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

MPs vote to demand Brexit plan and say article 50 should be triggered by end March – as it happened

The Houses of Parliament at dusk. MPs are debating a call for a Brexit plan.
The Houses of Parliament at dusk. MPs are debating a call for a Brexit plan. Photograph: Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA

Summary

  • Britain has taken a significant, although largely symbolic, step closer to Brexit after the MPs voted by a majority of almost 400 to back Theresa May’s plan to trigger article 50 by the end of March. In two votes, Labour and Conservative MPs joined forces to back a Labour motion saying the government should publish a “plan for leaving the EU” before article 50 is invoked, and a government amendment saying the government should invoke article 50 by 31 March. The vote is not technically binding on the government, but it is the first time parliament has backed May’s Brexit timetable, which would lead to the UK being out of the EU by the end of March 2019 (assuming that the two-year withdrawal process does not get extended.)
  • Labour has set out its conditions for supporting the triggering of article 50. In his speech Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, set out five conditions for the government’s Brexit plan. (See 4.41pm.) Unless the government wins its supreme court appeal there will have to be an article 50 bill and Starmer said, if the government’s Brexit plan did not fulfil his conditions, Labour would try to impose these terms on the government by amending the bill. On Sky News a moment ago, asked what would happen if the government did not cooperate, he said the government would face “further challenge” from Labour. He refused to elaborate on what this might mean, although ministers know they could be vulnerable to defeat because several dozen Tory MPs agree with Labour in favouring a “soft” Brexit. If there is an article 50 bill, the government wants to make it as hard to amend as possible, to minimise the chances of being defeated in this way.
  • Labour’s decision to back the government amendment has triggered a significant rebellion. Some 23 Labour MPs defied the whip and voted against the amendment on the first vote. It is claimed that another 56 Labour MPs abstained, by not voting without being given permission to be absent. At the start of the week the Conservative party was said to be facing a rebellion, but only one Conservative MP, Ken Clarke. voted against the whip on the first vote. The Labour MPs who defied the whip did so because they thought it was wrong to agree to triggering article 50 by the end of March when the government still has not said what it wants. Labour denies offering the government a “blank cheque”, and Starmer stressed that his support for triggering article 50 was conditional.
  • David Davis, the Brexit secretary, has refused to commit the government to publishing a white paper on its Brexit plan, suggesting that the “plan” that does get published will be a minimalist one. He has also refused to commit to giving MPs a vote on whether or not to leave the customs union. (See 2.57pm.)

That’s all from me for tonight.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

List of 23 Labour rebels

According to the Lib Dems, these are the 23 Labour MPs who voted against the party whip on the first vote: Rushanara Ali: Graham Allen; Ben Bradshaw; Ann Coffey; Neil Coyle; Stella Creasy; Geraint Davies; Jim Dowd; Louise Ellman; Chris Evans; Paul Farrelly; Mike Gapes; Helen Hayes; Meg Hillier; Peter Kyle; David Lammy; Chris Leslie; Ian Murray; Barry Sheerman; Tulip Siddiq; Angela Smith; Catherine West; and Daniel Zeichner.

This is from the Lib Dem leader Tim Farron.

This is from the Press Association.

The second vote asked MPs to approve the amended motion, and therefore give their symbolic consent to both the call for a plan and for Brexit to be formally triggered by no later than the end of March next year.

Ken Clarke was the sole Conservative to vote against the motion.

He was joined by nine Labour MPs, 51 SNP MPs, Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and five Liberal Democrats, among others.

The SNP is using the same line as Iain Duncan Smith.

Labour’s Scottish MP Ian Murray has accused the SNP of lying.

Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative leave supporter and former work and pensions secretary, has told Sky News that the vote gives Theresa May a “blank cheque” for Brexit.

This is from the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn.

This is from the Press Association.

MPs held two votes, with the first in favour of adding the Government amendment to the original Labour motion - by 461 votes to 89, majority 372.

This was opposed by 23 Labour MPs and one Conservative - former chancellor Ken Clarke.

The Labour rebels included Ben Bradshaw, David Lammy and former shadow chancellor Chris Leslie.

The amendment was also opposed by five Liberal Democrat MPs, three Plaid Cymru MPs and 51 SNP MPs.

Meanwhile, some 150 Labour MPs backed the government’s amendment.

This is from the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn.

MPs vote by a majority of 373 for a Brexit plan and triggering article 50 by end of March

The Labour motion as amended has been passed by 448 to 75 votes - a majority of 373.

This is from the Daily Mail’s Jack Doyle.

These are from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

Leave Means Leave, the successor to the Leave.EU campaign, has welcomed the vote. This is from its co-chair, Richard Tice.

This vote is a very significant step forward in the Brexit process.

Parliamentarians who, today, backed the government’s amendment have honoured the democratic decision taken by the British people in the EU referendum.

Going forward, these parliamentarians who voted with the government must not sabotage the Brexit process.

Any attempt to delay the process after backing this amendment would be an unforgivable betrayal of the British people.

This is from HuffingtonPost’s Paul Waugh.

In this division the tellers for the ayes are Labour MPs Nick Smith and Nic Dakin.

The tellers for the noes are Marion Fellows, an SNP whip, and the Lib Dem Tom Brake.

This is from the Mirror’s Dan Bloom.

MPs are now voting on the motion as amended. The result of this vote will be much the same as the previous one.

Government amendment passed by 461 votes to 89 - a majority of 372

The government amendment has passed by 461 votes to 89 - a majority of 372.

This is from Sky’s Faisal Islam.

Newsnight’s Nick Watt says it looks as if 88 MPs voted against the amendment.

This is from Ukip’s Douglas Carswell.

This is from the Conservative James Heappey.

This is from the BBC’s Susan Hulme.

The tellers for the ayes are Heather Wheeler and Jackie Doyle-Price, who are both government whips.

The tellers for the noes are Owen Thompson, an SNP whip, and the Lib Dem Tom Brake.

MPs vote on amendment saying government should invoke article 50 by end of March

MPs are now voting.

Here is the Labour motion.

That this House recognises that leaving the EU is the defining issue facing the UK; notes the resolution on parliamentary scrutiny of the UK leaving the EU agreed by the House on 12 October 2016; recognises that it is Parliament’s responsibility to properly scrutinise the Government while respecting the decision of the British people to leave the European Union; confirms that there should be no disclosure of material that could be reasonably judged to damage the UK in any negotiations to depart from theEuropean Union after Article 50 has been triggered; and calls on the Prime Minister to commit to publishing the Government’s plan for leaving the EU before Article 50 is invoked.

And here is the government’s amendment.

At end add ‘, consistently with the principles agreed without division by this House on 12 October; recognises that this House should respect the wishes of the United Kingdom as expressed in the referendum on 23 June; and further calls on the Government to invoke Article 50 by 31 March 2017.’.

MPs are voting on the amendment first.

Robin Walker, the Brexit minister, is winding up for the government now.

He says getting the government’s approach right is vital for its long-term interests. MPs want the government to prepare properly and get the details right.

He says David Davis has set out four Brexit aims: to achieve a national consensus; to put the national interest first; to minimise uncertainty; and to restore the sovereignty of parliament.

(This is a reference to goals Davis set out in his first speech to the Commons in the autumn.)

And Davis has set out the negotiation’s strategic goals, he says: to get the best possible access to the single market while ensuring the UK takes back control of borders, law and money.

He says MPs accept the government has received clear instructions from the voters to take Britain out of the EU.

The motion talks of a plan. We must deliver a global Britain, he says. He says Davis has said he will set out the government’s “broad plans” before article 50 is triggered.

He says Labour is backing the government amendment, although backbenchers disagree.

Chapman says Labour needs to see the government’s plan. If it is not satisfactory, Labour will demand more, she says.

She says the government said there will be no running commentary. But there is a running commentary, and it is causing problems in Europe.

We need a plan, instead of the vacuum that is present at the moment, she says.

Updated

Jenny Chapman, the shadow Brexit minister, is winding up now for Labour.

She says Labour is a party that represents everyone.

She says that Labour has been accused of asking the government too much. But, as Heidi Alexander said in her speech, we need basic answers to basic questions.

Kwasi Kwarteng, a Conservative, says any attempt to hold up the triggering of article 50 amounts to blocking the will of the people.

He says many senior Labour figures are based in pro-remain London. But many of their voters are from pro-leave areas in the north. This pantomime cow is falling apart, he says.

Michael Gove intervenes, to say the Conservatives are now the party that represents the working class.

Kwarteng recalls a conversation with a friend who said that, if Labour opposed triggering article 50, it would be electoral suicide for the party.

Neil Carmichael, the Conservative, says demanding the publication of a Brexit plan by the government is not about obstructing anything. We need a white paper, he says, so we can understand what the options are.

Labour’s David Lammy says he is glad that Labour has got the government to commit to publishing a Brexit plan. But he says he cannot vote for the government amendment because we do not know yet what the government’s Brexit plan involves. In those circumstances, it would be wrong to commit to triggering article 50 by the end of March next year.

Richard Drax, a Conservative, says uncertainty is being generated by those who want to hold up the triggering of article 50.

The Labour MP Adrian Bailey says he is backing the government amendment “after some consideration”. But he says his support for triggering article 50 by the end of March is contingent on the government coming up with a proper plan. And the opposition should have the chance to propose amendments, he says.

He says, if the government achieves consensus for its plans, it will be in a stronger position in the EU.

Updated

Sir Keir Starmer has been tweeting about the message in his speech.

John Bercow, the speaker, says he is cutting the time limit for speeches now to three minutes.

Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP, says she had been planning to vote for the Labour motion. But she cannot now because it will be amended by the government. She says Labour is “walking into a Tory trap”. She says it is wrong to commit to triggering article 50 by the end of March.

To trigger article 50 without having any assurances as to what the plan is, or what the outcome might be, would be “reckless”, she says.

Labour’s Geraint Davies says he cannot support the government amendment because he does not agree with committing to triggering article 50 by the end of March. Once article 50 is triggered, the government has lost its negotiating clout. And proper talks will not start until the autumn of 2017, once the German elections are over.

He accuses the government of secretly promising huge amounts of money to Nissan to encourage it to stay in the UK. He says the truth about this will not come out until after March.

Bob Neill, a Conservative, says ministers may well have to accept the case for a transitional deal. They should be pragmatic about this, he says. He says business should not face the risk of falling off a cliff edge.

Sir Keir Starmer is getting a remarkably positive write-up in the Independent. John Rentoul says Starmer has achieved a “parliamentary triumph”.

Starmer has been an MP for only 19 months, but already he is leading for the Opposition on the most important subject to come before this parliament, and he is doing it with a skill and assurance that recalls the way John Smith, the Labour leader with 22 years’ parliamentary experience including as a cabinet minister, harried John Major’s government over the Maastricht Treaty in 1992-93.

Starmer presented himself as the advocate of the 48 per cent as well as the 52 per cent. “The vote on 23 June was not a vote to write those who voted to remain out of their own history,” he said.

Dominic Raab, the Conservative MP, says the contours of the goverment’s Brexit negotiations are clear to anyone who wants to see them. But he still does not know where Labour stands, he says.

Eleanor Laing, the deputy speaker, has just announced that the time limit for backbench speeches will now be cut to four minutes.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative MP, is speaking now. He is setting out the argument he used in his Telegraph article. (See 10.45am.) He says parliamentary scrutiny is an argument used by those who hold the views of the public in contempt.

Labour’s Thangam Debbonaire says the UK will be much better off by being a full member of the single market.

She says when she left home this morning she did not know which bus she would be on. But she knew which route she was taking. She says she would not, in relation to Brexit, tell her constituents to get on an unnumbered bus.

Earlier Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, gave a powerful speech criticising the “vitriolic abuse” directed at people who have questioned the government’s right to trigger article 50 without consulting parliament. He said the worst moment came when a government minister, whom he did not name, criticised Gina Miler for exercising her right as a citizen to take the government to court.

If we continue like this we are on a road to a very bad place.

Grieve did not name the offending minister, but he was almost certainly referring to Sajid Javid, the community secretary who said Miller’s high court case was “a clear attempt to frustrate the will of the British people.”

This is from the Independent’s Tom Peck.

Tom Brake, the Lib Dem MP, says his party will vote against the amendment, and the Labour motion if amended. The Lib Dems will not agree to a government stitch-up, he says. He says Labour should not have agreed to give the government the right to trigger article 50 like this. He says the Lib Dems are not the proper opposition to the government over Brexit.

Bernard Jenkin, a Conservative, says most MPs are going to vote tonight for the triggering of article 50. He says that makes it hard to see why the supreme court is getting involved.

Andy Burnham's speech

Andy Burnham, the former shadow home secretary, says he hopes this debate will mark the time when people move on from re-running the EU referendum.

He says people voted to control immigration. So the status quo is not an option, he says.

The 700,000 people in Greater Manchester who voted to Leave, many of them lifelong Labour voters, voted for change on immigration. I’m quite clear about that and that has to be our starting point in this debate. The status quo - full free movement - was defeated at the ballot box and therefore not an option.

He says people in places like Leigh are not xenophobic. They are welcoming and kind, he says. But they want a system that is fair. And they do not think the poorest communities should pay the costs of high immigration.

They want an immigration system that gives the government greater control and reduces the numbers.

He says the left in Europe have been afraid to address this.

There are two good reasons why this is a progressive issue, he says.

First, it is big business that benefits from immigration.

Second, immigration policy is discriminatory. It favours people from Europe. Because numbers are capped, that means people from outside Europe are discriminated against.

He says the left has to form a new immigration policy that takes into account these realities. He says he is now longer prepared to be complicit in this any more.

My call tonight to this side of the House is to put forward a plan which treats all people equally and applies progressive principles to migration.

We need to make the argument for an immigration system that allows for greater control, reduces the numbers coming here - but does so in a fair way.

A system that treats all migrants equally, that doesn’t allow people’s wages to be undercut, and crucially continues to welcome people from Europe and around the world to work here.

These are progressive principles which can form the basis of a new immigration policy for the left.

UPDATE: Here is a video of the speech.

Updated

Crispin Blunt, the Conservative chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee, is speaking now. He says he is just back from the US, and he says Iain Duncan Smith was right to say there is strong appetite in Washington for a trade deal with the US. (See 3.07pm.)

He says when he intervened on Sir Keir Starmer earlier, he did not mean to say EU partners were the enemy. (See 1.23pm.) He says he was making the point that a plan has to survive contact with reality.

Heidi Alexander's speech

Labour’s Heidi Alexander is speaking now. She says she cannot back the government amendment because it includes an arbitrary timetable for triggering article 50.

She says she would back a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal.

And she says the UK needs more immigrants because of the ageing population. Cutting immigration would be bad for the economy, she says.

I accept a good number of people who voted to leave in June did so because they wanted control and/or reduce immigration.

I understand when decent jobs and decent homes are scarce, public services are under pressure, some people look around for someone to blame.

But I say this, and it may be unpopular to do so, we are going to need immigration in this country for some time to come.

We are not having enough babies and haven’t been for decades.

I’m a 41-year-old woman without children. Babies grow up to become taxpayers who fund public services.

Who will be contributing to my pension and my care in 30 years time? The answer is immigrants and their children.

I have no fixation with freedom of movement and if other EU states were up for modifying it, I’d be up for the conversation - but I can’t see how it makes sense to take the economic hit of leaving the single market in order to curb immigration when we have a basic need for it.

She also said she regretted not doing more during the EU referendum campaign to challenge the claim that Brexit would help the NHS.

I was a fervent campaigner for remain. I believe the British public was failed in the referendum by an exaggerated and embarrassing debate, and I deeply regret my own failure as the then shadow health secretary to expose the lie that Brexit would automatically mean more cash for the NHS. But we are where we are.

Updated

Labour's five conditions for a Brexit plan

Sir Keir Starmer’s speech is now on the Hansard website.

Here are extracts where he sets out Labour’s five requirements for a Brexit plan.

Starmer also made it clear that, if the government plan did not include these five elements, Labour would try to impose these conditions on the government by amending the article 50 bill (assuming the government loses in the supreme court, and there is an article 50 bill). (See 2.57pm.)

The minimum requirements of a plan are fivefold. The first—I have begun to touch on this—is the need for enough detail and clarity to end the circus of uncertainty that has been going on in recent weeks on issues such as the single market, paying for access to the single market, the customs union and transitional arrangements ...

The second requirement of a plan is that it must have enough detail to allow the relevant parliamentary bodies and Committees, including the Exiting the European Union Committee, chaired by my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn), to scrutinise the plan effectively ...

Thirdly, the plan must provide enough detail to enable the Office for Budget Responsibility to do its job properly. As Members across the House know, the Budget Responsibility and National Audit Act 2011 sets out the role of the OBR: it is the duty of the OBR to examine and report on the sustainability of the public finances. Its charter states: “The OBR’s published forecasts shall be based on all government decisions and all other circumstances that may have a material impact on the fiscal outlook.” The Government are responsible for all policy decisions and policy costings, but it is for the OBR to provide independent scrutiny and certification of the Government’s policy costings ...

Fourthly, the plan must have enough detail to enable the relevant authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to be assured that their particular and specific concerns are addressed. Other Members will speak about those concerns far more authoritatively than I can, but they include concerns about the single market and, in Northern Ireland, concerns about the border and related issues. The detail must be sufficient for those authorities to be assured that their concerns are understood and are being addressed ...

Fifthly, the plan must have enough detail to build genuine consensus. That is an important point, because the future of this country is bound up with the negotiations, and it is wrong in principle for the Government to act solely for the 52%—to base its approach on the 52% or a group within the 52%.

Updated

Ben Bradshaw, the Labour former culture secretary, is speaking now.

He says he cannot back the government motion because it would give the government “a blank cheque to invoke article 50 without any of us being any the wiser about the government’s intentions”.

He says David Davis has made it clear that he will not publish a white paper, and that the “plan” being published will not answer any of the big questions about Brexit.

He says Theresa May’s conference speech made it clear the UK is heading for a hard Brexit.

The Labour conference passed a motion saying a second referendum should not be ruled out, he says.

(That is true; the details are here. But Labour’s national executive committee subsequently put out a statement saying that was a mistake.)

Anna Soubry, the Conservative pro-European, says she did not like the referendum result. But she accepts it. So can people stop criticising people like her as remoaners, she says.

She says the government promised debates on Brexit. Two have been held so far. But one was on employment rights, where the government has promised to maintain existing rights, and the other was on transport, an relatively uncontentious issue. There should be debates on issues like the single market and immigration, she says.

She says she wants a government white paper on Brexit.

The opening of the debate is now available on the Hansard website.

I have been beefing up some of the earlier posts with direct quotes from the Press Association wires. To see the updated posts you may need to refresh the page.

Peter Bone, a Conservative, says he finds it odd how many MPs who showed little interest in parliamentary accountability when they were in government have now discovered a passion for this.

Asked to name names, he mentions Anna Soubry, the Conservative former business minster.

Michael Gove intervenes. He says when he was chief whip Soubry was always independent-minded, and not someone opposed to parliament having its say.

Labour’s Ivan Lewis says Brexit should have been a wake up call. Many voters feel the system does not work for them.

He says he despairs when he hears Labour spokespeople speak about the need to talk about immigration. He says some of them have dismissed people’s concerns.

Owen Paterson, the Conservative former environment secretary, says Brexit is about taking back control. On his first day as environment secretary he found his department had to pay £640m to Brussels because it did not like the way the government had implemented the common agricultural policy.

Some 90% of Defra [department for environment, food and rural affairs] laws are from Europe, he says. But he says the UK kept getting outvoted.

Douglas Carswell, the Ukip MP, says the government should get on with triggering article 50.

He says he suspects the sudden interest in parliamentary scrutiny from Labour is more about frustrating the will of the people. Labour are on the side of the international elites on this, he says.

Nicky Morgan, the Conservative former education secretary, says the problem with the government’s ‘no running commentary’ position is that commentary has been replaced by unofficial commentary.

Labour’s Angela Smith says she is going to vote against the government’s amendment because she is not convinced that the government won’t wriggle out of its commitment to produce a plan. And she says the amendment (because it backs the triggering of article 50 before the end of March) could curtail the ability of parliament to influence Brexit, she says.

But she stresses that she is not trying to stop Brexit.

Oliver Letwin's speech

Sir Oliver Letwin, the Conservative former Cabinet Office minister, says MPs are not really debating whether to publish a Brexit plan. They are actually debating whether the government should control the Brexit negotiation, or whether parliament should constrain the government by passing a law.

He says it is impossible for the government to conduct a proper negotiation if it is bound by parliament. Why? Because everything would be justiciable. The government could be taken to court and challenged every step of the way.

He says he voted to remain. He thought the UK would be better in the single market and the customs union. But that is all in the past.

The government will not be able to negotiate properly if it has to follow parliament, he says.

He says the logic of the situation suggests the UK will leave the single market.

Labour’s Helen Goodman says the German government gets a mandate from its parliament before negotiating in Brussels.

Letwin says this is very different. He says the government is engaged in “the most complicated game of multi-dimensional chess that any country has engaged in”.

Labour’s Mike Gapes says the European parliament is consulted.

But the European parliament is a counterparty in the talks, Letwin says.

Labour’s Ed Miliband says John Major’s government went to parliament before agreeing the Maastricht treaty.

Letwin says that is a bad example. Maastricht was a disaster, he says.

He says he thinks the government will be compelled by the logic of the solution to take the country out of the customs union.

Sir Oliver Letwin.
Sir Oliver Letwin. Photograph: Parliament TV/BBC Parliament

Updated

Pat McFadden, the Labour former Europe spokesman, is speaking now. He says he does not accept that argument that saying what we want will weaken our position.

James Cartlidge, a Conservative, says Labour is trying to limit the government’s options with its proposals.

McFadden says he does not accept that.

Michael Gove, the Conservative former justice secretary and leading Vote Leave campaigner, criticised Sir Keir Starmer’s speech. It contained “pious vapory”, he said, and “a hole in the air” instead of an argument. He accused Labour of not saying what it wanted.

He said remain supporters claimed during the EU referendum campaign that Brexit would damage the economy and weaken the union with Scotland. But the economy is getting stronger, he said, and the union with Scotland is getting more popular.

It was also a legitimate concern of some of those who voted remain that by voting to leave the European Union we’d do damage to the United Kingdom.

The truth is, of course, since we voted to leave the European Union support for a second independence referendum has fallen, support for Scottish independence has fallen, support for the Scottish National party and its secessionist sermonising has fallen, and the single most popular politician is Ruth Davidson - the only leader of any party that wants to embrace the result.

Updated

Ed Miliband's speech

Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader, told MPs that he accepted the result of the referendum.

He mocked the government’s decision not to consult on this.

And he criticised Downing Street’s decision to say that those questioning the government’s strategy were not backing the UK team. That implied critics were unpatriotic, Miliband said. He said he personally was used to being accused of being unpatriotic. But the Number 10 jibe now covered people like Sir John Major and Ruth Davidson.

They said those of us who are asking for transparency aren’t backing ‘the UK team’. In other words, we’re not being patriotic.

Now, by my reckoning that puts Sir John Major, Ruth Davidson and a number of Conservative MPs in to the unpatriotic category.

I’ve got to say, I’m used to being called unpatriotic and also my dad has been called unpatriotic as well.

I think it’s really something when Conservative MPs get called unpatriotic.

You know things have got desperate for the government when they start doing that.

We are not seeking proper scrutiny of the plan for Brexit because of a lack patriotism, we’re doing it for patriotism - because we believe in the unity of this country, we believe this country has got to be brought together, we think the cohesion of this country has got to be protected.

And this is the most complex and treacherous situation our country has faced for a generation.

Candour and transparency are not something the government should fear, but something they should embrace because it’s the only route to uniting our nation.

All of us have a responsibility to unify the country.

Updated

Ken Clarke's speech

Ken Clarke, the Conservative former chancellor, said he was not surprised the government is backing the Labour motion. It was “a harmless resolution”, he said.

This is a harmless resolution, an absolutely plain and simple resolution setting out what you would expect to happen in any similar circumstance, and would certainly have expected to happen at any time probably over the last 100 or 150 years. Certainly at every parliament I’ve sat in.

He mocked the idea that the plan was to have a “red, white and blue Brexit”.

No government that I can recall would have had the nerve to come along to parliament and say ‘We are exercising the royal prerogative, we are not actually going to go to you’. It is the nature of accountability - I’m not sure the government has totally picked up the point yet ...

We have been told the plan is to have a red, white and blue Brexit and we are the leaders in free trade whilst giving up all the conditions that govern free trade in the single market. We need a white paper, a strategy, votes in this House and clarity.

He said that the problem with the plan was that ministers “have no idea what their strategy is anyway and they do not actually agree with each other.”

In strengthening its negotiating position the government could actually benefit from having a proper process, particularly as at the moment it is sadly clear from the constant remarks made to the newspapers and the leaks now and again that at the moment the ministers have no idea what the strategy is anyway. And they don’t actually agree with each other.

He also caused amusement by talking about Sir Bill Cash voting to leave the EEC in 1975, only to be told by Cash that he voted to stay in.

Updated

Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, told MPs in his speech that people questioning the government strategy should not be called “democracy deniers”.

He also called for a firm commitment to giving MPs a vote on the final Brexit deal. David Davis said it was “inconceivable” that there would not be one, he said. But he said at one point it was inconceivable that Donald Trump would be elected US president.

Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative, former work and pensions secretary, welcomed the fact that Labour was backing the government amendment. He said Labour had “given the government a blank cheque to go forward and invoke article 50 without any real caveats”.

He also said he would rather stay in the EU than stay in the customs union.

Why would the United Kingdom want to stay in a customs union, when one of the key elements that is important on making that important decision to leave the European Union is we get back the opportunity to make our own trade arrangements.

I’d rather we stayed in than stay in the customs union, because it seems completely pointless to me to actually embroil ourselves on the customs union, go through all this rigmarole of arguments and debates and rows, only to find at the end of the day there is no jewel in the crown at the end.

He also said that the UK was at the front of the queue for a trade deal with the US.

I discovered the other day, in the House of Representatives there are now no less than five elements of legislation - three bills, I think, and two amendments to bills - going through both houses, the Senate as well, actually now paving the way for a free trade agreement with the United Kingdom.

So much for the existing president’s view that we’ll be at the back of the queue. It appears that the legislators in Congress see us wholly at the front of that queue.

And they know the reason why, because we are the great free trading nation of the world and we believe in free trade, and that is where we want to take both ourselves, by the way, and I hope many others with us as well.

Updated

I missed speeches from Iain Duncan Smith, Hilary Benn, Ken Clarke, Ed Miliband and Bill Cash while writing a summary of the opening, but I will catch up with the highlights from their speeches shortly.

Opening of the Brexit plan debate - Summary

On the basis of the opening speeches, the Brexit plan debate seems set to be rather routine. Sir Keir Starmer and David Davis were both well below their best, and anyone hoping for fireworks will have been disappointing. There haven’t been any big announcements.

But the exchanges have given some insight into the government’s thinking, and rather more into Labour’s. Starmer’s strategy for shaping Brexit is quite a bit clearer than it was a few hours ago.

Here are the main points.

  • Starmer, the shadow Brexit minister, has set out the broad outlines of a Labour plan for Brexit that it may try to write into law. He called on the government to publish its plan for Brexit and said it should include various elements: a statement about whether the UK would stay in the customs union and the single market; a statement about a transitional deal; information to allow the Office for Budget Responsibility to plan; and assurances for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. If the government loses its supreme court appeal, as expected, it will have to pass legislation to trigger article 50 and Starmer said Labour would amend that bill to include the Labour conditions if the government did not put them in its own plan. He said:

The government must now prepare its plan and publish it. And I put the government on notice, that if it fails to produce a plan by the time we are debating article 50 legislation - if we are, assuming the government doesn’t win (the supreme court appeal) - amendments from this side and possibly from the other side of the House will be put forward setting out the minimum requirements of a plan. In other words, we’re not going to have a situation where the government seeks a vote in a vacuum, or produces a late, vague plan.

  • David Davis refused to commit the government to publishing a white paper on its Brexit plan and instead suggested that the plan would only set out the very broad goals already set out by ministers. Labour did not explicity demand a white paper, but the Conservative Ken Clarke called for one.
  • Davis hinted that the plan might not even include a clear statement as to whether or not the UK wanted to stay in the customs union. In the past he has said the government would make a clear statement on this. But today he said it was not a binary choice; there were four alternative options, he claimed. He said the government would need “flexibility” in the negotiations and that it would be a mistake to tie itself down.
  • Davis refused to give MPs an assurance that they would get to vote on whether or not the UK stays in the customs unions. The Tory MP Anna Soubry raised this point, but Davis would not commit to a Commons vote. (See 1.53pm.)
  • Starmer insisted that Labour was not trying to frustrate Brexit.

The motion as amended is an indication that the purpose of calling for the plan is not to frustrate the process or delay the prime minister’s timetable. That is what is made clear by the motion and the amendment taken together. Labour has repeatedly said that it will not frustrate the process, and I stick by that.

  • He said the government had no mandate for a hard Brexit.

The overwhelming evidence is that [people] do not want a hard Brexit. There is no consensus for hard Brexit.

Sir Keir Starmer.
Sir Keir Starmer. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament
  • Davis said the government was making good progress towards finding a solution to the Northern Ireland border issue.
  • He said he expected that MPs would have a vote on the final Brexit deal - but refused to give a firm commitment that there would be on.
  • He said that having a second referendum would be “the most destructive thing” that could happen to the government’s negotiating position.

Updated

Gethins says the Irish government has said it had no idea what the UK wants from Brexit. An Irish minister said the UK was like a husband that applied for a divorce but wanted to keep the house and all the assets. He says Nicola Sturgeon, by contrast, got a warm reception when she went to Dublin.

Gethins says the situation is one of “chaos’ and that the government is responsible. It is carrying on the policies of the leave campaign, he says.

Gethins asks for an assurance that no law affecting the powers of the Scottish parliament will be made without the approval of that parliament.

He says David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, recently said Scotland would get “significant new powers”. Will they include over immigration, he asks.

He says Scotland is a European nation. In many areas, it agrees more with the European consensus than with the British consensus.

Stephen Gethins' speech

Stephen Gethins, the SNP’s Europe spokesman, is speaking now.

He says the government should guarantee the rights of EU nationals living in the UK.

Scotland has benefited more than most places from freedom of movement, he says. He says Scotland wants to keep it.

Davis says freedom of movement is not the only way to allow people into Scotland. He says, even with the UK controlling its borders, Scotland could still attract immigrants.

Gethins says Scotland should get power over immigration, as Michael Gove, the Conservative former justice secretary, proposed during the referendum.

Updated

Davis says the government has made its aims clear.

But it is important not to close off options before necessary, he says.

He say Jeremy Corbyn implied at the weekend that he wanted to tie the government’s hands on Brexit.

The government will set out its strategic plans ahead of triggering article 50.

The Commons was always going to be informed, because the government will have to set out what it wants in its article 50 letter.

He says many Labour MPs are paying lip service to accepting the result of the referendum.

But some are pushing for a second referendum, which would be “the most destructive thing you could do” for the government’s negotiating position, he says.

  • Davis says having a second referendum would be “the most destructive thing” that could happen to the government’s negotiating position.

On trade Davis says the government has been as clear as is possible at this stage.

The best deal will come from a negotiated outcome.

He says he wants the freest possible trade with Europe.

Davis says the government wants to the UK to continue to cooperate with the EU on security.

Sir Gerald Howarth, a Conservative, says the government has set out its vision with great clarity.

Davis says Howarth is right.

He says Labour claim to have been told nothing. But that only proves the truth of the adage, there are none so deaf as will not hear.

He says the government wants to control immigration. But that does not mean pulling up the drawbridge. Britain will be open to talent.

Labour has a problem with this because the party has at least three different positions on this topic, he says.

He says the government wants to remove the UK from the authority of the European court of justice. Labour complain because they think the ECJ guarantees our freedoms, he says.

Asked about the customs union, he says this is not a binary choice. There are different options.

Davis says the government has said it will protect employment rights. And no laws will be changed without the approval of parliament.

Anna Soubry, the Conservative, asks Davis if he is saying MPs will have no say in whether or not the UK leaves the customs union.

Davis says there are several options on this around. One is shown by Norway, in the single market but not the customs union. One is shown by Switzerland, which is in neither but which has a customs agreement.

Davis says he has given a great deal of thought to how to uphold accountability.

Labour’s Helen Goodman says industrialists say uncertainty is leading to them putting off investment.

Davis says people said the economy would collapse during the referendum. But in recent months it has been doing very well, he says.

Davis says MPs will get a vote on final Brexit deal

Starmer asks Davis to confirm that there will be a vote on the final deal in the Commons.

“That is what I expect,” says Davis.

  • Davis says MPs will get a vote on the final Brexit deal.

It is “inconceivable” that MPs would not have a vote, he says.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Conservative, asks for an assurance that this would just be a vote on the deal. It would not allow MPs to vote against leaving, he says.

Davis says that is correct.

Labour’s Pat McFadden says the government should publish a white paper. He says Davis himself argued for one in a ConservativeHome article he wrote in July, before becoming a minister.

Davis says that in that article he just said a white paper was one option.

Davis says even in trade negotiations it is normal to have a degree of secrecy.

But this negotiation will be about more than trade. It will cover issues like security.

It is not a bilateral negotiation, he says. It will involve about 30 different parties.

He says it will affect other EU countries.

And he says the situation in Europe will change.

For all these reasons, the government “must have the flexibility to adjust during these negotiations”.

Davis says it is like threading a neddle. If someone jogs your elbow, it is harder. If 650 people do it, it is even harder.

Ken Clarke, the Conservative, says the term plan is vague. Will the government publish plans, preferably in a white paper, and put them to a vote before triggering article 50?

This word plan is being used in an extremely vague way and could cover some of the vague assertions ministers have been making for the last few weeks. Will you accept the House requires a description, published in a white paper preferably, of the strategic objectives the government is going to be pursuing, submit that strategy to a vote of the House and once it has got the House’s approval then it can move to invoking article 50?

Davis says his promise of “all possible information, subject to not undermining the government’s negotiation” goes further.

Updated

Labour’s Geraint Davies says nothing will be achieved until after the German elections in the autumn. So if the government triggers article 50 by the end of March, it will be cutting the amount of real time available for talks. Wouldn’t it be better to wait?

Davis says he does not agree. Some 15 elections are taking place during the negotiating period.

Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, says the government will have to introduce legislation to trigger article 50.

Davis says he will not comment on the supreme court hearing. But the government will obey the law.

Davis says Labour has signed up to the government triggering article 50 by the end of March.

He says it was always his plan to give more information about his plans, provided that did not undermine the government’s position.

David Davis' speech

David Davis is speaking now.

He says Starmer said there was no mandate for hard Brexit. But he does not know what that means, he says.

But people voted for Brexit.

He says, on Northern Ireland, that there has been considerable progress towards getting a solution to the border problem.

  • Davis says government making good progress towards sorting out the Northern Ireland border issue.

Davis says if the government gave its information to the OBR, that would amount to revealing its plans.

Starmer says he does not expect the OBR to get confidential information. But he thinks the plan must give the OBR sufficient detail for it to produce figures.

Starmer has finished. David Davis, the Brexit secretary, will now respond.

Starmer says government has no mandate for a hard Brexit

Starmer says May’s conference speech was read in Brussels as pointing to the UK being outside the customs union and the single market.

We cannot go into the talks with this unclear, he says.

He says there is no mandate for hard Brexit. And no consensus for it.

  • Starmer says government has no mandate for a hard Brexit.

The overwhelming evidence is that [people] do not want a hard Brexit. There is no consensus for hard Brexit.

Starmer says comments like “Brexit means Brexit” do not help.

People want to know whether it will be hard Brexit, as Theresa May’s conference speech suggested, or a milder version, as comments like Davis’s about paying into the EU budget or the Nissan deal implies.

Chris Leslie, the former shadow chancellor, asks Starmer if he accepts there is a “risk” in the government’s timetable, that article 50 should be triggered by the end of March.

Starmer says he accepts that this is an exacting timetable. That is why the government needs to publish its plan in January, he says.

Starmer says the plan must also be one around which a consensus can be built.

He says the government must not act just in the interests of the 52% who voted to leave, or the 48% who voted to stay. It must act for the 100%, he says.

Crispin Blunt, a Conservative, says Starmer is talking about a plan. But no plan survives contact with the enemy. Things will change. The government will have to adapt.

I’m fascinated by this focus on the plan and the amount of work you’re going to invite the OBR to do and everything else. You do understand that no plan survives engagement with the enemy.

Starmer says it was a mistake for Blunt to describe our EU partners as the enemy.

He has been to Brussels, he says. EU partners are not impressed by jokes about Prosecco. Comments like Blunt’s “are simply not helping”, he says.

Updated

Starmer says Brexit plan must assure Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

Starmer says there must be enough detail in the plan to reassure the devolved governments that their concerns are being addressed.

He says “Brexit means Brexit” did not come close to address the concerns he heard when he visited the devolved parliaments.

  • Starmer says Brexit plan must assure Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Starmer says the OBR said in his recent report that it asked the government for a statement about its planned Brexit trade policy. This was the OBR trying to do its job, Starmer says.

The OBR said the government’s response left it “little the wiser”, Starmer says.

Starmer says the plan must contain enough detail to allow the Office for Budget Responsibility to do its job properly.

  • Starmer says government must publish enough information to allow the OBR to cost its plans.

Dominic Raab, a Conservative, says Labour is engaged in wrecking tactics.

Starmer says he does not accept that.

Starmer says he has no doubt that MPs will have a vote on the final deal. MEPs will get one, he says.

Davis says the government has already said the Constitutional Reform Act procedures will apply (ie, MPs will get a vote.)

Davis says MPs will also get a vote on the Great Repeal Act. After that there will be a series of consequential legislation, some primary and some secondary.

Starmer says that will be after article 50 has been invoked.

Lucy Frazer, a Conservative, says David Davis has given MPs an assurance that parliament will get the same information as the European parliament.

Starmer says that is welcome. But he says he is focused on what gets revealed before article 50 is triggered.

Starmer says Brexit plan must set out intentions for customs union and single market

Starmer asks MPs if they would be happy for the negotiate for two years without knowing the government’s plan.

David Davis says Starmer is putting up an aunt Sally. He says he himself has told MPs eight times in the past that the government will publish “as much information as possible” about its Brexit plans, so long as it does not undermine the government’s negotiating position.

Starmer accepts that Davis said that. And he says Davis has said that when the government reaches a decision on the customs union (and by implication the single market), it will publish it.

He says he accepts the plan to set out the government’s stance on the customs union, the single market and a transitional plan.

  • Starmer says government’s Brexit plan should say whether it will seek membership of the single market and the customs union, and whether there will be a transitional deal.

Davis says there may be more than one option available. And so it would be wrong to accept the government to be specific, he says.

Starmer says the uncertainty must end. People are entitled to know that the government is negotiating.

Starmer says, if the government has not produced a plan by the time article 50 legislation is debated, Labour will table amendments setting out the conditions for a plan.

  • Starmer says Labour will propose its own Brexit conditions if government does not publish its plan before article 50 legislation passed.

Starmer says Labour’s motion is not intended to delay article 50

Labour’s Jim Cunningham says the government is claiming Labour wants to sabotage article 50. But it doesn’t, he says.

Starmer says Labour’s motion is not intended to frustrate article 50, or to delay it.

  • Starmer says Labour’s motion is not intended to delay article 50.

Jonathan Edwards, the Plaid Cymru MP, says Labour is agreeing a timetable that could make it hard for parliament to scrutinise the article 50 legislation.

Starmer says he does not accept that.

Julian Lewis, a Conservative, asks Starmer to confirm that Labour will not block the article 50 legislation.

Starmer says it is reasonable to amend legislation.

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, asks Starmer to make it clear that Labour would not delay article 50 legistlation.

Starmer says delaying or frustrating article 50 legislation is not the plan.

Peter Bone, a Conservative, says he has tabled a private member’s bill for article 50 to be triggered.

Starmer says we will see what happens to that bill.

Starmer says the government is in the supreme court saying the Commons should have no vote on article 50.

Chris Bryant, the Labour MP, asks Starmer to confirm that today’s vote is not a legislative one.

Starmer accepts that. Unless the supreme court overrules the high court, legislation will be necessary to allow the government to trigger article 50, he says.

He says today is not a vote for article 50, or a vote giving the government authority to trigger article 50.

He says the timetable in the motion is intended to put pressure on the government to publish its plan in a timely fashion.

Starmer says the overnight briefings say the government always intended to publish a plan.

But it did not say that before. A concession is a concession, he says.

Starmer opens Brexit debate

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is opening the debate.

He says for months the government refused to publish a Brexit plan. But yesterday it caved in. He says last-minute amendments tell their own story.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, says Starmer has fallen into the trap of binding his party into accepting the triggering of article 50 by the end of March.

Starmer says he will address this in due course.

As usual, I missed the questions from Angus Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster, because I was writing up the snap verdict. Robertson asked about the closure of job centres in Glasgow. Lidington replied:

Clearly the DWP like every government department does look from time to time at its estate but the right hon gentleman makes a perfectly reasonable point on behalf of people in Glasgow, I will ask the work and pensions secretary to contact him ... The key element in any such decision is not the raw number of offices there should be but about how accessible the offices and the services they provide continue to be and I’m absolutely confident that it is that criterion that is at the heart of my right honourable friend’s thinking.

I’ve taken the quote from PoliticsHome.

Richard Graham, a Conservative, asks about rail services to Gloucester.

Lidington says Gloucester is a place people would want to visit easily. Transport ministers are working on how the Gloucester service can be improved.

And that’s it.

Steven Baker, a Conservative, says many journalists from the BBC have been contacting him trying to manufacture rows with the government. Should the BBC stick to impartial journalism, and stop this?

Lidington says, sarcastically, that he is shocked at the thought that anyone might think that Baker could be a source of information about Tory backbench rebellions.

Labour’s Geraint Davies asks if the government supports banning fracking, because of the impact from methane leaks.

Lidington says the government decided to back fracking, after considering both the economic and environmental impacts. It is confident that fracking can be carried out safely.

Labour’s Naz Shah asks what the government is doing to stop the massacre of Rohingya people in Burma.

Lidington says the government makes representations to the Burmese government about this regularly.

Craig Williams, a Conservative, asks if the government will protect S4C’s budget.

Lidington says the government is fully committed to it.

Tracy Brabin, the Labour MP, asks about the planned closure of Dewsbury A&A.

Lidington says the NHS is working harder than at any time in his history. He says reconfiguration decisions should be made locally.

Labour’s Anna Turley asks about a constituent who took his own life after feeling “belittled” by staff at the job centre. She asks for an investigation, into this case and how the DWP treats its clients.

Lidington expresses unreserved sympathy for the family of the man who died. Human beings sometimes get things wrong, he says. But the principle that people receiving benefits are subject to the kind of “disciplines” that apply to people in work is right, he says.

The DUP leader at Westminster Nigel Dodds says tonight’s vote is important because it is the first chance MPs will have to show that they support implementing Brexit, and triggering article 50 by the end of March.

Lidington says any MP voting against the government amendment will be “seeking to thwart the outcome of the referendum in the most undemocratic fashion”.

  • Lidington says MPs voting against government’s amendment are seeking to “thwart the outcome of the referendum in the most undemocratic fashion”.

The Conservative Andrew Bridgen says declaring your Brexit strategy now would be like showing your hand at cards. And Labour have only one card to play - the Joker, he says.

Lidington says it would be a mistake for the government to show its hand.

Snap PMQs verdict:

Snap PMQs verdict: Theresa May won’t have to worry about being outshone by David Lidington. He did an acceptable job of not answering Emily Thornberry’s questions about Brexit and the customs union, but other ministers have flannelled on this subject with a lot more flair and Lidington’s final splurge of Labour-bashing, in his final response, didn’t really come off. Thornberry was forensic and effective, and her line of attack was interesting because it suggests that customs union membership, not single market membership, is emerging as the key Brexit demand around which Labour is now coalescing. Perhaps that is because some in the Corbyn team are ambivalent about SM membership, because of the restrictions it would impose on the use of socialist instruments like state aid? Overall, then, a solid win for Thornberry.

David Lidington and Emily Thornberry stand in at PMQs

Updated

Thornberry says Lidington is giving familiar answers. But he said in September the Irish issue would be resolved before article 50 is triggered.

Lidington says, if the answers sound familiar, it is because he needs to repeat them so Thornberry gets them. He says the government is assessing the impact of Brexit on more than 50 sectors of the economy.

Thornberry says the government can consult, but the answer will come back: we should be part of the customs union. The government is promising to give parliament a say, but it is in the supreme court trying to stop parliament having a say. They cannot give us their plan because they do not have one. Will we hear anything different today?

Lidington says the government will publish a statement about his plans for article 50 is triggered. But Labour is in denial, he says. Some of Thornberry’s colleagues want to reverse the referendum vote. Labour is like Mutiny on the Bounty, reshot by the Carry On team. They are rudderless, drifting on Europe as on so much else. Decent working people have given up on Labour as the authentic voice of working families.

Thornberry says of course Labour accepts the democratic decision of the referendum. But it wants a Brexit that works for everyone. Leaving the customs union would mean chaos, she says. There would be border checks. She again quotes what Lidington said in February. Does Lidington agree with himself?

Lidington says the referendum changes the context of what is happening. It would not help to give a detailed exposition of the negotiating position.

Thornberry says: “Dear, oh dear, we are not asking for details.” Labour just wants an answer on this. Since 1993 there have been no customs checks on the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. Lidington said before the referendum said Brexit would lead to customs checks at the border. Does he still think that?

Lidington says the prime minister has repeatedly made it clear that he wants to ensure there is no need for border checks.

Emily Thornberry rises, to loud cheers.

She starts by mentioning the 75th anniversary of the Pearl Harbour attack. The following day Winston Churchill summoned parliament, and he told MPs that it was indispensable for parliament to play its full role in events. She says Labour welcomes the government’s decision to accept Labour’s motion. Does the government want the UK to remain part of the customs union.

Lidington starts by commemorating Pearl Harbour, and welcomes the fact that the Japanese prime minister if visiting the site of the attack today.

On the customs union, he says the government will give clarity at the earliest opportunity. It wants companies to have maximum access to the single market.

Thornberry says it will be a disaster for British business if we do not stay in. She quotes what Lidington said about this in February. So can he put this beyond doubt?

Lidington says he and Thornberry both argued for remain. But what separates them now is that the Conservative government is working to respect the verdict of the referendum. It wants the best possible outcome. But Thornberry, just two months ago, said she wanted to go back to the British people.

Sir Peter Bottomley, the Conservative MP, asks Lidington to encourage the RMT to ensure that 200 people with jobs do not put the convenience of 600,000 people in the Southern region at risk (by going on strike).

Lidington says the RMT’s action shows “coordinate contempt for the travelling public”. Labour are heckling, he says. He says the Conservatives are on the side of rail passengers.

The SNP’s Philippa Whitford says the reality of a Prestwick spaceport is getting closer. Will the government support it?

Lidington says the government is looking at the potential for future commercial space travel. It wants to see the UK as a pioneer.

David Lidington says he has been asked to take PMQs because Theresa May is in Bahrain.

Emily Thornberry is standing in for Jeremy Corbyn.

This is from Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh.

Caroline Lucas says she won't back the government's Brexit amendment

The Green MP Caroline Lucas says she will not back the government amendment today.

PMQs

PMQs is about to start.

David Lidington, the leader of the Commons, is standing in for Theresa May because she is away.

Philip Hammond, the chancellor and the second most senior person in the government, is also away, on a trip to South Africa.

The government's Brexit plan, as set out by Boris Johnson

In his Facebook post on the proposed government Brexit “plan”, which I quoted earlier, ITV’s Robert Peston said the plan would probably just be a restatement of the principles that the government has already set out. He pointed out that Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, summarised them recently when he appeared on Peston on Sunday.

For the record, here is the Brexit “plan”, as set out by Johnson. Johnson told Peston.

You know, I don’t want to set out a negotiating position today beyond what the prime minister has herself said and she’s made some very clear points. Number one: take back control of freedom of movement and that’s obviously important. Number two: money. Take back control of our the money that is currently preempted by Brussels. Number three: take back control of our laws, which is what people voted for and I think for many people in this country, it was the number one thing they wanted ... For me it was about democracy and that’s what I think people want. So what the prime minister has said is that there will be no jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in this country. Number four: Britain is a great free trading nation, we have the chance now to be a great campaigner for free trade around the world and to do free trade deals.

Now, you take those four points together, you have an absolute wealth of information about what Brexit will look like, the very exciting possibilities that it raises.

Barry Gardiner, the shadow international trade secretary, told BBC News a few minutes ago that he hoped the government would choose to publish a proper white paper on its Brexit plan. When it was put to him that the government was just committing to releasing a “plan”, and that this could amount to little more than a rehash of a speech, Gardiner said this would amount to acting “in bad faith”.

If it is that, then she would be acting in bad faith with regard to parliament and with regard to the public. I trust that she won’t do that.

SNP and Lib Dems to vote against government amendment

With Labour planning to vote for the government amendment (which itself accepts the Labour motion in its entirety - see 9.53am), there will not be a division between the two main parties when the division is called tonight at 7pm.

But that does not mean there won’t be a vote. The Lib Dems are going to vote against the government amendment, because they are opposed to triggering article 50 without the promise of a second referendum. In a statement Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, said:

An amended motion would fail to include any meaningful commitment from the Conservative Brexit government to produce the equivalent of a white or green paper setting out its position on such fundamental questions as to whether it wants Britain to remain in the Single Market.

I call on the Labour party to remember it calls itself the official Opposition. It should not cave in to Conservative attempts to deny the public a final say on the most important question facing the country in a generation. It is appalling that a so-called opposition could allow itself to be muzzled by the government on an issue that will face this country for years to come.

It is now clear that the Liberal Democrats are the real opposition to the Conservative Brexit government, striving to keep Britain open, tolerant and united.

Tim Farron (right) with Sarah Olney, the new Lib Dem MP for Richmond Park.
Tim Farron (right) with Sarah Olney, the new Lib Dem MP for Richmond Park. Photograph: Dudley/ Pacific/ Barcroft Images

And the SNP will vote against the government amendment too. This is from Stephen Gethins, the SNP’s Europe spokesman.

It has been 167 days, almost six months, of distraction and deflection from the UK government, and just 113 days until 31 March deadline. Today’s debate is welcome in holding the government to account over its inaction. However, Labour have a decision to make; they can either back our amendment to the motion that respects the vote across all four parts of the UK and that will give devolved administrations a formal role in the negotiations and seek agreement before triggering article 50. Or they risk backing a Tory amendment that will see the UK put through a hard right Tory plan to take us out of the EU that will damage jobs, livelihoods, businesses and the economy.

The SNP are clear. The UK government must set out that it respects the will of the Scottish people – and their amendment fails in that. SNP MPs will be protecting Scotland’s interests and voting against the motion as amended by the UK government for a damaging hard right Brexit.

UK experts are to advise Gulf airlines how to spot people traffickers and their victims who may be en route to the region for forced labour or sexual exploitation.

Gulf states, who own airlines including Emirates, Qatar Airways, Oman Air and Saudia, have agreed that UK Border force will work with airline staff and crews to spot the signs of adults and children who have potentially been trafficked and how to share their concerns with police or border officials.

Gulf countries have drawn international condemnation in recent years for the treatment of migrant workers, mostly from south Asia, who work on building projects and the service industry.

Qatar, which is hosting the 2022 World Cup, has been at the centre of the criticism after the UN’s International Labour Organisation found migrant workers stranded for months without pay, without access to healthcare and stripped of their passports.

At the Gulf Co-operation Council summit in Manama, all six Gulf nations agreed to further discussions on complying with international conventions on forced labour, according to a communique sent after discussions with Theresa May.

“The UK is already taking action at home to stamp out modern day slavery but we will only eradicate this problem if we work with other countries around the world,” the prime minister said in a statement. “This agreement from the Gulf states is an encouraging step forward.”

Theresa May at a plenary session on the second day of the Gulf Cooperation Council summit in Manama, Bahrain.
Theresa May at a plenary session on the second day of the Gulf Cooperation Council summit in Manama, Bahrain. Photograph: Carl Court/Getty Images

The Commons Brexit committee has been taking evidence this morning from Carolyn Fairbairn, the director general of the CBI, Frances O’Grady, the secretary general of the TUC and John Longworth, a former director general of the British Chambers of Commerce and now co-chair of Leave Means Leave.

I have not been following it, but here are some lines that have emerged on Twitter. The tweets are from the Times’s Marcus Leroux, BrexitCentral (a pro-Brexit website), the Sun’s Steve Hawkes, LSE Brexit (an academic blog), and Open Britain (a pro-single market campaign.)

  • Fairbairn said CBI members had mixed views about whether or not the UK should stay in the UK.
  • Fairbairn said the government should guarantee EU migrants living in the UK that they can stay after Brexit.
  • Fairbairn said CBI members were worried about the UK reverting to trading with the EU on WTO terms.
Carolyn Fairbairn giving evidence to the Brexit committee.
Carolyn Fairbairn giving evidence to the Brexit committee. Photograph: Parliament TV

Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, does not always agree with the prime minister - at the weekend he went on Peston on Sunday and explicitly disagreed with her stance on including students in migration figures - but today he is siding with her. He has posted this on Twitter.

There are alternative views as to whether the government’s decision to table an amendment accepting Labour’s Brexit plan motion amounts to a climbdown, because the government is conceding it will publish a plan, or a clever tactical ambush, because ministers are forcing Labour to back the triggering of article 50 by the end of March. The Telegraph splash leans towards the latter view.

In an article for the Telegraph, the Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg argues that the government has come out of this best.

By taking this stance, Theresa May gives nothing away but the Government demonstrates an intelligent approach to parliamentary scrutiny and parliamentary rhetoric - an adept handling of Labour’s student union tactics. It attests to the subtlety and smart thinking of the Chief Whip, Gavin Williamson. Everyone knows Theresa May is in charge and that she knows what she wants to do in the lead-up to Article 50. Her position is an authoritative one. There will be no difficulty in voting through a bill to enact Article 50; it is wise not to waste political capital on tomorrow’s sideshow.

Annual net migration to the UK from European Union countries could fall by as much as 150,000 as a result of Brexit, according to a new study, the Press Association reports.

The research suggests that a drop in migrant workers on this scale would have a lost-lasting damaging effect on the economy, reducing GDP per capita in 2030 by up to 5.4% below what it would otherwise have been.

The study’s author, Jonathan Portes, suggested the negative impact resulting from lower migration could approach the size of the loss due to reduced trade opportunities.

But the reduction in foreign workers would boost pay for UK nationals in low-income jobs by as much as 0.5% by 2030, found the report by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (Niesr) (pdf).

Data released earlier this month showed a record 284,000 EU nationals entered the UK over the year to June 2016, as part of an all-time high of 650,000 total incomers. Some 189,000 EU citizens arrived for work - the highest estimate recorded.

Net migration - the overall difference between the numbers arriving and leaving the country - was at a near record of 335,000, well above the Government’s controversial target of less than 100,000.

Niesr’s research estimates the possible impact on EU migration of limitations on the right to free movement to live and work in the UK, which Prime Minister Theresa May has put at the top of her list of priorities for Brexit.

Its central estimate anticipates a fall of 91,000 a year in net EU migration in the years to 2020, rising to 150,000 if rules are tightened more severely.

The knock-on impact would be to reduce GDP by 0.63% to 1.19% and GDP per head by 0.22% and 0.78% on the central scenario. In the more extreme scenario, the hit to GDP per capita would be up to 1.16%.

Assuming migration reductions are maintained after 2020, the paper calculates that the cumulative hit to GDP per head by 2030 would be between 0.92% and 3.38% under the central scenario, and from 1.53% to 5.36% under the extreme scenario.

Under the central scenario, low-paid workers who currently face competition from overseas labour in sectors like catering, hotels and care services might see a wage rise of 0.12% by 2020 and 0.51% by 2030.

Labour will vote for the government amendment (see 9.53am) this afternoon, party sources say.

But some Labour MPs are saying they will not vote for it because it explicitly calls for article 50 to be triggered by the end of March. Here are three of them.

And Mike Gapes has posted a tweet implying he will not support the government.

Updated

Brexit debate - Motion and amendments

Here is the Labour motion that MPs will be debating this afternoon. It calls on the government to publish a Brexit plan before it triggers article 50.

That this House recognises that leaving the EU is the defining issue facing the UK; notes the resolution on parliamentary scrutiny of the UK leaving the EU agreed by the House on 12 October 2016; recognises that it is Parliament’s responsibility to properly scrutinise the Government while respecting the decision of the British people to leave the European Union; confirms that there should be no disclosure of material that could be reasonably judged to damage the UK in any negotiations to depart from the European Union after Article 50 has been triggered; and calls on the Prime Minister to commit to publishing the Government’s plan for leaving the EU before Article 50 is invoked.

Three amendments have been tabled. The most important is this one, which has been tabled by the government, because it will certainly be “called” (ie, put to a vote). It backs the Labour proposal for a plan to be published, but it also confirms that the result of the referendum should be respected, calls for article 50 to be invoked by the end fo March and says publication of the plan should not compromise the government’s negotiating position. It says:

At end add ‘, consistently with the principles agreed without division by this House on 12 October; recognises that this House should respect the wishes of the United Kingdom as expressed in the referendum on 23 June; and further calls on the Government to invoke Article 50 by 31 March 2017.’.

There are two other amendments that have been tabled which almost certainly will not be put to a vote.

Here is the one tabled by the SNP and Plaid Cymru. It effectively says Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should have a veto on the decision to trigger article 50.

Line 4, leave out ‘decision of the British people to leave the European Union’ and insert ‘result of the referendum on leaving the European Union in Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales; calls for a formal role for the devolved administrations including their agreement before Article 50 is triggered’.

And here is the one tabled by the Lib Dems. It calls for a second referendum, on the final Brexit deal.

At end add ‘; and further calls on the Prime Minister to commit to a referendum on the final agreement following the negotiations and before the UK leaves the EU.’.

Labour drops call for Scotland to get a separate Brexit deal

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, has challenged the Scottish government to “put more meat on the bones” of its proposals to secure a separate Brexit deal from the rest of the UK.

Speaking to journalists in Edinburgh at the end of a two-day visit to Scotland, the shadow Brexit secretary said:

It’s difficult to see how having any part of the UK in the single market and another part out would work in practice. That reinforces that there has to be a UK approach [to negotiations] from the start. Those that are advocating a different set of arrangements have to put more meat on the bones as to how it would work in practice.

But Starmer also appeared to roll back on his previously stated position that “there should be special arrangements for ... Scotland”.

Asked about the Scottish government’s attempts to explore different arrangements since the June referendum, Starmer insisted that the prime minister “should be getting the best deal for the whole of the UK”.

We want a top level answer on the single market that applies across the UK and therefore there is not question of any separate arrangement for Scotland or anywhere else.

But at the beginning of November, when pressed to clarify Labour’s position after Jeremy Corbyn and Tom Watson contradicted one another on the party’s approach to Article 50, he said: “We are clear that we need the fullest possible access to the single market, that we should be in the customs union, and that there should be special arrangements for Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland.”

First minister Nicola Sturgeon is planning to publish a paper detailing different options for a more favourable EU deal within the next few weeks.

But Starmer appeared to position himself more closely to the UK chancellor, Phillip Hammond, who last week said it was unrealistic to suggest that Holyrood could negotiate its own Brexit terms separately from the UK.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary.
Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary. Photograph: Neil Hall/Reuters

What would a “plan for leaving the EU” look like? MPs will today debate a Labour motion calling for one and the government has accepted it. That means there is no prospect of a revolt when the debate ends at 7pm. But, as usual, the debate will reveal something about what MPs think about Brexit. For example, how many MPs, especially Tories, are determined to keep the UK in the single market? What are Labour’s red lines? How many MPs back the Lib Dem call for a second referendum? We may even learn something new about the government’s thinking on Brexit, although the chances are probably slim. At times ministers seem more willing to discuss the location of our at-sea Trident submarines than their Brexit negotiating strategy.

But David Davis, the Brexit secretary, who will be speaking at the start of the debate for the government, will have to say something about what this “plan” might look like. Opposition MPs want a proper, substantial document, like a white paper. The government is hoping to publish with the bare minimum, and if it thought it could get away with a few lines on a post-it note, it would.

ITV’s Robert Peston has a good post on his Facebook page about the government’s thinking on this. Here’s an excerpt.

What is not widely understood is that the prime minister believes that probably the worst mistake ever made by her predecessor Cameron was to write to the president of the EU Donald Tusk setting out what he wanted from his own negotiations with the EU - which were supposed to provide us all with a good reason to remain in the EU.

By doing so, DC showed both the poverty of his ambition in respect of his negotiating aims and set himself up to be knocked back by other EU government heads.

Which led directly both to his referendum failure and his political demise.

So although she is under enormous pressure even from her own MPs to tell us what she really really wants in the Article 50 negotiations, she will not bend to them.

I will be covering the debate in detail.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.15am: Carolyn Fairbairn, director general of the CBI, Frances O’Grady, general secretary of the TUC, and John Longworth, the former director general of British Chambers of Commerce, give evidence to the Commons Brexit committee.

9.45am: Kezia Dugdale, the Scottish Labour leader, gives a speech calling for the UK to become a federal state.

10am: NatCen, a social research centre, publishes a report on Brexit voting patterns, with speeches from Labour’s Chuka Umunna and the psephologist John Curtice.

12pm: David Lidington, leader of the Commons, takes PMQs in the absence of Theresa May, who is in Bahrain. Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, will stand in for Jeremy Corbyn.

Around 12.40pm: MPs begin a debate on a Labour motion saying the government should publish its Brexit plan. The government has accepted Labour’s demand, although it is challenging MPs to accept the need to trigger article 50, starting the two-year process of withdrawing from the EU.

As usual, I will also be covering the 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.

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

I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time. Alternatively you could post a question to me on Twitter.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Forget About Kelly Osbourne's Weight Loss, Sharon Osbourne's 'Skeletal' Look Now Has Fans Worried — What Happened?
Sharon Osbourne's recent weight loss has sparked online speculation, with fans questioning her health amid the Osbourne family's grieving period.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Jack Osbourne Claims Dad Ozzy Chose To Die In Final Hours Before Black Sabbath Farewell
Jack Osbourne reveals his father Ozzy chose to die peacefully before Black Sabbath's farewell, as Sharon Osbourne plans to revive Ozzfest in 2027.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
What pet cats can tell us about human cancer
They live in our houses, drink our water and even sleep in our beds. Cats have become an integral part of many households and share much of our lives.
The Conversation
The Conversation
Love Magic Power Danger Bliss by Paul Morley review – reappraising Yoko Ono
An vivid celebration of the once-maligned, now revered artist’s life and work
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Carolyn Bessette Kennedy’s style, decoded: a stylist shares the secrets of the 90s minimalist wardrobe
Build with 80% staples, splurge on timeless pieces and more tips on fashioning a minimalist wardrobe à la Bessette
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
Celine Dion Clothing Brand Scandal Erupts: Fans Claim Her 'Children Are Everything' Ads Hide Dark Agenda
Celine Dion's clothing brand promo featuring 'Children Are Everything' has drawn fan criticism and online debate over its imagery and message.
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