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

Vince Cable humbled as liberal EU prime ministers disown his Brexit referendum claim - Politics live

Sir Vince Cable speaking at a Brexit debate in London earlier this week.
Sir Vince Cable speaking at a Brexit debate in London earlier this week. Photograph: Richard Gardner/REX/Shutterstock

Afternoon summary

  • Official poverty figures have shown an increase in the number of children living in poverty. Some 30% of children are living in households in relative poverty, or 4.1m - up from 4m last year. Commenting on the figures, Alison Garnham, chief executive of the Child Poverty Action Group, said:

It’s bad enough that for a second year running our child poverty rate is at 30%, largely driven by social security cuts, but for hard-pressed families there is worse to come. We are only half way into a four-year freeze on children’s benefits that is hitting family budgets very hard. Child benefit alone will lose 23% of its value over the decade so low-income families are losing core support as prices rise.

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Here is the full statement from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe on the Lib Dem press release. It says:

ALDE leaders met in Brussels on 22 March 2018 at the Egmont Palace. At the meeting, liberal leaders showed their support to the leader of the Liberal Democrats Vince Cable.

However, no statement was agreed upon or issued at the meeting.

If there would have been such a statement issued by the ALDE Party, it would have been done in their capacity as Party Leaders, not as Prime Ministers

As the Times’ Bruno Waterfield points out, there was another error in the Lib Dem press release.

More from my colleague Jessica Elgot on the Lib Dem snafu.

Embarrassment for Vince Cable as liberal EU prime ministers disown his Brexit referendum claim

Earlier the Lib Dems claimed that eight liberal EU prime ministers had signed a statement backing their call for a referendum on the final Brexit deal. (See 3.50pm.)

It was an unusual statement, because prime ministers are usually loath to interfere in the internal affairs of other EU countries, and it seems as if the Lib Dems may have jumped the gun because the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe - the liberal group in the European parliament, to which liberal PMs are attached - has now disowned the Lib Dem press release.

As my colleague Jessica Elgot points out, the original press release also contained a mistake about the Slovenian prime minister.

On the plus side, that means that only seven PMs have retracted the original statement - not eight.

But Vince Cable and his team have managed to upset the seven most powerful liberals in Europe. Not a great move ...

Updated

Matt Hancock’s busy day of media appearances continued with him speaking at a Press Gallery lunch. In a question and answer session, the culture secretary said “the system is not good enough” when asked if he was happy if the Cambridge Analytica stand-off.

He hinted that he would grant the information commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, additional powers by introducing amendments to the data protection bill that would give her additional powers “to go in faster” once an investigation had begun and that the commissioner should be able to force individuals to give testimony.

At present the commissioner’s powers only extend to companies, which means that former employees of Cambridge Analytica can avoid answering questions if they have quit a company under investigation for privacy breaches.

When asked if it was time for the government to stop advertising on Facebook, the minister said “we haven’t gone there yet”. He argued that Facebook remained an effective form of communication despite the scandal.

There was also a none too subtle side swipe against his opposite number Tom Watson, arguing that it was only the shadow culture secretary who “thinks it is a good idea to put Max Mosley in charge of regulating the Jewish Chronicle” - an inaccurate reference to the fact that Mosley’s charitable trust provides arm’s length funding to Impress, the only officially recognised press regulator. “Like most conspiracy theorists, when a real conspiracy theory comes along, he doesn’t take notice,” Hancock said.

Other jokes were less controversial. Hancock said parliamentary business meant that he arrived late to last month’s annual Brit music awards after dinner had been served. The minister said he was sitting on the same table as Rolling Stone Ronnie Wood. Upon hearing of the minister’s hunger, the guitarist searched his bag for “a bit of a pick me up .... which turned out to be a Babybel for one of his daughters”.

Matt Hancock
Matt Hancock Photograph: Wiktor Szymanowicz/REX/Shutterstock

The final stage of the Scottish government’s EU continuity bill was passed late yesterday evening by a Holyrood majority (except Scottish Conservatives) and the question is: what happens next?

The continuity bill, whicht ransfers EU regulations directly Scottish law in the event of the Scottish and UK governments failing to agree a deal, puts the Scottish parliament on a potential collision course with Westminster.

(Wales yesterday passed a similar bill - both were rushed through in order to pre-empt key votes on the EU withdrawal bill in the House of Lords coming after Easter.)

Holyrood’s presiding officer has already ruled that he considers the bill to be ultra vires, while the UK government has also hinted that it may challenge its legality in the Supreme Court.

There is no expectation that the UK government will go to court before it gets royal assent, after which an act of the parliament can be challenged in the courts by any party with a relevant interest.

Although Scotland’s highest law officer, the Lord Advocate James Wolffe, has previously given his opinion that he believes the bill to be within the competency of Holyrood, there is a debate in legal circles about whether he may refer it to the supreme court now to preempt a later challenge. Wolffe now has 28 days in which to refer the bill to the Supreme Court.

Cambridge Analytica boss recalled to Commons culture committee to explain 'inconsistencies' in earlier evidence

Alexander Hix, the suspended boss of Cambridge Analytica, has been summoned to give evidence for a second time to the Commons culture committee. In an open letter, the committee chairman Damian Collins said the MPs wanted to ask him about discrepancies between what he said in previous evidence and recent revelations about how Cambridge Analytica has exploited Facebook data. There were “a number of inconsistencies” in the evidence, Collins said. Giving “false statements” to a committee was “a very serious matter”, he added.

A judge has given doctors permission to take blood samples from Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia so that tests can be carried out by chemical weapons experts, following a hearing in a specialist court, the Press Association reports. The PA story goes on:

Mr Justice Williams has made a ruling following a hearing in the Court of Protection, where issues relating to people who lack the mental capacity to make decisions are considered, in London.

He said both Mr and Ms Skripal were unconscious in hospital in Salisbury and therefore unable to give their consent to blood samples being taken or tested.

The judge, who is based in the family division of the High Court in London, announced his decision today after analysing the case at a private hearing earlier this week.

8 Liberal EU PMs back call for UK referendum on final Brexit deal

Eight Liberal prime ministers from across Europe, almost a third of all EU members states, have signed a joint statement backing a referendum on the final Brexit deal, including Dutch leader Mark Rutte and Belgium’s Charles Michel.

The prime ministers, who met Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable in Brussels ahead of the EU summit, said they would back any move to reverse Brexit and said the British public should be given the chance to vote on whatever deal Theresa May reaches with the EU.

The statement was signed by Rutte and Michel as well as Luxembourg’s prime minister Xavier Bettel. The Czech Republic’s Andrej Babiš, Slovenia’s Miro Cerar, Denmark’s Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Estonia’s Jüri Ratas and Finland’s Juha Sipilä has also signed.

The statement, issued shortly before May met EU leaders for a working dinner in Brussels ahead of Friday’s talks on the transition arrangement, said:

We regret Brexit, but acknowledge the choice made by British voters for the UK government to negotiate withdrawal.

We further acknowledge and support the Liberal Democrats’ call for the British people to have the final say on the Brexit deal.

All parties need to seek a broad deal accommodating both the position of the UK government and the principles on which the European Union is built.

Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader
Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader Photograph: Steve Parsons/PA

UPDATE: This initiative has rather backfired. See 4.41pm for more.

Updated

Downing Street has named some of the EU countries giving strong support to the UK over its assessment that Russia was to blame for the Salisbury nerve agent attack, the BBC reports.

In Brussels the German chancellor Angela Merkel said she and her fellow EU leaders would discuss “the terrible events in Salisbury” at their summit. She went on:

I have already assured Theresa May of my solidarity and our support. It is good that Great Britain has now given the substance to the chemical weapons authorities so it can be investigated.

If Theresa May thought she was going to get ringing endorsement of her stand against the Putin regime at today’s EU summit she may have to think again. Greece’s leader Alexis Tsipras has been busy chatting with him today.

Taking a leaf out of US president Donald Trump’s book, the Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras has announced that he called the Russian president earlier today to “congratulate” him on his re-election. In a tweet the leftist leader said he had not only called Putin to applaud him on his victory but had discussed “Greek-Russia and Euro-Russian cooperation.”

And while on the phone Tsipras didn’t waste the chance of using the opportunity to discuss developments in the eastern Mediterranean where Turkey’s gunboat policy off the coast of Cyprus over disputed gas reserves is the butt of growing concern and will be talked about at tonight’s summit. Fellow orthodox Greece prides itself on having good relations with Russia.

Russian ambassador's press conference - Summary and verdict

Alexander Yakovenko, the Russian ambassador to the UK, spent almost an hour taking questions from journalists at his press conference earlier. It is rare to see frontline British politicians now holding press conferences lasting for more than about 15 minutes, but Yakovenko was keen to make an impression and to shift opinion and he made a good go of it. His opening statement sounded relatively measured and legalistic (the conspiracy theorist claim that the UK was to blame has been minimised to not much more than a hint), he raised Iraq and WMD but not obsessively and then he responded to all journalists who wanted to ask a question with politeness and good humour.

But perhaps a bit too much good humour. Towards the end he was laughing more than seemed appropriate, almost nervously, and his polished demeanour is unlikely solve his fundamental problem - which is that most people in the UK think Russia is likely to be lying.

Perhaps if Yakovenko had given a press conference like this earlier last week, people might be more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. But he probably won’t have changed many people’s minds this afternoon and, despite the fact that he repeatedly called for proof and evidence, his refusal to say that Russia would accept the conclusions of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons investigation into the Salisbury attack did rather undermined his protestations of good faith.

Here are the main points from the statement and the press conference.

  • Yakovenko, the Russian ambassador, challenged the UK to provide proof that Russia was to blame for the nerve agent attack in Salisbury. He said that so far “no facts” had been presented to back up the government’s claims. If the UK wanted to show it was a “serious country”, it had to back up what it said with evidence, he said.
  • He said the UK had a track record of not telling the truth. That was why proof was so essential, he said quoting Ronald Reagan (the former American president, Anglophile and arch anti-communist) to help make his point. Yakovenko said:

The UK has a bad record of violating international law and misleading the international community, which includes invading Yugoslavia (78 days of bombardment), Iraq and Libya under false pretexts, and supporting the coup d’état in Ukraine. I would like to quote President Ronald Reagan, who frequently referred to the Russian proverb “trust but verify”.

History shows that British statements must be verified.

  • He implied that Britain might have produced the nerve agent used in the attack. He said:

[The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) experts investigating the attack] would also need to check how that was possible that the British authorities managed to designate the nerve agent used as so called “novichok” and its origin so quickly. Could it mean that it is highly likely that the British authorities already had this nerve agent in their chemical laboratory in Porton Down, which is the largest secret military facility in the UK that has been dealing with chemical weapons? Is it a coincidence that this chemical weapons facility is only 8 miles away from the site of the incident? How did doctors decide what antidotes to administer to the victims? Russian experts were puzzled by how quickly the British authorities managed to designate the nerve agent allegedly used in Salisbury and how this correlates with Scotland Yard’s official statements that “the investigation is highly likely to take weeks or even months” to arrive at conclusions.

  • He said that, when Boris Johnson spoke to him about the incident on Monday last week, he identified the nerve agent involved as A-234. Only later in the Commons did Theresa May describe it as a “novichok”, he said. He said this was “a bizarre Russian name to use with regard to a chemical substance” and “a clear attempt to additionally and quite artificially link the incident to Russia”.
  • He said that Boris Johnson’s comment comparing Putin’s World Cup to Hitler’s Olympics was an insult to the Russian people. The Russians lost 25m people fighting and defeating Hitler, he said. (See 12.47pm.) He also suggested the use of language like this would cause serious damage to Anglo-Russian relations.
  • He refused to commit to accepting the verdict of the OPCW team investigating the nerve agent attack. He said he would have to see what they said, and that he might then demand more evidence. (See 1.02pm.) He also sidestepped a question about whether he would resign if it were proved that Russia was definitely responsible for the Salisbury attack. (See 12.57pm.)
  • He said the Russians were assuming that Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia must have been given an antidote to the nerve agent. That’s because, if they had not received one, they would have died already, he said.

Based on the opinion of our specialists, they would say that if this so-called A-234 was used, the people should die immediately. So it means that either they received an antidote or something else happened.

  • He brushed aside claims that Russia was responsible for other deaths on British soil. Asked about President Putin’s comments that traitors deserved to die, he said that Putin was speaking in a different context and that his comments did not relate to the UK. (See 12.26pm.) And asked about the deaths of other Russians in the UK, he hinted that Alexander Litvinenko and Boris Berezovsky may have been killed because of their links to the security services. (See 12.31pm.)
  • He defended the Russian embassy’s decision to post a message on Twitter about the Salisbury attack joking about the need to call in Hercule Poirot. The Russians were trying to make a point about how complicated the case was, he claimed.

Since this case is so complicated, we need some wisdom from a person like Poirot to investigate the murder. That was the message.

When it was put to him that the tone was inappropriate, he said:

We’re not going to talk about the tone, because Twitter has so many [examples of] British tone.

He also suggested that the embassy was trying to emulate the tone adopted by British tabloid newspapers.

  • He claimed the UK was refusing to allow the extradition of 43 criminals to Russia on spurious human rights grounds (to do with the condition of Russian jails). He claimed some of those 43 were serial killers, and that by refusing the extradition requests, the UK authorities were putting the public at risk. But he refused to name them, claiming data protection laws did not allow this. (See 12.31pm and 12.41pm.)
  • He claimed that Russia was not involved with Cambridge Analytica. He admitted that he had been photographed with its boss, Alexander Nix, but that was only because he had been asked to give Nix a prize at a polo event, he said, and it was the only time they met. (See 12.44pm.)
  • Yakovenko claimed that some Russian journalists in the UK had been threatened as a result of the anti-Russian climate created by the government’s nerve agent allegations. He said:

Some of them [have been] threatened physically. In this case, we [advised] them to work with the police because, from my point of view, that sort of pressure [on] the media is absolutely unacceptable.

He also claimed that Russia had complained about this to the Foreign Office and raised the matter with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Russian ambassador Alexander Yakovenko speaking at a news conference at the Russian embassy in London.
Russian ambassador Alexander Yakovenko speaking at a news conference at the Russian embassy in London. Photograph: Kirsty O'Connor/PA

Updated

May says Salisbury attack was 'part of pattern of Russian aggression against Europe'

Theresa May has just arrived at the EU summit in Brussels. On her way in, she was asked if she agreed with Boris Johnson’s comment comparing Vladimir Putin hosting the World Cup to Hitler hosting the Olympic Games in 1936. She ignored the question, and instead condemned Russia for the “brazen and reckless” attack in Salisbury. It was clear that Russia did not respect borders, she said.

We do see this as part of pattern of Russian aggression against Europe and its near neighbours.

She also said she looked forward to talking about Brexit at the summit. She said the EU and the UK had made “considerable progress” and she said she looked forward to both sides moving on to the next stage of the talks.

Theresa May arriving at the EU summit in Brussels
Theresa May arriving at the EU summit in Brussels Photograph: Francois Lenoir/Reuters

Yakovenko winds up his press conference, thanking the journalists for coming.

I’ll post a summary shortly.

Yakovenko says he thinks Britain is trying to find a new role in the world. After Brexit, it needs new priorities. That explains why it is taking a stance against Russia, he suggests.

Q: Will you accept it if the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons confirms the British government’s analysis that the nerve agent was of Russian origin?

Yakovenko says he does not know. He will have to see what the OPCW says. He may then want to ask further questions.

Yakovenko says it is extraordinary that British MPs are calling for cyberwarfare against Russia.

Q: Just now you asked if the Skripals had received an antidote. But in your opening statement you said they definitely had received an antidote. Why the inconsistency?

Yakovenko says the Russians have assumed the Skripals had an antidote. That is because the Russian assessment is that, if they had received the nerve agent without getting an antidote, they would be dead.

Q: If the UK does prove the Russia was responsible for the Salisbury attack, will you resign?

Yakovenko says that is a good question. But, first, he says he wants to list some of the questions the Russians have asked the UK?

What hospital are Sergei Skripal and Yulia being held in? What is their condition? Why is the policeman recovering, while they are not? Did they receive antidotes? If so, what antidotes? Has the hospital identified next of kin who could take decisions on behalf if they are unconscious? Did the Skripals agree to CCTV footage of them being shown? Who did authorise that? What exposure to nerve agent do medical staff have? If medical staff can tolerate exposure to the Skripals, can consular stuff visit them too.

Yakovenko says he has not has answer to any of these questions.

He should get answers before he answers the resignation question, he says.

Updated

Q: Would you answer questions honestly if Vladimir Putin was a serial killer and responsible for several deaths?

Yakovenko says he will not answer that because it is offensive. He says the questioner should show respect. Good manners should apply, he says.

Q: What do you want to see from the EU summit today?

Yakovenko says the British government should produce evidence.

Q: If England do not go to the World Cup, will you miss them?

Yakovenko says that, as he understands it, the team is coming. He will be pleased to see them there. He does not like football particularly, he says, but he says he likes watching good football.

Boris Johnson's Hitler comment 'insult' to the Russian people, says ambassador

The Russian embassy has now posted on its website the text of Yakovenko’s reply to the first question, which was about Boris Johnson’s comment yesterday about the World Cup in Russia being like Hitler hosting the Olympics in 1936.

Q: What is your comment to yesterday’s statements by Boris Johnson who compared the World Cup in Russia with the Olympic Games in Nazi Germany?

A: I am authorized to say that Moscow considers this kind of statements, made at the level of Foreign Secretary, in any way unacceptable and totally irresponsible.

The British government is free to make a decision about its participation in the World Cup. But nobody has the right to insult the Russian people, who defeated Nazism and lost more than 25 million people, by comparing our country to Nazi Germany.

That goes beyond common sense and we don’t think British war veterans, including those of the Arctic convoys, would share this opinion.

Q: [From Channel 4 News’ Jon Snow] I have a picture of you giving a prize to the Cambridge Analytica boss Alexander Nix. Can you confirm that Russia is involved with them, and that Russia got involved in the American elections?

Yakovenko says he has met thousands of people in the UK. On day he got invited to a polo match, and was asked to give out the prize, because it was vodka. That was the only time he met Nix.

He says Russia did not have contact with Cambridge Analytica.

Q: You said the UK has given residence to serial killers. Can you name them?

Yakovenko says he is covered by data protection laws. So he cannot give names in public. But he is willing to give names in private, he says.

Yakovenko says some Russian journalists have been threatened. He says putting that sort of pressure on the media is unacceptable.

He says Russia has sent an official note to the Foreign Office about this and is demanding explanations.

Q: Boris Johnson says he does not want a new cold war. Then he compares Putin to Hitler. How do you deal with that?

Yakovenko says top diplomats should be cautious with their language.

He says he understands how things work. But he worries how this is being presented. It is very anti-Russian. And it creates problems for the UK. After two weeks of wild statements, how are you going to talk to the Russians. What Boris Johnson said (about the World Cup being like Hitler hosting the Olympics in1936) was “very insulting” to the Russian people.

Yakovenko says Russia wants to see the evidence. If you are a “serious country”, you need to back up what you say with evidence.

So far all we have seen is a “hysterical newspaper campaign”.

Yakovenko says he is surprised the UK is not cooperating with Russia.

He says this is a terrible case. Russia wants to know the truth.

Q: Will the World Cup be a propaganda opportunity for Vladimir Putin?

Yakovenko said the decision to hold the World Cup in Russia was a decision taken by the world.

Some 20,000 or 30,000 people from Britain are coming.

There are new facilities and fascinating hotels, he says. Of course it will be an advertisement for Russia.

President Putin wants Russia to grow faster than other economies.

Q: Putin said the idea that Russia was involved in the the Salisbury poisoning was “unimaginative”. Yet other Putin enemies have been killed. So how reliable is Putin’s word?

Yakovenko says it is very reliable. He says the questioner did not mention other Russians who have died in the UK. What is the common fact around these cases? All the investigations were classified. Russia did not have access to the papers.

In this country people linked to the secret services, like Alexander Litvinenko and Boris Berezovsky, have died.

He says Russia has been asking for the extradition of 43 criminals to Russia. Some were serial killers. But Britain is refusing to extradite them to Russia.

Why are these people threatening the public in this country? They are criminals, he says.

He says he does not accept that arguments used by the British about bad conditions in Russian jails being an excuse for the extraditions not being allowed.

Q: Why did Putin threaten that traitors would be killed?

Yakovenko says that was in a different context. It had nothing to do with Britain.

Q: At the weekend the Russian embassy tweeted, “Do we need Poirot?”. Are you treating this as a joke?

Yakovenko asks the journalist if he liked it. When the reporter suggests the tone was inappropriate, Yakovenko says people adopt a different tone for statements on Twitter.

Q: When will the Russian government respond to the British question about whether Russia was directly involved, or whether it lost control of its novichok supplies?

Yakovenko says Russia has already responded to this. It said it was not involved.

He says he is puzzled as to why Russia has not received any cooperation from the UK.

Russian ambassador says UK has 'bad record of misleading international community' as he demands proof of nerve agent claims

Here is the Russian ambassador’s summary.

To summarize what have been said before a Q/A session, I would like to say that the burden of proof lies with the British authorities. By now no facts have been officially presented either to the OPCW, or to us, or to UK’s partners, or to the public.

We can’t take British words for granted.

The UK has a bad record of violating international law and misleading the international community, which includes invading Yugoslavia (78 days of bombardment), Iraq and Libya under false pretexts, and supporting the coup d’état in Ukraine. I would like to quote President Ronald Reagan, who frequently referred to the Russian proverb “trust but verify”.

History shows that British statements must be verified.

We demand full transparency of the investigation and full cooperation with Russia and with the OPCW.

Here is a link to the text of Alexander Yakovenko’s opening statement.

I will post a summary shortly.

Alexander Yakovenko, the Russian ambassador to the UK, is holding a press conference now.

There is a live feed here.

At the Number 10 lobby briefing the Downing Street spokesman said that the “fair and open” passport procurement process would be allowed to run its course. He went on:

We are still in the process of running a fair and open competition to ensure that the new contract delivers a high-quality product which offers the best value for money for the taxpayer. Our passports are routinely redesigned every five years and the terms of that have been transparent.

The spokesman said he had “noted” what De La Rue’s chief executive had said on Today this morning (see 9.58am), but asked if that meant the prime minister could personally intervene, he replied:

No, what it simply means is they have made comments this morning but I, at the moment, am restricted from commenting in detail on that. We are in the process of running a fair and open competition and that process is formally continuing.

He said the process was “at the end stage”, with a final outcome expected in weeks.

At culture questions Tom Watson, Labour’s shadow culture spokesman, also pressed Matt Hancock on the government’s decision to drop the second part of the Leveson Inquiry into press standards. Watson asked whether Leveson or any other previous police inquiries had “surfaced allegations of illegal data theft of the personal information of Dr David Kelly who was very distressed when a Sunday Times journalist subsequently turned up unannounced at his home just a week before he took his own life”.

Watson added there were also allegations that “at least one senior editor”, whom he did not name, had “misled the first part of the Leveson inquiry and possibly even perjured himself”.

The Labour MP accused Hancock of “caving into the press barons” by not completing the Leveson Inquiry as was originally promised by David Cameron when he was prime minister.

Hancock replied that previous inquires were comprehensive, and added:

If his accusations of perjury are true, then we have rules in place that are in order to deal with those. If there is evidence of criminal wrongdoing then it should be brought forward, and that is the proper way to proceed.

The Lib Dem leader Sir Vince Cable has criticised the Tories complaining about the passport contract going to a foreign firm. (See 9.35am.)

And the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg says the saving to the taxpayer from awarding the contract to a Franco-Dutch firm will be £120m, not £50m as was reported overnight.

Hancock says government would consider beefing up Information Commissioner's powers

At culture questions in the Commons Matt Hancock gave a hint that the government would consider further strengthening the Information Commission’s powers to investigate the misuse of personal data in the light of the Cambridge Analytica affair.

The culture secretary was responding to a Commons question from Labour’s Liam Byrne who said it was “ludicrous that it has taken so long for her [the Information Commissioner] to get a search warrant for Cambridge Analytica’s officers, and it is ludicrous that people frustrating her investigations do not face jail for that frustration”.

Hancock began by criticising Byrne for his “abrasive tone” and said “the data protection bill currently before parliament is all about strengthening this enforcement”.

But he added that “if following evidence from this investigation we need to further strengthen those powers, then I am willing to consider that.”

The cabinet minister also repeated previous responses by the government that there are no current contracts between government and the Cambridge Analytica group.

Updated

According to Politico Europe, which has seen a draft of the conclusions for this week’s EU summit, Downing Street has so far failed to persuade the EU as a whole to say that Russia is definitely to blame for the nerve agent attack in Salisbury. In their story Jacopo Barigazzi and Tom McTague say the new text will condemn the attack “in the strongest possible terms”. But, in terms of attributing responsibility, it will not go beyond the formula used on Monday in a statement from EU foreign ministers when they said that:

The European Union takes extremely seriously the UK government’s assessment that it is highly likely that the Russian Federation is responsible.

Juncker defends controversial letter to Putin

According to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, who is at the EU summit in Brussels, Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European commission, has defended his decision to send a letter to Vladimir Putin congratulating him on his re-election as Russian president without mentioning the Salisbury nerve agent attack, saying he was just taking the same approach as the German chancellor, Angela Merkel.

In his letter to Putin Juncker said “positive relations between the European Union and the Russian Federation are crucial to the security of our continent”. In her message to Putin, Merkel said Germany and Russia should “address bilateral and international challenges constructively and find sustainable solutions.”

Updated

These are from Allie Renison, head of Europe and trade policy at the Institute of Directors, on the passport row.

Updated

Unite boss Len McCluskey says giving passport contract to foreign firm is 'appalling'

It is not just Tory Brexiters who are complaining about the decision to award the passport contract to a foreign firm. Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary, has described it as “appalling” too.

And this is from Unite’s national officer, Louisa Bull.

Theresa May and Amber Rudd need to explain to De La Rue workers why ‘taking back control’ means their jobs could be put at risk while the production of Britain’s new iconic passport is shipped overseas to France.

It wouldn’t happen in France because of national security and it shouldn’t happen in the UK. De La Rue is the UK’s leading security printer making banknotes as well as passports sustaining thousands of decent jobs in the UK.

Ministers need to reverse this decision and start supporting British business and UK workers through public procurement and an industrial strategy which is more than just soundbites.

At the Gemalto factory in Fareham they are not commenting on claims that, if Gemalto wins the passport contract, the new documents will be manufactured there (which would mean the jobs going to British workers, working for a Franco-Dutch company, rather undermining the story about this being a snub to the UK). (See 9.35am.) An official said the company would be issuing a statement later. I’ve also contacted Gemalto’s Europe office and am waiting for a reply.

David Allen Green, a lawyer and the Financial Times’ legal commentator, says Matt Hancock is wrong to think that Brexit will allow the UK to change procurement rules so that only British firms can apply for contracts to make British passports. (See 9.35am.)

He has also posted a thread explaining the law on this in more detail. It starts here.

The Today programme also had an interview with Martin Sutherland, the chief executive of De La Rue, who said he was disappointed and surprised not to be winning the passport bid. He said:

I find that a disappointing and surprising decision. I think we have heard over the last few weeks and months ministers more than happy to come on the media and talk about the blue passports and the fact that the blue passport is an icon of British identity. Now this icon of British identity is going to be manufactured in France.

Sutherland challenged ministers to come to his factory in Gateshead to defend the decision.

The passports are manufactured in Gateshead. We have a very skilled and proud workforce in Gateshead. I’m going to have to look at them in the whites of their eyes and explain why the British government thinks it’s a good idea to buy French passports rather than British passports.

I would like to invite Theresa May or Amber Rudd to come to my factory and explain to my dedicated workforce why they think this is a sensible decision to manufacture offshore a British icon.

And Sutherland also said that the French do not allow foreign firms to bid to make their passports.

Minister floats prospect of procurement rules changing after Brexit after passport contract backlash

Ministers, including leading Brexiters, repeatedly say that the government is committed to free trade and that, after it is freed from the shackles of the protectionist EU, “global Britain” has a glorious future as a trading nation on the international stage.

But today a story has hit the headline suggesting that, when difficult choices have to be made, Brexiters - or at least some of them, and their champions in the press (who shape government policy to an extent) - still hancker after after a bit of old-fashioned protectionism. It is the news that a Franco-Dutch company, Gemalto, is poised to win the government contract to produce the new, post-Brext blue passports Theresa May has promised, rather than the British company De La Rue which also tendered. Here’s the Guardian’s overnight version of the story. And here is how it is being reported on the front pages of the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph.

The papers have managed to find leading Tory Brexiters to condemn the decision. Priti Patel, the former international development secretary, told the Sun that to award the contract to a French firm was “simply astonishing” and “a national humiliation”. And Sir Bill Cash, the chair of the European scrutiny committee, told the Daily Telegraph the decision was “completely unnecessary and ... symbolically completely wrong”.

Perhaps, on reflection, Patel doesn’t really feel this quite amounts to “national humiliation” and perhaps she was just trying to be helpful to a journalist. And perhaps the Sun, the Mail and the Telegraph rang other Brexiters who said it was a good thing that the government was saving the taxpayer £50m by awarding the contract to Gemalto not De La Rue, and that there just wasn’t space for those quotes to make it into the papers.

But when Matt Hancock, the culture secretary, was asked about this on the Today programme, he declined to make the free trade case for awarding the bid to Gemalto. Instead he blamed EU procurement rules, and suggested that after Brexit the UK would be able to guarantee that contracts of this kind always went to British firms. He told the programme:

The procurement rules are very clear. As it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules. But, as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete.

What makes this even more striking is that, before he became an MP, Hancock used to work as chief of staff to George Osborne, one of the Conservative party’s arch free market globalists. If he won’t make the case for awarding a contract to a cheaper foreign firm, who will?

Here is the Economist’s Anton La Guardia on the story.

Just to make this even more complicated, there are reports that, even though Gemalto is Franco-Dutch, the new passports will be made at its factory in Fareham anyway.

I will try to get this confirmed later.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.30am: Matt Hancock, the culture secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

9.30am: The Department for Work and Pensions publishes annual poverty statistics.

10.30am: Jeremy Corbyn launches Labour’s local election campaign with a speech in Manchester.

1pm: Hancock speaks at a press gallery lunch.

Afternoon: Theresa May and other EU leaders arrive in Brussels for an EU summit.

Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news from Jack Blanchard. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’ top 10 must reads.

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.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use 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
A flesh-eating fly is advancing towards the US border – can it be stopped?
A flesh eating parasitic fly has spread north through Mexico to within a few hundred miles of the US southern border.
The Conversation
The Conversation
Matthieu Blazy’s hit Chanel look is heading for the high street
Prepare for bouclé jackets, quilted chain-link bags galore and an outfit formula that is proving to be consumer catnip
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
What Went Wrong With Kelly Osbourne And Sid Wilson's Relationship? Cheating Claims Untrue
Kelly Osbourne has hinted at the reasons behind her split from Slipknot's Sid Wilson, sharing a pointed 'forgiveness' message on Instagram after reports their engagement was quietly called off. Friends say grief over Ozzy Osbourne's death has taken a heavy toll, though neither Kelly nor Sid has formally confirmed the…
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Super Mario Galaxy Movie stars Chris Pratt and Charlie Day refuse to confirm or deny whether Wario and Waluigi will show up
Charlie Day and Chris Pratt are staying silent on whether Wario and Waluigi are in The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, and it's only fueling the rumors
Total Film
Total Film
Pizza and bread products sold in 10 states under recall for possible metal shards
Trader Joe’s Focaccia Bread with Roasted Tomato & Parmesan is part of the recall
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Sony's Spider-Man 'cancellation' explained
Don't panic – it's not the end of the Spider-Verse.
Creative Bloq
Creative Bloq
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play