest in schools and education.
The motion may get passed, but the SNP will not be speaking for the country, he says.
Updated
In the Scottish parliament the debate on a second independence referendum is coming to an end. Murdo Fraser MSP is winding up for the Scottish Conservatives. He says the debate has been a waste of time. They have spent eight hours debating independence when they could have been debating education or health, he says.
He says Scottish Tories have deliberated for years on how to make a Conservative prime minister in London popular in Scotland.
But they were wasting their time. Now they have found out that all it takes is for a a prime minister to say no to Nicola Sturgeon.
Sturgeon thought her popularity would go up in Scotland if Theresa May snubbed her call for a second referendum. But the opposite has happened. Sturgeon is now less popular than Ruth Davidson and May, he says.
He thanks Sturgeon for what she has done.
Updated
Yesterday Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, published Labour’s six conditions for Brexit. YouGov has been polling on them, and this afternoon it has published its findings.
As YouGov’s Chris Curtis explains in his write-up, voters like the conditions, but do not think Labour would be justified in opposing Brexit if they are not met.
Despite widespread support for Labour’s tests the public don’t want them to derail Brexit. For all but one test, people believe that each ‘would be nice to have, but Britain should STILL LEAVE if it is not met’. When taking the package as a whole, just a third (32%) think Labour would be justified in opposing Brexit if all six conditions are not met, compared to over four in ten (44%) who think the party would not be justified. Around a quarter (24%) are not sure.
Moreover, the tests the prime minister is probably least likely to pass – such as delivering for all regions and nations of the UK, and delivering the “exact same benefits” as Britain currently has from the single market and customs union – are the ones that the public are least likely to be seen as essential. Only 29% and 27% of the public respectively believe the UK should NOT leave if the test is not met.
Curtis may have misunderstood Labour’s position. Starmer said, if the tests were not met, Labour would not support the final Brexit deal in the Commons. He did not say Labour would try to block Brexit. His hope is that he would be able to send Theresa May back to Brussels to try for something different.
But Curtis also says Labour’s strategy may pay dividends in the long run.
Our research last year showed that the public are currently unforgiving towards Remainers who appear to be trying to block Brexit, with nearly six in ten (59%) describing calls for a second referendum as illegitimate. But when looking at these new tests, 45% of British adults think they are reasonable, compared to 31% of voters thinking they are unreasonable. This allows Labour to be seen to be reasonably supporting the government as article 50 is triggered whilst also hedging its bets so they can later vote against Brexit if public support turns during the re-negotiation period.
So, although public don’t yet see these conditions as essential and don’t want Labour to oppose Brexit if the government fails to meet them, there are many reasons why this could end up being a shrewd move by Sir Keir Starmer – especially if public opinion does shift over the next couple of years.
Here is my colleague Zoe Williams’ take on “Legs-it”.
Tom Watson urges May to remove Tory whip from Osborne to solve Evening Standard conflict of interest
Tom Watson, the deputy Labour leader and shadow culture secretary, has written to Theresa May on the matter of press ethics. Nothing to do with the Daily Mail, this time. It is about George Osborne, and the controversy generated by his appointment as editor of the Evening Standard. It has been said that it was wrong for a government backbencher to be editing one of the country’s major newspaper.
Watson has a helpful solution; Osborne should lose the Tory whip.
Here is an extract from his open letter.
The Conservative Party’s 2015 manifesto promised to “defend... the operation of a free press”. You said yourself last November that “our democracy is underpinned by the freedom of our press”. You were right.
The former Prime Minister, David Cameron, said in 2012 that politicians and the media had “got too close” and that “the relationship between politicians and media needs resetting”. He was right.
Both the freedom of the press and the need for distance between politicians and the media are threatened by Mr Osborne’s appointment.
Mr Osborne is currently a Conservative MP, taking the Conservative party whip in the House of Commons. I have no objection to the whip system – I myself am subject to the Labour whip, and I have been a government whip in the past. But any MP who takes their party’s whip is subjecting himself or herself to the disciplinary procedures of that party.
My view is straightforward. It is intolerable for the operation of a free press for the editor of a major newspaper to be subject to the whip of a political party, in particular the governing party.
I have said before that I believe the best solution would be for Mr Osborne to step down as an MP and trigger a by-election ...
However, if he refuses to do that – and as things stand, that appears to be his position – I would urge you to withdraw the Conservative whip from him, enabling him to sit as an independent, or perhaps as an independent conservative ...
We cannot be said to have a free press when a major newspaper editor is subject to the discipline of any political party, let alone the governing party. By pre-emptively removing the whip, even perhaps against his will, you will release him from any obligation, and any perceived obligation, towards the government in his editorial decisions.
Updated
Boris Johnson claims Trump's stance on climate change moving towards UK's
Earlier I flagged up what Boris Johnson said during Foreign Office questions this morning about the Daily Telegraph’s “cut EU red tape” campaign. (See 1.17pm.) Here are some more lines from the session.
- Johnson dismissed claims that the White House suggestion that GCHQ bugged President Obama had damaged the UK-US relationship. GCHQ dismissed the allegation as “nonsense”. When Labour’s Ben Bradshaw asked what damage was being done by “fantastical and ridiculous outbursts like those of President Trump levelled at GCHQ”, Johnson replied:
The damage done by such remarks I think can be likened to that of a gnat against a rhinoceros or an elephant. It is not something that will make any difference to a fundamental relationship that, as I say, is of great international importance. As for the assertion that there was some sort of collusion by GCHQ to bug the presidential candidate, I think that has been accurately described as absurd and ridiculous.
But the Conservative MP Keith Simpson, a military historian, said Johnson underestimating the significance of the row. He told Johnson:
President Trump’s allegation repeated from Fox News was not a gnat at a rhinoceros, it was deeply damaging.
Johnson said he disagreed. He told Simpson.
I believe that it has done no lasting damage to our relationship, and certainly not to the special relationship or to intelligence sharing, which will of course carry on between our countries.
- Johnson, who was in the US last week for meetings with members of the Trump administration, including the secretary of state Rex Tillerson, claimed that Trump was shifting his stance on climate change. Trump’s position was moving close to Britain’s, he claimed. During the presidential campaign Trump refused to accept that man-made climate change was real. But when Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, asked if Johnson had raised this during his talks in Washington, he replied:
The United States remains a supporter of [the Paris agreement on climate change]. In the course of my conversations with the US secretary of state on that issue, I received some encouragement—I do not want to exaggerate the outcome of the conversations—that as in so many other dossiers, the US is moving from the position we saw during the campaign, when some remarks came across as being perhaps out of line with UK government thinking, into a position that is much more closely aligned with our thinking, even on climate change.
- He also claimed that Trump as shifting on other foreign policy issues and that people like Thornberry were being too “pessimistic” about Trump. He told her:
[Thornberry] is again being far too pessimistic. We were told by the US presidential candidate that NATO was obsolete; we now hear that he is 100% behind NATO. We were told that the JCPOA, the joint comprehensive plan of action on Iran, was going to be junked; it is now pretty clear that America supports it. We were told that there was going to be a great love-in between the new US administration and Russia; they are now very much more in line.
My colleague Jane Martinson says the Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre was not in the office yesterday when the “Legs-it” headline was drawn up. Ted Verity, the Mail’s deputy editor, was in charge, she says.
Paul Dacre wasn't even in yday, his deputy Ted Verity responsible for #legsit -
— jane martinson (@janemartinson) March 28, 2017
was "enemies of the ppl" his too? I'll go get a life now
The Scottish government has released the text of Nicola Sturgeon’s speech.
Here is my colleague Jane Martinson, the Guardian’s media specialist, on the Daily Mail’s response to complaints about its front page. (See 1.47pm.)
The Mail's "light-hearted side-bar alongside serious political story in an 84-page paper" a bit disingenuous as #legsit fills front page
— jane martinson (@janemartinson) March 28, 2017
Kezia Dugdale, the Scottish Labour leader, is speaking now.
She says there are two intransigent leaders in this.
Sturgeon is determined to get indpendence, she says.
Nicola Sturgeon intervenes. That is unfair, she says. She says she proposed a compromise plan that would have delivered the federal Britain that Dugdale wants.
Dugdale says that was last year. She has not heard compromise talk recently. For Sturgeon, it is independence first and last, she says.
And she says the second intransigent leader is Theresa May.
Davidson says last week Conservatives were told they were frightened to debate independence.
They are not, she says. But they are sick of it.
She proposes the amendment in her name.
As an amendment to motion S5M-04710 in the name of Nicola Sturgeon (Scotland’s Choice), leave out from “acknowledges” to end and insert “declines the Scottish government’s proposal for a referendum on independence before April 2019; believes that it would be unfair to ask this question while the process of leaving the EU is still ongoing and while the Scottish government has failed to set out its own position on independence; considers that no referendum should take place while there is no public or political consent for one, and urges the Scottish government to focus its efforts on working with the UK government to secure the best possible new relationship with the EU.”
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader, is speaking now.
She mocks the idea that Theresa May decided that the one person she could trust to reveal new details of her Brexit timetable thinking was Sturgeon yesterday.
(There is a dispute about whether or not May said anything significant to Sturgeon yesterday about the timing of Brexit. Sturgeon argues that May effectively confirmed that Sturgeon’s proposed timetable for the referendum was realistic. Downing Street disputes this.)
Updated
Sturgeon says she will not rehearse the points she made in the debate last week.
But she has two points to make.
Triggering article 50 will lead to fundamental change, she says.
That change should not be imposed on Scots. Scots should have the right to choose, she says.
She says, when she met Theresa May yesterday, May made it clear that by the autumn of next year the shape of the Brexit deal would be clear.
Sturgeon says she agrees that now is not the time for an independence referendum. But there should be a referendum between autumn 2018 and spring 2019.
If parliament passes the motion this afternoon, she will ask for a referendum, but not in a confrontational way.
She says, although a referendum should not take place before autumn 2018, preparation needs to start in advance.
She says she will not write to May about this tomorrow, because she recognises the importance of triggering article 50.
She says, if May does not respond, she will return to the Scottish parliament after Easter to say what her next steps will be.\
- Sturgeon says, if May continues to reject call for second referendum, she will return to Scottish parliament after Easter to announce her next steps.
Nicola Sturgeon's speech
Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, opens the debate.
She says the debate last week was suspended after the attack at Westminster. It was a moment when they all reflected on the importance of democracy, she says.
She says that is relevant to today’s debate.
She says it is important to recognise that people on the other side have sincerely-held views.
The Church of Scotland said debates like this did not have to be divisive, she says.
She says she hopes to conduct this debate in a spirit of openness, honesty and understanding. She hopes others will do the same.
MSPs resume their debate on call for second independence referendum
MSPs in the Scottish parliament are now resuming their debate on the SNP’s call for a second independence referendum.
Here is the SNP’s motion.
That the parliament acknowledges the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs and therefore mandates the Scottish government to take forward discussions with the UK government on the details of an order under section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 to ensure that the Scottish parliament can legislate for a referendum to be held that will give the people of Scotland a choice over the future direction and governance of their country at a time, and with a question and franchise, determined by the Scottish parliament, which would most appropriately be between the autumn of 2018, when there is clarity over the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, and around the point at which the UK leaves the EU in spring 2019.
Green party submits complaint about Daily Mail to Ipso
Amelia Womack, the Green party’s deputy leader, has submitted a complaint to the Independent Press Standards Organisation about the Daily Mail’s coverage of Theresa May and Nicola Sturgeon today. Her letter says:
I wish to make a complaint under the editors’ code of practice relating to the Daily Mail’s coverage on March 28 of a meeting between Nicola Sturgeon and Theresa May.
The coverage breaches clause 12 as the women are being discriminated against due to their gender.
To bring the politicians’ appearance into this story is not only entirely irrelevant but incredibly disrespectful.
This headline and the further derogatory comments inside the paper would not have even been considered, let alone published, if the two politicians in question had been men.
Sturgeon accuses Mail of taking UK 'back to the early 1970s'
Nicola Sturgeon has chided the Daily Mail for “taking Britain back to the early 1970s” after it ran a widely condemned front page article in its English editions focusing on her and the prime minister’s legs and dress.
Alongside a posed photograph of the two leaders before they opened talks on Brexit and Scotland the headline ran: “Never mind Brexit, who won Legs-it!” The Mail’s editors in Scotland ran a very different headline: “Oh so frosty! Secrets of Nicola and PM’s talk-in.”
Sturgeon refused to fuel the row by responding on Twitter, but her spokesman said:
It is slightly surprising that when the first minister of Scotland and the prime minister of the UK meet to discuss the key issues of the UK’s departure from the EU and giving the people of Scotland a choice over their future that the main focus should be on their legs and what they are wearing.
Brexit may risk taking Britain back to the early 1970s, but there is no need for coverage of events to lead the way.
Daily Mail refuses to apologise and tells 'po-faced' leftwingers to get a sense of humour
Here is the Daily Mail’s response to the row about the story in full. This is from a spokesperson for the paper.
For goodness sake, get a life! Sarah Vine’s piece, which was flagged as light-hearted, was a side-bar alongside a serious political story. It appeared in an 84-page paper packed with important news and analysis, a front page exclusive on cost-cutting in the NHS and a health supplement devoted to women’s health issues.
For the record, the Mail was the paper which, more than any other, backed Theresa May for the top job. Again for the record, we often comment on the appearance of male politicians including Cameron’s waistline, Osborne’s hair, Corbyn’s clothes – and even Boris’s legs. Is there a rule that says political coverage must be dull or has a po-faced BBC and leftwing commentariat, so obsessed by the Daily Mail, lost all sense of humour … and proportion?
(Actually, Vine’s piece was only flagged as light-hearted in a later edition, as John Prescott spotted. See 1.39pm.)
Vine says at lot of the “kerfuffle” about this is because it is in the Daily Mail. If it were in Private Eye, people would not care.
Q: The Mail changed the front page headline between editions, to say it was you. Yet you did not use the headline. John Prescott says the men are blaming you.
Men at Mail create #legsit.
— John Prescott (@johnprescott) March 28, 2017
Public outcry.
Men change front page & blame Sarah Vine.
Vine doesn't mention #Legsit https://t.co/k6GkgWcmsG pic.twitter.com/EUTHaawtO6
Vine says she was not in the office.
She says she was not horrid about the two women.
People are sometimes rude about male politicians too. William Hague was described as looking like a foetus. And when George Osborne lost weight, the Guardian said this was down to his new female adviser, she says.
And that’s it. The interview is over.
Sarah Vine's World at One interview
Sarah Vine, the Daily Mail columnist (and wife of Michael Gove), is on the World at One talking about her paper’s “Legs-it” coverage of Theresa May and Nicola Sturgeon. Vine wrote the inside article headed (in the paper edition): “Finest weapons at their command? Their pins!”
Q: Are you surprised by how much attention this attracted?
Vine asks if people have had “a slight sense of humour failure”. The paper wrote lots of serious stuff about the meeting too, she says.
Q: But a third of pages six and seven are about the talks, two thirds is about the legs.
Vine says she does not just talk about the legs. She is talking about how they are sitting.
Q: Is this as important as the break up of the UK?
Vine says how they relate to each other could affect the break-up of the UK.
We are a tabloid newspaper and this is what we do.
The serious coverage may be quite dry, she says. She says the picture is worth commenting on.
The Daily Mail has told the BBC’s Chris Mason that its critics are just being humourless.
Daily Mail spokesman: "Has a po-faced BBC&left-wing commentariat, so obsessed by the Daily Mail, lost all sense of humour… and proportion?"
— Chris Mason (@ChrisMasonBBC) March 28, 2017
Lunchtime summary
- A Daily Mail front page that declared “Never mind Brexit, who won Legs-it!” next to a photograph of Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon and British prime minister Theresa May has prompted widespread outrage - but not in Downing Street, where the prime minister’s spokesman has refused to condemn it.
- Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, has told MPs he “applauds” a Daily Telegraph campaign to abolish mountains of “red tape” after Brexit. He said Brexit “will be an opportunity for this country to get rid of some of the burdonsome regulation that has accreted over the last 44 years.” The Telegraph has launched its campaign with an article from Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative former work and pensions secretary, saying there should be a “root and branch review of the costs of the regulatory burden its intrusions into the daily lives of the citizens and businesses of the UK” after Brexit. Duncan Smith said:
Recent reports from Open Europe and Civitas found that the total cost to the UK economy of the top 100 most expensive EU regulations is £27.4bn a year. For example, financial regulations were estimated already to cost £1.7bn each year through stultified markets.
Duncan Smith did not specify what “red tape” he wanted to abolish, but the Telegraph published a panel citing the EU working time directive as a law it would like to abolish, as well as regulations relating to bananas and to the great crested newt. Johnson is a former Telegraph columnist and he has got a record of tactfully endorsing Telegraph campaigns which do not necessarily have enthusiastic government backing, like the campaign for a new Royal Yacht. But the Telegraph campaign highlights where Tory thinking may go after Brexit. Theresa May has said she will not allow Brexit to undermine employment rights, but pressure from the likes of the Telegraph and Duncan Smith may make this position hard to sustain.
Tuesday's Telegraph: "Cut the red tape choking Britain" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers (via @hendopolis) pic.twitter.com/LSmQZgwo4L
— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) March 27, 2017
- Ken Livingstone, the former Labour mayor of London, has claimed to be a victim of McCarthyism. In a submission ahead of a Labour party national executive committee (NEC) disciplinary hearing later this week, which will consider comments he made about Hitler and Zionism, he argues:
What is being presented to the NCC hearing is a political allegation, that I stand up for the rights of party members expressing their support for Palestinian human rights. That is the real charge against me ...
Some are seeking a type of McCarthyism, where accusations are made without proper regard for evidence in order to restrict political discussion ...
I did not say or suggest that Hitler was a Zionist. I did not make any equation of Hitler and Zionism. I neither criticised the transfer agreement or the section of Zionism that participated in the agreement. I did not draw any historical parallels with the situation today anywhere, including with the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Any suggestion that my intention was to draw equivalence between Nazism and Zionism is entirely false.
It has been suggested that my comments were offensive. For the sake of absolute clarity, I reiterate that I had absolutely no intention for my remarks to cause offence, least of all to Jewish people, and I am sorry if they did.
- James Brokenshire, the Northern Ireland secretary, has told MPs that talks on trying to establish a cross-party executive at Stormont will continue and that he is making contingency plans to legislate after Easter to allow an administration to be formed without a new election having to take place.
Updated
Labour has moved the writ for the Manchester Gorton byelection to take place on Thursday 4 May, the date of the local elections. The byelection was caused by the death of Sir Gerald Kaufman.
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader, has weighed in on “Legs-it”.
Apparently, some mild interest in politicians' legs today; here are mine. They're a bit short. But with a lovely Aboyne vista here. #Legs-it pic.twitter.com/0a4c8XW6fj
— Ruth Davidson (@RuthDavidsonMSP) March 28, 2017
For clarification, I'm not actually Aboyne today. I'm fog bound at City airport. This was just the only picture of my legs I had on my phone
— Ruth Davidson (@RuthDavidsonMSP) March 28, 2017
Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, said the Daily Mail’s Mail/Sturgeon splash today was the sort of thing that would deter women from going into politics.
You’ve got two of the most senior politicians in the country, two very important politicians. The idea that we are talking about their legs beggars belief.
What sort of message does that send to girls, young women, thinking about starting a career in politics if we are talking about their legs rather than their views on important matters?
You compare and contrast photographs of Boris Johnson and David Cameron - nobody comments on the trousers they’re wearing or their legs.
I want to judge Nicola Sturgeon and Theresa May on their politics, their values and their vision, rather than their legs.
Authorities at the Scottish parliament have disclosed all police officers will be armed with tasers when they guard and patrol Holyrood’s entrances and grounds, in a marked escalation of security.
Holyrood’s chief executive, Paul Grice, said there was no specific threat but security had been reviewed after the attack on Westminster last week.
Unlike at Westminster, police officers at Holyrood are not routinely armed. Grice told Holyrood staff, MSPs and media based there:
Police Scotland has assured us that the move is an operational contingency measure and is not based on any intelligence threat in relation to the parliament or Scotland.
Hilary Benn, the pro-remain Labour MP, has done a heroic job so far chairing the Commons Brexit committee. It’s a huge committee, with 21 members, and it includes a variety of opinion ranging from uber-leaver Michael Gove to arch-remainer Pat McFadden. Yet Benn has managed to get them all to agree two unanimous reports, one calling for, among other things, the publication of a white paper, and another saying the government should make a unilateral declaration saying EU nationals in the UK will be allowed to stay after Brexit.
But it couldn’t last. According to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, the committee has now split, because leave MPs cannot support the draft of its latest report.
hearing Brexiteers 'politely' walked out of Brexit Cttee, claim Benn put forward 155 page report 'so gloomy it couldn't be allowed to stand'
— Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) March 28, 2017
Offenders may have been falsely accused of tampering with tags because of fault, says MoJ
In a written statement to MPs Sam Gyimah, the justice minister, says the Ministry of Justice has discovered a problem with tags used to monitor offenders. Around 115 of them were faulty, with the result that they may have registered as having been tampered with when that had not happened.
So some offenders may have been falsely accused of tampering with a tag, Gyimah says. But he says it is “unlikely” that anyone will have been sent back to jail as a result.
There is a small chance that some enforcement action may have been taken against an offender or suspect in response to a false report of a tamper. It does not mean an individual will have been automatically sent to custody. A single tamper alert without any additional evidence of an escalation of risk is likely to result in an alternative outcome, such as a warning letter. So it is unlikely that a first tamper on its own will result in an offender being recalled. The Ministry is working with G4S and EMS to investigate that further. The issue is also being brought to the attention of the courts.
Here is our news story about the “Legs-it” row.
And here is a comment article from my colleague Owen Jones denouncing it.
No 10 refuses to criticise Daily Mail's sexist 'Legs-it' May/Sturgeon coverage
At today’s Number 10 lobby briefing the prime minister’s spokesman refused to comment on the Daily Mail’s sexist “Legs-it” front page.
PM spokesman on Mail: "You would not expect me to comment on what newspapers should or should not put on their front pages."
— Anushka Asthana (@GuardianAnushka) March 28, 2017
The Labour MP Michael Dugher (who used to work as press spokesman at Number 10 when Gordon Brown was prime minister, but as a political one, not a civil service one), said this was unacceptable.
Isn't it routinely the job of the PM's spokespeople to comment on what's on the front of newspapers? How can the PM have no view on sexism? https://t.co/5wzGYBYgJI
— Michael Dugher MP (@MichaelDugher) March 28, 2017
It is not entirely irrelevant that the prime minister’s new press secretary is one James Slack, who used to work - for the Daily Mail.
But equally, it would be a mistake to read too much into this. Downing Street has been refusing to criticise the Daily Mail for years, long before Slack joined the team. For example, when the Mail published an article saying Ed Miliband’s father hated Britain (which he didn’t), Cameron would not join the chorus of politicians criticising it. And last year, when the Mail published its “enemies of the people” splash headline about the judges how ruled against the government over article 50, May refused to condemn it.
Updated
Open Britain, the group campaigning for a soft Brexit, has published a report (pdf) highlighting what it says are 10 promises made by the government and Vote Leave about Britain’s departure from the EU. It is putting them on the record because it suspects they won’t be kept.
The 10 promises are:
1 - EU TRADE. The ‘exact same benefits’ delivered as we currently have within the Single Market and Customs Union.
2 - TRADE DEALS. Lots of new trade deals with new countries that are ready to sign on the day of our departure from the EU
3 - MONEY. Savings from contributions invested in public services, including £350m a week for the NHS.
4 - NORTHERN IRELAND. No changes to the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
5 - RIGHTS. Citizens’, workers’ and environmental rights currently guaranteed by membership of the EU to be fully protected.
6 - SECURITY. A deal on security that maintains and enhances our cooperation with the EU.
7 - UNITED KINGDOM. The integrity of the Union protected and made stronger.
8 - SCIENCE. Science and research partnerships with the EU strengthened.
9 - DATE. The UK will be fully out, including required ratification, in 2019.
10 - IMMIGRATION. A dramatic reduction in net migration while also keeping the UK open to the talent and skills that UK business need.
In a joint statement Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem former deputy prime minister, Chris Leslie, the Labour former shadow chancellor, and Nicky Morgan, the Conservative former education secretary, said:
Vote Leave and the government have made specific promises: leaving is a cost-free option; trade will be enhanced not hampered; there will be major savings from the EU budget; core arrangements with the EU, for example over national security, will remain unchanged; and the integrity of the United Kingdom will be protected.
Now that article 50 is being triggered, people will expect these promises to be delivered: this is the government’s Brexit contract with the British people.
Since you’re here, we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Guardian than ever, but far fewer are paying for it. Advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as open as we can. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian’s independent journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our perspective matters – because it might well be your perspective, too.
If everyone who reads our reporting helps to pay for it, our future would be much more secure. You can give to the Guardian by becoming a monthly supporter or by making a one-off contribution. – Guardian HQ
Last night on Question Time David Davis, the Brexit secretary, quashed speculation that EU migration will inevitably fall after Brexit. In some years it might need to go up, he said.
And in the Daily Telegraph (paywall) today William Hague, the Conservative former foreign secretary, is saying something very similar. He has written a column offering some advice on how the UK and the EU can reach a Brexit agreement and he proposing some “creative thinking” on immigration.
Those red lines leave such a narrow space for the ‘bold and ambitious free trade agreement’ that the prime minister has called for that some creative solutions are needed. For instance, instead of trying to control the number of EU migrants, the U.K. could control the conditions under which they work here – no benefits, and no crime or they’re out. Otherwise give them permits to do the crucial work they do in the NHS and many other services or industries. Then we control our borders but in a way compatible with free trade.
Three leading consumer-focused organisations, Citizens Advice, MoneySavingExpert.com and Which?, are urging Theresa May to set up a cross-government working group to ensure that consumers get the best deal from Brexit. They have made their proposal in an open letter. Here’s an extract.
A vast range of consumer rights, safety and quality standards, and enforcement regimes is founded in EU legislation. These rights and safeguards are woven into our everyday lives, and can often be taken for granted. They range from having access to a basic bank account, assurances that food and electrical products are safe, to seeking redress when buying products across borders.
It is therefore vital that core consumer rights and protections do not fall by the wayside during discussions to leave the EU, any future trade deals with the EU and other countries, as well as in our future domestic framework. This will safeguard UK consumers from any potentially negative effects of Brexit, while taking advantage of and maximising any opportunities.
We are calling for a cross-government high-level working group focused solely on securing the best possible deal for UK consumers. This is imperative for the economy and our communities, and we are ready and willing to help you achieve this.
Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, has also had a meeting in Brussels with Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s Brexit negotiator.
When asked during a photocall with Khan if he intended to punish Britain in the negotiations, Verhofstadt said: “Not at all.”
Updated
London mayor urges EU citizens to press for Brexit deal that does not punish UK
Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, is in Brussels this morning and he has given a speech to an event organised by Politico Europe. In it, he urged EU citizens to press for a Brexit deal that does not punish the UK and that allows all sides to prosper. He said:
Now is the time to be confident in the European Union. And to act with confidence. There’s no need – as some have suggested - for the EU to send a message – or to instil fear – by punishing the UK. Because a proud, optimistic and confident institution does not secure its future through fear ...
The truth is that London will always remain a key partner for Brussels and every European nation long after Brexit is resolved.
My city is not only the beating heart of Britain’s economy, but the single most important organ for growth across Europe. I say this with friendship and all due respect – but a bad Brexit deal that hurts London would hurt the European Union too.
He also said that he was confident that the EU would survive long after Brexit, and that London and the EU would continue to have a good relationship.
The EU has been criticised in recent times, with increasing calls for major reform. But we mustn’t forget the extent to which it’s been a force for good in the world. How much it’s achieved and how it’s transformed the face of Europe. The EU stands as a symbol for how different people – and different nations – are stronger together than they are apart ...
I’m optimistic that London, the UK and the EU have bright futures ahead of us. And that the historic bonds we’ve established over many years can – and will – endure. The UK might be leaving the union, but in London we’ll always consider ourselves part of the European family.
At this turning point in European history – it’s time for us to be audacious and bold with our approach to Brexit. That means putting aside the animosity, differences and anger that many expect, and working together to find a solution that brings continued fortune and prosperity to us all.
Sadiq Khan urges EU not to "punish" UK in Brexit negotiations - warning it would be a "lose-lose" situation for Europe too. #politico pic.twitter.com/3G8scAjHvB
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) March 28, 2017
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem former deputy prime minister, Chris Leslie, the Labour former shadow chancellor, and Nicky Morgan, the Conservative former education secretary, speak at an Open Britain event launching a report setting out what Vote Leave promised from Brexit.
11.30am: Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
12.30pm: James Brokenshire, the Northern Ireland secretary, gives a statement to MPs on efforts to form a power-sharing executive at Stormont.
Around 2.05pm: MSPs resume their debate on the call for a second independence referendum. Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, will open the debate (again). MSPs will vote at 5pm.
Also at some point today the UK government is expected to publish its formal response to the Scottish government’s white paper on how Scotland could stay in the single market after Brexit.
As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary 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
