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

French president says Brexit talks will be 'hard' if UK wants hard Brexit - Politics live

Francois Hollande, the French president, speaking to journalists as he arrives at the EU summit.
Francois Hollande, the French president, speaking to journalists as he arrives at the EU summit. Photograph: Thierry Charlier/AFP/Getty Images

Afternoon summary

  • François Hollande, the French president, has said that the Brexit talks will be “hard” if Britain insists on a hard Brexit. Speaking as he arrived at the EU summit in Brussels, he said:

I have said it very clearly; Madame Theresa May wants a hard Brexit, then talks will be hard too.

  • Sir Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, has said Britain is using cyber warfare in the bid to retake Mosul from Islamic State. Speaking at an international conference on waging war through advanced technology, Fallon made it clear Britain was unleashing its cyber capability on IS, also known as Daesh. Asked if the UK was launching cyber attacks in the bid to take the northern Iraqi city from IS, he replied:

I’m not going into operational specifics, but yes, you know we are conducting military operations against Daesh as part of the international coalition, and I can confirm that we are using offensive cyber for the first time in this campaign.

That’s all from me for today, and for another 10 days. I’ll put up a readers’ edition blog next week, and next week I’ll be off for the half-term break. My colleagues Jessica Elgot, Haroon Siddique and Peter Walker will be driving the blog in my place.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

Martin Schulz, president of the European parliament, has reaffirmed his opposition to the EU starting Brexit negotiations with the UK until article 50 is invoked. He posted these messages on Twitter.

He also restated his opposition to the UK retaining full access to the single market if it refuses to accept freedom of movement.

More people want Brexit talks to prioritise single market access than curbing immigration, poll suggests

Ipsos MORI has published some polling today suggesting that more people think the UK should prioritise access to the single market in the Brexit negotiations (45%) than think it should prioritise controlling immigration (39%). This is significant because the Theresa May has made it clear that she sees controlling immigration as more important, although May and other ministers insist both objectives are achievable.

As Ipsos MORI says, opinion is split largely in line with how people voted in the referendum.

Public opinion is largely split along the lines of how specific groups tended to vote in the referendum on EU membership. The single market is the priority for professionals and skilled workers with more than half (54%) of ABC1s and two in three (67%) graduates preferring Britain to put this option first. This compares with those in social classes C2DE preferring to prioritise immigration control (51%), as do those without a qualification (53%).

There is also a clear age difference. Fifty-seven percent of 18-34 year olds favour access to the single market (24% favour immigration control) compared with 32% of those aged 55+ (50% of whom favour immigration control).

Jeremy Corbyn has accused the prime minister of delaying the government’s commitment to bringing lone child refugees to the UK, including those who do not have family in the UK.

The Labour leader said it was “worryingly unclear what system the Government has in place to continue to identify and register children to see who might be eligible.”

Child refugees have two legal routes to enter the UK, the first under the EU’s Dublin Regulation to reunite children with families already in the UK, and the second is the government’s commitment in the so-called Dubs amendment to the Immigration Act.

Under this amendment, introduced by Alf Dubs, the Labour peer who arrived in the UK as a Kindertransport child refugee, the government pledged to take an unspecified number of unaccompanied refugee children, without them having family ties.

At the time of the amendment in May, Home Office sources briefed around 3,000 would be allowed into the UK, though since the act was passed it appears that no children have arrived in the UK under its provisions.

In a letter to Theresa May, Corbyn said there was an “obvious delay in implementing the Alf Dubs amendment and commitments to help child refugees.”

Today Corbyn has been meeting Labour MEPs and others in Brussels.

Some EU leaders think UK might not leave EU, Maltese PM tells BBC

And these are from the BBC’s Europe editor Katya Adler.

Here are some more tweets from Laura Kuenssberg from the EU summit.

Tusk is Donald Tusk, the president of the European council.

French president says Brexit talks will be 'hard' if UK wants hard Brexit

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, who is at the EU summit in Brussels.

Back to Brexit for a moment. This morning David Davis, the Brexit secretary, told MPs that Norway trades perfectly well with Sweden even though it is outside the customs union. (See 10.13am.) But in the comments BTL acme and maxfisher have both flagged up this blog by L Alan Winters, an economics professor and head of the UK Trade Policy Observatory (UKTPO), about Sweden and Brexit. He says:

Swedish exporters find exporting to Norway far more troublesome than exporting within the EU. This chimes with the UKTPO’s argument that the EEA is not a simple alternative to belonging to the EU customs union and Single Market (see: Roos And Rules: Why The EEA Is Not The Same As Membership Of The Single Market Briefing Paper).

Here is my colleague David Conn on the Commons vote.

Here is my colleague Zoe Wood’s story on the Green vote.

Green's knighthood - What happens next?

Here is the amendment MPs have passed.

[This House] noting that Philip Green received his knighthood for his services for the retail industry, believes his actions raise the question of whether he should be allowed to continue to be a holder of the honour and calls on the honours forfeiture committee to recommend his knighthood be cancelled and annulled.

MPs voted in favour by acclamation. (Voting always starts with the speaker, or deputy speaker, asking if MPs are in favour of a motion. If they all shout “aye”, and no one shouts “no”, as happened on this occasion, the motion gets passed without a formal division. That is not quite the same as the Commons voting unanimously in favour of something, because many MPs were not in the chamber. But no MPs spoke out against Green losing his knighthood.)

It is now up to the honours forfeiture committee, a group of civil servants chaired by Sir Sir Jonathan Stephens, permanent secretary at the Northern Ireland Office, to decide what to do. It does not have to obey the House of Commons in this matter but, given the importance the government places on parliamentary sovereignty in the context of Brexit, it would be odd for Heywood and his committee to snub the Commons on this.

Of course, if Green were to act speedily and generously to make up the shortfall in the BHS pension fund, as MPs demanded, the committee could decide that that somehow superseded the Commons vote.

UPDATE: The original post wrongly said the forfeiture committee is chaired by Sir Jeremy Heywood, the cabinet secretary. But it is chaired by Sir Jonathan Stephens.

Updated

MPs vote in favour of Philip Green losing his knighthood

MPs vote for the amendment, and the main motion, by acclamation. No one objects.

Updated

Frank Field, the chair of the work and pensions committee, is winding up the debate now. He says the debate has shown the commons select committee system working.

Lewis says the key thing is to legislate to ensure this happens never again.

For example, what is to stop auditors signing off accounts when a firm like BHS will later go bust.

Lewis says the system is “bent”.

In the near future the shape of the modern economy will be transformed. Let’s make sure it works for everyone, he says.

The rules of the game need changing.

He says he is delighted, and a little surprised, to hear Theresa May say she rejects laissez-faire thinking.

Will the party of billionaires and tax avoiders really transform the economy in the interests of workers?

He says Labour welcomes May’s plan to put workers on company boards.

But would an individual worker or two on a board have been able to stand up to Green. A voice is pointless without teeth, he says.

Clive Lewis, the shadow business secretary, is speaking now.

He says this issue cuts across party lines. There is a great deal of anger about BHS in the Commons. In effect, Green used the company to line his own pockets, and then he jumped ship like a rate from a sinking ship.

He says stripping Green of his honour will not create jobs, or restore the deficit in the pension fund. He says as far as he is concerned, he would be happy for Green to keep his knighthood if he restores the shortfall in the BHS pension fund.

He says the real problem is with the system that allows this, and that fact that Green was not breaking the law.

Clive Lewis.
Clive Lewis. Photograph: BBC

Updated

For an alternative view of Green, here is Ed Staite, a former Conservative party aide who is now a PR executive, with a column for PR Moment nominating Green for communicator of the week.

Clive Lewis, the new shadow business secretary, has told the BBC that what happened at BHS is “symptomatic of a wider malaise within our economy”. Labour wanted a new approach, he said.

There’s a lot of anger about this individual – that’s fine, we’ll debate that – but there does need to be a change in emphasis. Theresa May has said she wants to see an economy that works for all. Well we’ll hold her feet to the fire on that.

Iain Wright's speech - Extracts

The best speech of the debate so far has probably been the one from Iain Wright, the Labour MP who chairs the Commons business committee. (See 12.40pm.) Here are key extracts.

  • Wright described the BHS saga as “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern time”.

BHS is one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times. I’m sure the whole House has sympathy for the thousands of workers and pensioners who have lost their jobs and seen their pension benefits reduced as a result of greed, incompetence and hubris. The reputation of business has been tarnished as a result of this greed. The vast majority of businesses are not run and managed like this. It would be wrong to tar all of business with the same brush. However, it is vital that this mess is sorted. Even at this late stage, Sir Philip should make amends for this whole story, and put right the wrongs that he himself engineered.

  • Wright accused Green of raiding BHS for his own benefit.

[Green] can’t be described as a short-term corporate raider. But he did raid the company, and his ability to do so meant that he was then in a financial position to be able to obtain the debt to acquire Arcadia and, through the same modus operandi, pay his family the biggest dividend in corporate history. He took the rings from BHS’s fingers, beat it black and blue, starved it of food and water, put it on life support, and then wanted credit for keeping it alive.

BHS’s balance sheet was made considerably weaker during Sir Philip’s tenure of the company. His extraction of value early on in his ownership made the company less able to innovate, to retain a market share or competitive place in the retail market which would allow the firm to generate the profits and be in more of a position to survive and to address the growing pension scheme deficit.

  • Wright said the BHS Group’s dividend policy “set the scene for the eventual demise of the company”.

BHS folded in 2016, a year after Sir Philip Green sold it to Dominic Chappell, but its demise was on the cards a lot earlier than that. In the three year period between 2002 and 2004, BHS Group paid dividends of £423 million, even though operating profit for the period was less than that amount, at £325 million. In 2004, BHS Group had dividends of £199,500,000. This dividend exceeded the Group’s operating profit for that year of £137 million ...

Sir Philip could say, quite reasonably, that he received dividends for only a short period of time early on in his period of ownership. It was a long time ago. That is true. But I do think the dividend policy is crucial to understanding the whole story of BHS and wider lessons for business.

Green was to enrich himself, his family and his friends at the expense of long-term and sustainable growth for the company. Certainly, profits were made, but they were more akin to a short-term sugar boost rather than a nutritious diet that aided the long term health and strength of the business.

  • Wright said Green was not even very good at retail.

Sir Philip received his knighthood for services to retail. However, throughout the course of our inquiry, it became increasingly evident that he wasn’t particularly good at retail at all. True, he was able, in the early days, of sniffing out a corporate bargain and cutting costs to boost profit. There is nothing wrong with that, but he did not boost BHS’s turnover during his period of ownership, he lost market share to more nimble, or even not-so-nimble competitors, and he failed to anticipate the on-line retail revolution. By failing to innovate and invest in the brand, BHS looked like a remnant of the 1970s and 1980s, in a cut throat competitive sector where grabbing the customer’s attention and retaining their loyalty are paramount.

James says it is important that the investigating bodies are given time to complete their inquiries.

If the evidence supports it, enforcement will be taken, she says.

James says Green says he is in a dialogue with the pensions regulator.

She says she would urge him to sort it out quickly.

The pensions regulator continues to investigate the handling of BHS pensions. A conclusion will be announced soon.

Asked if she is aware of any specific proposals put to the regulator by Green, James says she is not aware of any.

If the government needs to bring forward further legislation in the light of the investigation, it will do so, she says.

She says BHS directors are being investigated. If it is found that their conduct fell below what was expected, action will be taken.

Margot James, the business minister, is speaking now.

She says the committee report into BHS highlights the gap between the amount paid to senior executives and advisers, and what happened to workers.

She says the prime minister is committed to reviewing the rules governing corporate governance, including executive pay. There will be a consultation later this autumn.

She says Iain Wright made strong points in his speech about the difference between public companies and private companies.

Margot James.
Margot James. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Ian Blackford, the SNP pensions spokesman, criticises Green in his speech, but says the government is at fault too for not tightening up company pension law.

Updated

Richard Graham, a Conservative, says the BHS pension scheme went from surplus to large deficit in about 10 years. The way it was run could not by any stretch of the imagination be called best practice, he says.

He says in the four months since Green gave evidence to the Commons inquiry into BHS relatively little has happened. So today provides a chance to put pressure on Green, he says.

This debate is not about grandstanding, he says. But it is about parliament telling Green he must honour the commitment he made. If he waits too long, that will be damaging to those affected.

Winnick says Green is 'a billionaire spiv who has shamed British capitalism'

In the Commons debate David Winnick, the Labour MP, says the Philip Green only pays a minimal amount of tax because his business is registered in his wife’s name in Monaco. He says, given this, he does not know why Green got a knighthood in the first place.

He says hardly a go days without the papers covering details of Green’s lifestyle. That is a provocation, he says. He goes on:

[Green is a] billionaire spiv who should never have received a knighthood, a billionaire spiv who has shamed British capitalism.

Other public figures who have had honour removed

The Press Association has compiled a useful list of other public figures who have been stripped of honours. Here it is.

  • Rolf Harris, March 2015. The former children’s entertainer was stripped of his CBE after being jailed for almost six years for a string of sex attacks on girls as young as seven.
  • Stuart Hall, October 2013. The former It’s A Knockout presenter was made an OBE in 2012 for services to broadcasting and charity. But the Queen directed it be cancelled after Hall, then 83, was handed a 30-month jail term for sexually abusing 13 victims, one as young as nine, over a period of nearly 20 years.
  • Vicky Pryce, July 2013. The economist was made a Companion of the Order of the Bath in 2009 in recognition of her contribution as head of the Government economic service. But in March 2013 she and ex-husband Chris Huhne were both jailed for eight months for swapping speeding penalty points a decade earlier so he could avoid a driving ban, which only emerged when Pryce approached newspapers after Huhne left her for another woman. She was released from prison after two months but, following her conviction, her name was removed from the Order of the Bath register.
  • James Crosby, June 2013. The former HBOS chief executive, who was knighted in 2006 after leaving the bank, was stripped of the title at his own request following a scathing parliamentary report into its collapse.
  • Jimmy Savile, January 2013. The television star was knighted for his services to charity in 1990 but the honours forfeiture committee considered stripping him of the title posthumously when the scale of the paedophile’s crimes emerged. The Cabinet Office later said that he had ceased to be a member of the order upon his death in 2011.
  • Fred Goodwin, January 2012. Goodwin received his knighthood for services to banking under the Labour government before guiding the Royal Bank of Scotland to the brink of collapse in 2008. While honours are usually only removed from those convicted or jailed, the Cabinet Office said the scale of the RBS disaster - necessitating a £45bn bailout from the taxpayer - made the case “exceptional”.
  • Jean Else, February 2011. “Superhead” Jean Else was made a Dame in 2001 in recognition of her transforming performance at Whalley Range High School in Manchester. But in January 2009 she was banned from running a school after the General Teaching Council found her guilty of failing to observe minimum standards in recruiting and promoting staff. Her honour was revoked in 2011 after she was found guilty of misconduct.
  • Robert Mugabe, 2008. Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe was stripped of his honorary knighthood in 2008 over his “abuse of human rights” and “abject disregard” for democracy.
  • “Prince” Naseem Hamed, 2007. The former WBA world featherweight champion was jailed in 2006 for 15 months and disqualified from driving for four years after a crash in May 2005 that left another man with fractures to “every major bone in his body”. The boxer was stripped of his MBE in January 2007.
  • Lester Piggott, 1988.The former champion jockey was stripped of his OBE after he was given a three-year jail term for evading tax in 1987.
  • Anthony Blunt, 1979. Art historian Anthony Blunt was a Professor of the History of Art at the University of London and Surveyor of the Queen’s Pictures. What was not known was that in 1964 he had confessed to having been a member of the infamous Cambridge Five Soviet spy ring, passing information to Moscow while they worked for MI5 during the Second World War. His secret was closely guarded for many years, but Margaret Thatcher publicly revealed his status in November 1979 and he was immediately stripped of his knighthood.

Eleanor Laing, the deputy speaker, says she expects the debate to end around 2.30pm. She appeals to MPs to restrict their speeches to seven minutes.

Wright says Lord Grabiner, the Arcadia chairman, has been “truly hopeless” in this affair.

He says BHS is “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.

The reputation of all business has been tarnished, he says.

Labour’s George Howarth intervenes. He says in in principle he agrees with the amendment saying Green should lose his knighthood. But is this the right time to proceed?

Wright says Green said he would sort out the BHS pension scheme. He told the committee he would do that four months ago. But he has not acted yet, Wright says.

Wright says Green 'took rings from BHS's fingers'

Wright is still speaking.

Iain Wright.
Iain Wright. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Iain Wright, the Labour MP who chairs the Commons business committee, says the report into BHS, jointly written by his committee and Frank Field’s work and pensions committee, was agreed unanimously.

Here are some of the conclusions from that report.

The evidence we have received over the course of this inquiry has at times resembled a circular firing squad. Witnesses appeared to harbour the misconception that they could be absolved from responsibility by blaming others. The worst example was Sir Philip Green, despite his protestations to the contrary. Sir Philip adopted a scattergun approach, liberally firing blame to all angles except his own, though he began his evidence by saying he would do the opposite. The truth is that a large proportion of those who have got rich or richer off the back of BHS are to blame. Sir Philip Green, Dominic Chappell and their respective directors, advisers and hangers-on are all culpable. The tragedy is that those who have lost out are the ordinary employees and pensioners. This is the unacceptable face of capitalism.

The sale of BHS did not have to proceed as it did. The potential checks, however, proved to be inadequate. Regulatory concerns were circumvented. Advisers were heavily incentivised to progress the deal ...

Sir Philip Green drove the deal forward. He sought to sell a chain that had become a financial millstone and threatened his reputation. He knew that Dominic Chappell was a wholly unsuitable purchaser but overlooked or made good each of Chappell’s shortcomings and proceeded with a rushed sale regardless.

Dominic Chappell was out of his depth. He was over-optimistic to the point of arrogance. He failed to recruit a retail expertdespite his own lack of experience; failed to secure funding on commercial terms; failed to address BHS’s property leases in a timely way; and failed to address the company’s long-term underperformance ...

The Green family benefited significantly from BHS. In his early years of ownership, Sir Philip cut costs, sold assets and paid substantial dividends offshore to the ultimate benefit of his wife. He failed, however, to invest sufficiently in stores or reinvent the business to beat the prevailing high street competition. We found little evidence to support the reputation for retail business acumen for which he received his knighthood.

It is true these are private companies holding Green family money. BHS, however, was a major employer and the sponsor of a large and ailing pension fund. Arcadia, another Green company, is in a similar position. Sir Philip gave insufficient priority to the BHS pension scheme over an extended period. His failure to resolve its problems by now has contributed substantially to the demise of BHS. Sir Philip owes it to the BHS pensioners to find a resolution urgently. This will undoubtedly require him to make a large financial contribution. He has a moral duty to act, a duty which he acknowledges.

Fuller says Green was running a business with 11,000 employees. He criticised the decision to sell BHS to Dominic Chappell.

What goes through the mind of a knight of the realm to say that those livelihoods should be consigned to a three-time bankrupt?

What goes through the mind of the owner of such a substantial business that this, the problems that he has faced and been to him quite challenging, can more easily be solved by someone with zero experience of the industry that they are about to take on?

We are debating today those tangible issues. We are talking about what happened to the pensions, we are talking about what happened to the fact that many people lost their jobs, that there is a symbolic but still quite tangible step that we can take in this House, which is to say that those behaviours do not merit the continuations of an honour.

He says MPs can take the step of saying these behaviours do not merit an honour.

He says some MPs have said they agree Green might not deserve an honour, but they are not sure this is a matter for the Commons. But Fuller says he disagrees. The Commons should intervene, he says.

Richard Fuller.
Richard Fuller. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Updated

Richard Fuller's speech on stripping Philip Green of his knighthood

Richard Fuller, the Conservative MP, is speaking now. He is moving the amendment saying Philip Green should lose his knighthood. (See 9.07am.) Another 113 MPs have signed it, he says.

He says he believes passionately in the good that business can do.

He says he is on the business committee that inquired into BHS. And he says it is assumed that, when things get tough, people will do the right thing.

In business honour is ultimately all you have.

And he says that is why he has tabled this amendment.

MPs debate stripping Philip Green of his knighthood

MPs have just started the debate on BHS. And the Speaker will call the amendment on stripping Sir Philip Green on his knighthood and so we will got a vote - although it is possible that it may get passed without opposition.

Frank Field, the Labour chair of the Commons work and pensions committee, is opening the debate. He is speaking to the motion on the order paper.

That this House notes the recent joint Report by the Business, Innovation and Skills and the Work and Pensions Committees on BHS; endorses that Report’s criticisms of the governance of the company and of the holding company, Taveta Investments Limited; believes that the sale of the company to Retail Acquisitions Limited for £1 was clearly not in the interests of British Home Stores’ employees and pensioners; notes the failure of Sir Philip Green over many years to resolve the deficit in the BHS pension fund; and calls on him to fulfil his promise to do so forthwith.

A draft bill on a second independence referendum has been published by the Scottish government this morning, after first minister Nicola Sturgeon pledged to hold a new poll in the event of a hard Brexit in a direct challenge to UK prime minister Theresa May.

The draft legislation, which was formally unveiled by constitution secretary Derek Mackay, despite the Scottish parliament being in recess until next week, sets out proposals for the rules governing the campaign, the conduct of the poll and how votes are counted.

The proposed franchise would be the same as for the Scottish parliament, ie including 16 and 17-year-olds and citizens of EU countries now living in Scotland.

The eight page document proposes that any referendum would be run in a way similar to 2014, using the same yes/no question “Should Scotland be an independent country?” It also suggests that the vote would similarly not be subject to any minimum turnout requirement or an approval threshold.

Any decision on holding a referendum, including the timing of it, will be for the Scottish parliament - where a pro-independence majority exists between the SNP and the Scottish Greens - to take. Despite Theresa May’s stated intention to oppose another independence poll, Holyrood would then ask the UK government to grant a Section 30 order to allow the vote to take place.

Davis claims Labour harming national interest by demanding detailed Brexit information

Here are the key points from David Davis’s Brexit questions in the Commons.

  • Davis signalled that the government is drawing up plans for a transitional deal that would protect the interests of the City between the UK leaving the EU and a final trade settlement being finalised. Theresa Villiers, the Conservative former Northern Ireland secretary (and leave supporter) told him this should be an “urgent priority” for the government so that City firms do not start planning on the basis of a worst case scenario (ie, losing access to the single market). Davis implied the government was looking at such an option. He told her:

We are seeking to ensure a smooth and orderly exit from the European Union and it would not be in the interests of either side, either Britain or the EU, to see disruption. And to that end we are examining all possible options, as you would expect.

We are approaching these negotiations in good faith and with goodwill towards our negotiating partners, and we hope the same in reverse, focused on a mutual interest to the UK and the EU including financial stability. I would say that having London as a number one financial centre sitting at the heart of the global capital markets is not just in the UK’s interests, it’s also in the EU’s interests, and I’m confident that everyone will see the value in not undermining it.

Hilary Benn, the Labour MP and new chair of the shadow Brexit secretary, said that businesses needed to know now that transitional arrangements would be put in place if there was no deal within two year. Davis told him:

We have to treat as absolutely central to what we do maintaining the stability of both the City but also the European financial markets, and the European financial markets are a little fragile over the last few years. Now we will therefore do anything necessary.

  • Davis said that the government would publish “much information” about its Brexit plans between now and the triggering of article 50, starting the two-year EU withdrawal process. He told MPs:

Over the course of the coming - whether it is six months or less - period before the triggering of article 50, much information will be put out about this and the House will be in no doubt what our aims and strategic objectives are.

  • But he also claimed that Labour was undermining the national interest by demanding detailed information about the government’s Brexit negotiating position. He told MPs:

I’m afraid what [Labour] do is rather seriously not to the country’s interests from time to time ...

What the opposition are trying to do is to put us in a disadvantaged position against the European Union. That is not in the national interest.

David Davis in the Commons.
David Davis in the Commons. Photograph: BBC

Updated

Sir Kevin Barron, chairman of the Commons Standards Committee breached the MPs’ code of conduct by accepting payment for hosting events for a drug company in Parliament, the Press Association reports.

But the committee recommended in a report that no further action was required against Barron following the “minor” and “inadvertent” breach.

The fees received by Barron after sponsoring three events in parliament were donated to charity, and parliamentary standards commissioner Kathryn Hudson concluded the breach of the rules was “at the least serious end of the spectrum” because the MP did not personally benefit.

The report recommended that no further action was required against the Labour MP, who stood aside while the committee examined his case, and the inquiry had raised “no doubts over Kevin Barron’s integrity and honesty”.

Open Britain, the campaign to keep the UK in the single market, says 27,000 people have already backed its campaign calling on Theresa May to guarantee the right of EU nationals to stay in the UK after Brexit. It is calling the campaign #WriteToRemain and it has set up a website to enable people to submit letters to the prime minister about this.

I will post a summary of the key points from Brexit questions in the Commons shortly.

The SNP’s Kirsty Blackman says people in Scotland are worried about being stuck on a small island with perpetual Tory governments. Will Davis commit to fully devolving employment law to Scotland?

Davis says he is the one who has guaranteed that employment rights will not be watered down. He says he is due to meet Mike Russell, the Scottish Brexit minister, to discuss this tomorrow.

Labour’s Nick Thomas-Symonds says the Welsh first minister should have a seat on the UK government’s negotiating team to protect Wales’s interests.

Davis says he met the first minister recently. That is how they will do this, he says.

Labour’s Jenny Chapman, a shadow Brexit minister, asks if the government will continue to make payments to the EU after it has left.

Davis says he will not answer that.

Chapman asks how much the government will have to spend on legacy commitments. She says the Financial Times says these could cost Britain £20bn.

Davis says the European Commission, talking about how it negotiates, says it does not publish its negotiating position. Confidentiality is necessary to achieve a successful outcome, it says. He says Labour is trying to put the government at a disadvantage.

  • Davis accuses Labour of undermining the national interest by demanding details of the government’s negotiating position.

Anna Soubry, a Conservative, asks if he government has prepared draft emergency legislation in case it loses the court case challenging its right to invoke article 50 without a vote.

Davis says ministers do not comment on ongoing court cases.

Sir Bill Cash, a Conservative, says a Lords committee has published a report saying parliament should be consulted before article 50 is invoked. Does Davis think the referendum result should take precedence?

Davis says he has not read the report.

Mark Durkan, the SDLP MP, says employment law is a devolved matter for Northern Ireland. So will it get control of employment law when powers are taken back from the EU.

Davis says there will be discussions with the devolved administrations to make sure powers go to the right place.

Davis says the government has been clear it will “do nothing to undermine workers’ rights” as part of Brexit.

Alistair Burt, a Conservative, says there is significant concern in the agriculture community about leaving the EU.

Walker says there is close cooperation between his department and Defra.

Neil Parish, the Conservative chair of the environment committee, asks for an assurance that the UK will not row back on EU environment standards. Not all EU laws are bad, he says.

Walker says the government wants to maintain environment standards.

Davis says he thinks the EU will want a deal that is good for the UK and good for the EU. That would mean a free trade area, he says.

Labour’s Helen Goodman says leaving the customs union could lead to exporters having to comply with rules or origin rules, increasing costs by 25%. So isn’t the customs union even more important than the single market.

Davis says Norway, which is outside the customs union, trades perfectly well with Sweden. He says these issues are being considered.

Margaret Ritchie, the SDLP MP, asks if the government will explore ways of ensuring Northern Ireland can stay in the single market if the rest of the UK leaves.

Davis says the government is committed to keeping an open border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, and to getting the best access to the single market. He will not go beyond that now, he says.

Labour’s Wes Streeting asks if the government will consider a plan to give London the ability to issue its own work visas to EU citizens.

Walker says the government will do what is best for the UK as a whole.

Alex Salmond, the SNP international affairs spokesman, asks why Philip Hammond yesterday was able to guarantee that foreign bankers will be able to stay in the UK, while not being able to give that guarantee to other hard-working EU nationals.

Walker says Salmond is misrepresenting what Salmond said.

(Actually, Salmond’s summary of what Hammond said is perfectly fair.)

Stephen Metcalfe, the Conservative MP who has just been elected chair of the Commons science committee, asks if the government accepts that an element of free movement must remain. This is important for science, he says.

Robin Walker, a Brexit minister, agrees. He says David Davis in his Conservative party conference said Brexit would not mean pulling up the drawbridge.

David Jones, the Brexit minister, is now answering a question. Davis has been answering them all until now.

He says the government will ensure that EU regional funding sums are guaranteed until 2020.

Stephen Gethins, the SNP’s Europe spokesman, asks when the government will publish its assessment of the impact of Brexit.

Davis says the government is conducting a central assessment. It is looking at the impact of Brexit on 51 different sectors of the economy. And it will take into account regional factors.

Lucy Frazer, a Conservative, asks what the government will do to ensure the UK can still recruit talent from abroad.

Davis says his job is to bring back the power to control immigration. The government will then decide how to use that power. But MPs can be “very confident” that the government will not be limiting the ability of talent to come to the UK.

Updated

Labour’s Ben Bradshaw asks if Davis agrees with Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, that we should leave the customs union, or with Philip Hammond, the chancellor, that we should not.

Davis says he has answered that. (See 9.46am.)

Nigel Mills, a Conservative, says businesses in his constituency want some clarity about what the trading relationship with the UK will be. When will they get that?

Davis says the government’s aims are already clear. On the market front, it wants the best possible access to the EU.

In his question to David Davis, Labour’s Sir Keir Starmer mentioned a letter he had sent to Davis asking for the timetable for the publication of Brexit plans. Here is Starmer’s news release about this.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, says the government has agreed to give MPs a debate on its Brexit plans. When will those plans be availabe?

Davis says the Commons also agreed that any disclosures should not undermine the government’s negotiating position.

He says between now and the triggering of article 50 “much information” will be put out by the government.

  • Davis says the government will publish “much information” about its Brexit plans.

Starmer asks for an assurance that the government does not want to leave the customs union.

Davis says these matters are serious. The government is taking its time. Being inside the customs union has advantages, but cuts off trade deals with other countries. Being outside has some disadvantages, but allows those trade deals to be struck.

Labour’s Pat McFadden asks if the government is ruling out paying for market access to the EU.

Davis says he will not comment on leaks. He says Labour has accepted the ministers should not undermine the government’s negotiating position.

David Davis takes questions on Brexit in the Commons

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, is taking questions in the Commons.

He says financial services will be of great importance in the Brexit talks.

Q: Will he make getting a transitional deal a priority?

Davis says he is seeking an orderly exit from the EU. It will not be in the interests of either side to have disruption. And he says it is in the EU’s interests for the City not to be disrupted.

  • Davis suggests government is open to having transitional arrangements in place when the UK leaves the EU.

Hilary Benn, the Labour MP and new chair of the Brexit select committee goes next. He says uncertainty is a major concern for business. Can Davis guarantee business that the government will seek a transitional arrangement if a free trade deal with the EU cannot be negotiated within two years.

Davis says Benn is right; maintaining stability of the City and the European financial markets is essential. So the government will do “anything necessary”.

But he says at the point of exit all the rules will be the same.

Updated

Backbench debates in the House of Commons often attract very little attention, but today’s may turn out to be remarkable. It seems highly likely that the Commons will vote for Sir Philip Green to be stripped of his knighthood.

MPs are due to debate a motion on the joint report from the Commons business committee and the Commons work and pensions committee into the collapse of BHS. It says Green should fulfil his promise to make good the deficit in the BHS pension fund. But more than 100 MPs have signed an amendment tabled by the Conservative MP Richard Fuller saying Green should lose his knighthood. It says:

[This House] noting that Philip Green received his knighthood for his services for the retail industry, believes his actions raise the question of whether he should be allowed to continue to be a holder of the honour and calls on the honours forfeiture committee to recommend his knighthood be cancelled and annulled.

It would be surprising if John Bercow, the Speaker, does not call the amendment and, assuming it does get called, it is hard to imagine it not being passed. It is not binding, because the final decision on Green’s knighthood would be taken by the honours forfeiture committee, but the committee may find it hard to ignore parliament.

I will be covering the debate in detail.

Otherwise it is a relatively quiet day. Here is the agenda.

9.30am: David Davis, the Brexit secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

9.30am: Quarterly crime figures for England and Wales are published.

9.30am: HM Revenue and Customs publishes its latest tax gap figures.

Around 11.30am: MPs begin debating the backbench motion on Sir Philip Green. The vote will take place mid-afternoon.

Afternoon: Theresa May arrives in Brussels for an EU summit.

There are also byelections taking place in Batley and Spen, and in Witney.

As usual, I will be covering the breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary after the BHS debate.

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

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

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
21 Times Celebrities Shamelessly Lied And People Did Not Go Easy On Them
Celebrities probably lie all the time – it's part of their job. However, sometimes they get caught in a lie by experienced internet sleuths who will stop at no lengths to fact-check their problematic faves. Remember that time Kylie Jenner claimed to have never tried cereal? Or when Soulja Boy…
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
Jon Stewart jokes about chaos as ‘The Bachelorette’ season gets pulled after scandal
Jon Stewart opened his latest commentary by welcoming viewers back from the weekend, though his greeting quickly turned into a sharp jab at the state of current events.
The Fashion Central
The Fashion Central
Woman rents Texas Airbnb, then questions her life choices after secret room discovered in ceiling
We wouldn't sleep a wink.
We Got This Covered
We Got This Covered
Why Kris Jenner Is Pretty 'Who Cares' When It Comes To Negative Fan Reactions To Stuff That Happens On The Show
Like water off a momager's back.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
One Thing Dwayne Johnson Was Extremely Mindful Of With The Moana Live-Action Film (Since The Animated Is 'So Good')
It clearly wasn't that hair.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
When does Daredevil: Born Again season 2 take place in the MCU – and is it a prequel to Spider-Man: Brand New Day?
A larger look at how Daredevil: Born Again season 2 fits into the MCU timeline
Total Film
Total Film
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play