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

Brexit: Greg Clark's Commons statement on the Nissan deal - Politics live

Greg Clark is making a Commons statement on Nissan.
Greg Clark is making a Commons statement on Nissan. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/PA

Greg Clark's Commons statement on Nissan - Summary

Here are the key points from Greg Clark’s Commons statement on Nissan.

It seems to me why would you not aim as a matter of negotiation to avoid bureaucratic impediments. That seems to me common sense. And this is what I set out.

Nick Herbert, another pro-remain Tory, later put the same point to Clark. Clark replied:

What I was able to say is how you would go into a negotiation. That seems to me to find common ground.

  • Clark suggested that the government could seek different trading arrangements with the EU for different sectors of the economy. He also implied there was a regional element to this. In response to a question from the Labour chair of the Commons business committee, Iain Wright, Clark said:

It seems to that the the approach - not only that I intend to take, but that I am already taking - with the firms that are in our economy is to take time to meet them to understand the different needs of different sectors, so that we can be informed by them, as we form our negotiating mandate. It will be different from sector to sector. That’s obviously the case.

My commitment, which we will share when we meet in his committee, is through our industrial strategy to make sure that we not only have confidence for individual sectors, but individual places as well. Because there is a very interesting confluence there, and I think the investment in Nissan is good for the sector, and good for Sunderland and the North East.

Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, later put it to Clark that his reply to Wright implied some sectors of the economy might be offered tariff-free trade with the EU while others would not. Clark did not deny this, but just said it was not in his power to decide the outcome of the talks.

  • Clark gave details of the four assurances he offered to Nissan. (See 6.10pm.)
  • He claimed there was no need for him to publish the letter he wrote to the firm about the support the government was offering. (See 5.29pm.)

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

The Clark statement is over. I will post a summary soon.

Clark gives details of four assurances given to Nissan

Here is the key extract from Greg Clark’s opening statement, where he set out the four assurances given to Nissan. He told MPs:

Through many conversations I, and my colleagues had, here and in Japan, it became clear that four reassurances were important to securing the investment for Britain.

Three were about the automotive sector generally and one was about Brexit.

These were

1 - That we would continue our successful and longstanding programme of support for the competitiveness of the automotive sector, including Nissan.

This support is available to firms for skills and training of the local workforce, for research and development and innovation – in line with EU and UK government rules.

Since 2010 the government has invested £400m into the UK automotive sector in this way and we will continue to invest hundreds of millions more over the coming years.

All proposals of course – from any company – must be underpinned by strong business cases and tested against published eligibility criteria. All proposals are subject to rigorous external scrutiny by the Independent Industrial Development Advisory Board and are reported on to parliament.

2 - We would continue our work with the automotive sector, including Nissan at Sunderland, to ensure that more of the supply chain can locate in the UK, and in close proximity to the major manufacturing sites. In a previous post I established the local growth deals and the city deals which working with Local Enterprise Partnerships, have provided a way in which local councils, businesses and the government can upgrade the sites, especially sites brought into use from dereliction, and to provide the infrastructure for small and medium-sized businesses that can supply these major companies. This programme I can confirm will continue and with vigour

3 - We would maintain a strong commitment to research and development and in particular to the take-up of ultra-low emission vehicles. The opportunities presented by bringing the energy and climate change department together with the business department make us ideally placed to build on Britain’s strengths in low carbon energy, the automotive sector, in science and research and many other areas

4 - In our negotiations to leave the EU we will emphasise the very strong common ground there is especially in the automotive sector between ourselves and other EU member states in ensuring that trade between us can be free and unencumbered by impediments.

A good deal for the UK can also be a good deal for other member states, and that is how we will approach the negotiations. Whatever the outcome we are determined to ensure that the UK continues to be one of the most competitive locations in the world for automotive and other advanced manufacturing.

Back in the Commons Greg Clark says that the Brexit talks have not started, but that the demeanour the government should adopt should be to seek common ground and common interests with EU partners.

Mark Carney to stay on as Bank of England governor until 2019

Turning away from Greg Clark for a moment, it has just been announced that Mark Carney will stay on as governor of the Bank of England until 2019. That is a year longer than originally planned, but not the three-year extension that would have led to him serving a normal eight-year term.

My colleague Graeme Wearden has all the details on his business live blog.

The Conservative Philip Hollobone says this announcement shows that remainers who have become remoaners should be more positive.

Clark says this is an announcement we all should celebrate.

The Sun’s Steve Hawkes thinks MPs are asking the wrong questions.

To be fair the SNP’s Callum McCaig did ask about money. See 5.32pm.

Labour’s Dame Rosie Winterton says there is a worry this could be an isolated deal. She says a firm in Doncaster has laid workers off, citing Brexit as a factor. So does Clark accept the need for regional impact assessment of Brexit.

Clark says the regions have an important role to play in industrial strategy.

Clark says the consequences of positive news like this extend to other sectors too.

Labour’s Tom Blenkinsop says he welcomes Clark’s adoption of “New Labour-style industrial activism”.

Clark says that was a backhanded compliment. He says it was a Conservative government that brought Nissan to the UK.

Here is the Sun’s Steve Hawkes on Clark’s performance.

Nick Herbert, the Conservative former minister, asks how Clark could assure Nissan there would be no bureaucratic impediments to trade with the EU if the UK was outside the customs union.

Clark says he was talking about the stance the government adopted when it went into negotiations.

Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, says Clark seems to be implying that some sectors will get tariff-free access to the EU, and others won’t. Is that right?

Clark says that it makes sense to ask what different sectors need.

Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative chair of the Treasury committee, says Clark told the BBC yesterday that he wanted the UK to be able to trade without bureaucratic impediments. Does he accept that rules of origins rule would mean, that if the UK were outside the customs union, there would be such impediments?

Clark says he wants the best possible deal.

Clark says it is obvious that both sides would benefit from tariff-free trade.

Michael Gove, the Conservative former education secretary, says that for years Labour MPs have wanted an activist industrial policy, focused on getting jobs for working-class people. So why aren’t Labour MPs welcoming this news?

John Bercow, the Speaker, says Clark is not responsible for Labour policy.

Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative former work and pensions secretary, suggests that Nissan wanted to stay because the UK would be able to negotiate new trade deals outside the EU, and they would benefit.

Clark welcomes Duncan Smith’s support, but does not address this particular point.

The SNP’s energy spokesman, Callum McCaig, asks how much the deal offered to Nissan could cost the taxpayer.

And since the government is offering a flexible Brexit to the City, will it offer a flexible Brexit to Scotland too.

He says Nissan got a letter of comfort. But Scotland and the other devolved administrations only got a hotline - and one that takes 36 hours to answer.

Clark says there is a clear common interest for all EU countries in having tariff-free arrangements, given that car components go back and forth between countries in the manufacturing process.

Clark says he does not see the need to publish his letter to Nissan

Clark is replying to Lewis.

He says he is surprised Labour’s response to the news has been so miserable.

Labour should not abandon a cross-party, long-term approach to inward investment, he says.

He says as a minister he has focused on getting to know the long-term concerns of investors.

He says he wants to get the best possible terms of trade with the EU.

And he is determined to keep the motor industry competitive.

On the subject of whether he will publish his letter to Nissan, he says he has set out what it contains.

But companies need to know that, when they share information with the government, their investment plans will not be disclosed to their competitors.

  • Clark says he does not see the need to publish his letter to Nissan.

Clark says MPs know that, when he works to attract inward investment to the UK, he does not do so on a partisan basis.

Greg Clark.
Greg Clark. Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Clive Lewis, the shadow business secretary, is responding for Labour.

He welcomes the Nissan investment.

But he says it is not clear what the government offered Nissan.

It seems to have offered the equivalent of the philosopher’s stone - tariff-free access to the single market, but with no concessions, he says.

He asks why other businesses are not getting similar assurances.

Piecemeal, backroom deals do not amount to an industrial strategy, he says.

He says if the government has got nothing to hide, it should show MPs the letter.

Clive Lewis
Clive Lewis Photograph: BBC/BBC Parliament

Greg Clark is giving his Commons statement now.

He says four assurances were essential to persuade Nissan to make its investment.

First, he says the government said it would continue its policy of making the automative industry competitive.

Second, he said it would continue to ensure that car manufacturers can have all of their supply chain in the UK.

Third, he said the government would could continue to back research and development, particularly in low-emission cars.

And, fourth, he said the government would seek to protect the car industry in the Brexit talks.

Greg Clark's statement on Brexit and government support for Nissan

Greg Clark, the business secretary, is starting a Commons statement about Brexit and the government support for Nissan. Nissan announced last week that it would build the next Qashqai and X-Trail models at Sunderland after receiving assurances from the government that it would not lose out from Brexit. Clark has not published the letter the government gave to Nissan that helped secure the investment, but he spoke about the assurances in some detail yesterday in an interview that shed considerable light on how the government will approach Brexit.

Over the summer, and at the Conservative conference, Theresa May suggested that her Brexit priority would be getting control of immigration, even if that meant limiting access to the single market. Clark’s comments yesterday suggested that in recent weeks there may have been something of a rethink, because he implied Downing Street want a free trade relationship similar to the single market and customs union.

Clark’s interview has already prompted much analysis. Here are three articles worth reading.

Describing his talks with Nissan executives, Clark told Marr: “What I said was that our objective would be to ensure that we would have continued access to the markets in Europe – and vice-versa – without tariffs and without bureaucratic impediments and that is how we will approach those negotiations.

“For the continental European car manufacturers, they export a lot to us, we export a lot to them, components go backwards and forwards. If you conduct the negotiations in a serious, constructive and civilised way there is a lot in common that we can establish. I was able to reassure Nissan – and other manufacturers – that that is the way we are going to approach it.”

This implies that the business department regards access to the EU single market must at the least be set alongside control of migration and UK borders as a negotiating objective.

The aim, according to one minister, is for the outcome to feel like the UK is in the EU single market without being a member.

There is absolutely zero chance that Monsieur Barnier would permit the UK to have one of the things it prizes the most – the automotive single market– without extracting a concession on the issue that exercises Central and Eastern European states the most: migration.

Some of the animus among the Visegrad, Baltic and Balkan nations will be assuaged with direct financial contributions from Britain but a blanket ban on free movement is politically impossible in the EU.

The firmness of Britain’s commitments to Nissan mean that the British government knows that it has to accept a compromise on this issue.

Here is the full statement from Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, on the Orgreave announcement.

The victims and their families have been treated shamefully by this government.

The campaigners were led to believe only that there was debate on the form of Inquiry, but Amber Rudd and Theresa May have led them up them up the garden path.

The South Yorkshire police chief constable is in favour of an inquiry, as are many stakeholders, and of course the campaigners themselves.

The current and previous home secretaries both indicated that an Inquiry would be granted.

This is a shameful decision, which ignores the need for truth and justice.

Labour stands with the campaigners and will not rest until there is a full Hillsborough-style inquiry.

Here is a Guardian video of Labour MPs responding to Amber Rudd’s Commons statement.

Orgreave inquiry: Burnham accuses Rudd of ‘nakedly political act’ – video

Here is some more political reaction to Amber Rudd’s decision not to hold an inquiry into Orgreave.

From Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem leader and former deputy prime minister and a Sheffield MP

From Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader

From Frances O’Grady, the TUC general secretary

From Dave Prentis, the Unison general secretary

From Caroline Lucas, the Green party co-leader

Turning back to Ukip and Raheem Kassam for a moment, the Mirror’s Dan Bloom says the Times has responded to claims a Times journalist harrassed and intimidated Kassam’s parents. (See 9.43am.)

Osborne reprimanded for not seeking watchdog's advice before launching Northern Powerhouse Partnership

George Osborne has been criticised by a cabinet office lobbying committee for failing to declare his Northern Powerhouse Partnership to the watchdog before it was announced.

The government’s advisory committee on public appointments sent a critical letter to the former chancellor for failing to consult them before his non-profit organisation was announced in a blaze of publicity.

Though it said the Treasury had no concerns about the project, Osborne should have given prior warning, the committee said.

“The committee noted with concern that you sought advice on this appointment after you had launched the Northern Powerhouse Partnership,” Lady Browning, the committee’s chair, said in a letter to Osborne.

The committee is unable to offer retrospective advice on appointments that have already been announced. Nonetheless, it would draw your attention to the normal restriction it would impose prohibiting the misuse of privileged information obtained while in public office.

The committee notes that in seeking to promote economic development in the North of England, this role will involve some dealings with government. However, it would expect you to refrain from making use, directly or indirectly, of privileged access derived from your role as a minister to influence government policy on behalf of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership.

Lib Dem leader Tim Farron said:

The chancellor has been rapped over the knuckles for not following due process; having been in the government for the last few years he should know these rules and abide by them.

It’s not good enough for him to bend the ministerial code simply to try and protect his failing Northern Powerhouse project.

George Osborne at the launch of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership.
George Osborne at the launch of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership. Photograph: Paul Ellis/AFP/Getty Images

At the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign press briefing Kevin Horne, a former miner who was arrested at Orgreave, He said that campaigners had been “misled” and that their fight for justice would go on.

We do think we’ve been misled. What do we tell the families whose dads are dead, whose grandads are dead. We’ve got to go home with our tails between our legs and say we’ve failed. But we will go on. We will keep at it until we do get a decision. It might take a change of government. It will be there one day, same as Hillsborough.

He also said he did not accept Amber Rudd’s point about Orgreave being different from Hillsborough because, as Rudd put it in her statement, “ultimately there were no deaths or wrongful convictions” at Orgreave. Horne said:

Hillsborough got justice. And we haven’t got any justice. There is no time limit on justice. I don’t understand these questions. Should we pursue child sex [cases]? Should we not look for war criminals? I don’t understand these questions, I really don’t.

He also said that the government had gone back on assurances that there would be an inquiry.

Theresa May sounded really positive when we met her. And then Amber Rudd [was] talking about formats for an inquiry. And now today we’ve just been custard-pied. We are really disappointed, to say the least. The fight will go on, there’s no doubt about that.

Kevin Horne, an Orgreave Truth and Justice campaigner
Kevin Horne, an Orgreave Truth and Justice campaigner Photograph: Sky News

Corbyn says he is 'appalled' by Orgreave decision

Here is Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, on the Orgreave decision.

The Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign are holding a press briefing at Westminster. They say that, when they met Amber Rudd earlier this year, she said that she would hold an inquiry, and that the only thing she needed to decide was what form it would take.

Here is a Reality Check from my colleague Denis Campbell about how much extra money is going into the NHS.

Updated

Sarah Wollaston, the Conservative chair of the Commons health committee, says that although Hunt does not agree with her committee’s view of the £10bn figure, she is sticking to it.

Hunt says he respects Wollaston. But he does not agree with Wollaston’s letter, and he thinks her calculations are wrong. The government has never claimed there was an extra £10bn going into the department for health’s budget, he says. He says the NHS asked for an extra £8bn over five years. It has got £10bn extra over six years. Or an extra £9bn over five years. Whichever figure you choose, it is bigger than £8bn over five years, he says.

Hunt is replying to Ashworth.

He says Labour cut health spending in Wales.

He says if Labour thinks the NHS is underfunded, it must accept that its policies at the last two elections were wrong.

Jon Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, told Hunt his figures had been discredited by the Commons health committee. He said they could only be more discredited if they were put on the side of a bus and driven around by Boris Johnson.

Hunt answers urgent question on NHS funding

Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, has just replied to an urgent question about NHS funding.

He said health spending had increased in real terms every year since 2010, and increased in real terms every year too.

He said health spending was 10% higher than the OECD average, and about the same as the EU average.

He said the NHS put forward its own plan for the future in 2015. It asks for a minimum of £8bn extra, and for this to be frontloaded, he said

But the NHS will receive an increase of £10bn over six years, he said. It would go up from £98.1bn in 2014-15 to £119.9bn in 2020-21, he said.

Updated

In the Commons Yvette Cooper, the Labour MP and new chair of the Commons home affairs committee, challenges Rudd over what she said about their being no miscarriage of justice at Orgreave. (See 2.53pm.) She says that 95 miners were charged and that some were remanded in custody before charges were dropped.

Rudd says that she made the decision carefully, having assessed whether there was a case for public inquiry. She does not address the miscarriage of justice point directly.

And here is some more reaction to Rudd’s decision from Labour MPs.

From Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary

From Dan Jarvis

From Ben Bradshaw

From Michael Dugher

From Mike Kane

From Stephen Kinnock

Jon Trickett has also accused Amber Rudd of not holding an inquiry into Orgreave to protect Margaret Thatcher.

Labour says it would hold an inquiry into Orgreave

Jon Trickett, Labour’s national campaign coordinator, says Labour will hold an inquiry into Orgreave it it wins the election.

One consequence of Amber Rudd’s decision is that it shows Nick Timothy’s doesn’t run the country (or at least, not every day). This is what Timothy, the prime minister’s co-chief of staff, wrote earlier this year in a blog calling for an inquiry.

Of course, some people will argue that as we are talking about events that took place more than thirty years ago, we should let sleeping dogs lie. But the Hillsborough Independent Panel inquiry showed that sleeping dogs in South Yorkshire Police lied, lied and lied again, not just about their own conduct but about the victims and other football supporters. If we want to prevent that from happening in future, if we want to make sure the police are above corruption, collusion and cover-ups, we need to know when and how these things have been allowed to happen in the past ...

The economy needed to be reformed, the unions needed to be faced down, and unprofitable pits needed to be closed. But if the police pre-planned a mass, unlawful assault on the miners at Orgreave, and then sought to cover up what they did and arrest people on trumped-up charges, we need to know.

The Liberal Democrats have criticised Rudd’s decision. This is from Brian Paddick, the former police officer who is the party’s home affairs spokesman.

People deserve answers about what happened at Orgreave. We must have confidence in our police forces and avoid any suggestion that there may have been a stitch-up by people in power to try to cover up wrong doing.

A full and proper inquiry is required to restore trust and confidence and I am dismayed that the home secretary has failed to establish one.

Sarah Champion, who has Orgreave in her Rotherham constituency, said campaigners had travelled down to London to watch in the public gallery, on the understanding they would be met by the Home Office and hear an inquiry announced. She said:

I am beyond shocked about this, I am incredibly frustrated for the people who will never see justice, for years research has been done by the Orgreave Truth and Justice Committee, and evidence gathered by the IPCC, and this feels like a complete snub to the people of South Yorkshire. So this is what they think of us.

And Liberty, the human rights organisation, has described Rudd’s decision as “deeply disappointing”.

The Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign has tweeted this.

Amber Rudd's Orgreave statement - Summary

Here are the key points from Amber Rudd’s statement explaining why she has rejected calls for an inquiry into Orgreave.

  • Rudd says that an Orgreave inquiry would produce “very few lessons” for modern policing and that this makes it hard to justify an inquiry.

There would ... be very few lessons for the policing system today to be learned from any review of the events and practices of three decades ago. This is a very important consideration when looking at the necessity for an inquiry or independent review and the public interest to be derived from holding one.

  • She says policing has changed “fundamentally” since 1994, and she implies this makes it very unlikely that the Orgreave events could happen again.

There have been very significant changes in the oversight of policing since 1984, at every level, including major reforms to criminal procedure, changes to public order policing and practice, stronger external scrutiny and greater local accountability.

The operational delivery and practice of public order policing has moved on a great deal from the arrangements in 1984, and tactics have now been reviewed and altered several times both by the police and the courts.

Protections which were singularly lacking at the time of Orgreave now exist with the introduction in the mid-80s of the Police & Criminal Evidence Act which has vastly improved the way police investigations and powers operate.

The creation of the Crown Prosecution Service in 1986, with the introduction of independent CPS prosecutors, fundamentally altered the prosecution of offences. It ended the existence of ad hoc prosecution arrangements across the country whereby a mixture of police prosecutors and private firms of solicitors - hired by the police and acting for and on the instruction of the police – conducted prosecutions.

With regards to the external scrutiny of complaints against the police, this was strengthened by the creation, in 1985, of the Police Complaints Authority which was replaced in 2004 by the more effective Independent Police Complaints Commission and in turn will be replaced by the Office for Police Conduct in 2017. The exemplary standards of behaviour expected of everyone who works in policing were reinforced by the introduction of a statutory Code of Ethics, laid before this House in 2014.

Lastly, the introduction of directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners in 2012 has given the public a voice in shaping their local policing priorities and improved the accountability of police leadership.

  • She says she is not convinced that a proper investigation into Orgreave at the time would have prevented the Hillsborough tragedy.

The campaigners say that had the consequences of the events at Orgreave been addressed properly at the time, the tragic events at Hillsborough would never have happened five years later. That is not a conclusion which I believe can be reached with any certainty.

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, says a letter from Rudd will not compensate for not having an inquiry. The police lied at Orgreave, she says. It was similar to Hillsborough.

Rudd says Hillsborough was very different. No one died at Orgreave, she says. And there were no miscarriages of justice, she says.

And that is it - for now. The questions on Orgreave are over, although the topic might come up again in the chamber when Rudd takes topical questions (ie, questions on anything, not on topics submitted in advance) after 3.15pm.

Rudd says she spoke to the head of the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign this morning. She has also sent the campaign a six-page letter. She understands why they are disappointed.

Sir Edward Leigh, a Conservative, suggests the government should set up a Commons select committee to carry out its own inquiry.

Rudd says that is an interesting idea. Existing select committees could do this, she suggests.

Labour’s Andy Burnham says Rudd has announced an “establishment stitch-up” that amounts to a “nakedly political act”.

Rudd says she has made her decision honestly, based on the evidence.

Rudd says the easier decision would have been to have an inquiry. But she cannot see how it would be in the public interest given the substantial changes to policing since the 1980s.

Dennis Skinner, the Labour MP, says Theresa May said there would be an inquiry into Orgreave when she was home secretary. Why has the government changed its mind?

Rudd says she has taken this very seriously, and spoken to May about this. There was no commitment made before, she says, only a willingness to look at all the papers – a willingness Labour did not show when it was in government.

Updated

Rudd says South Yorkshire police is under new leadership. She hopes it can make good progress.

In the Commons Amber Rudd has just said she has concluded there is no case for a review.

Labour’s Chris Matheson says this is a shameful decision. The government has led these families up the garden path, he says.

Rudd says the government has taken the time and looked at the document. She has met with the families and with the campaigning MPs. The fact she has taken a different decision does not make it dishonourable, she says.

Here is my colleague Alan Travis’s full story on this.

Hilary Benn says Rudd's Orgreave decision is 'shameful'

Amber Rudd is about to be asked about her decision in the Commons.

The Labour MP Hilary Benn has tweeted this response.

The home secretary, Amber Rudd, has rejected the possibility of an inquiry into the so-called “Battle of Orgreave”, the brutal clash between the police and miners during the 1984 miners’ strike.

The long-awaited decision will be regarded as a bitter blow to former miners and campaigners who hoped an inquiry would establish clear links between the misconduct by the South Yorkshire police atduring the Hillsborough disaster and their behaviour five years earlier at Orgreave.

But the home secretary Rudd ruled out any kind of inquiry, saying said that there could be very few lessons for the policing system of today to be learned from any review of the events of 30 years ago.

“This has been a difficult decision to make, and one which I have thought about very carefully. I have now concluded that there is not a sufficient basis for me to instigate either a statutory inquiry or an independent review,” said the home secretary in a Commons written statement.

“I know that this decision will come as a significant disappointment to the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign and its supporters and I have set out in a letter to them today the detailed reasons for my decision which include the following points.

“Despite the forceful accounts and arguments provided by the campaigners and former miners who were present that day, about the effect that these events have had on them, ultimately there were no deaths or wrongful convictions,” she told MPs.

The brutal clash on 18 June 1984 between 6,000 police officers from forces across the country and thousands of striking miners during a mass picket at coking works in South Yorkshire was a key moment in the 1980s’ miners’ strike.

Rudd says an Orgreave inquiry would produce 'very few lessons for the policing system today'

Here is an extract from Amber Rudd’s statement justifying her decision not to order an inquiry into Orgreave.

Despite the forceful accounts and arguments provided by the campaigners and former miners who were present that day, about the effect that these events have had on them, ultimately there were no deaths or wrongful convictions.

There have been very significant changes in the oversight of policing since 1984, at every level, including major reforms to criminal procedure, changes to public order policing and practice, stronger external scrutiny and greater local accountability.

There would therefore be very few lessons for the policing system today to be learned from any review of the events and practices of three decades ago.

Updated

Rudd says there will be no Orgreave inquiry

The Home Office has announced that there will be no Orgreave inquiry. The Press Association has just snapped this.

There will be no statutory inquiry or independent review into the notorious clash between police and miners at Orgreave in 1984, home secretary Amber Rudd has announced.

Burnham warns of 'establishment stitch-up' as Rudd prepares to announce Orgreave inquiry

Amber Rudd, the home secretary, is taking questions in the Commons this afternoon. The second question on the order paper, from the Labour MP Chris Matheson, is about when she plans to announce an inquiry into events at Orgreave and it is expected that the announcement will come in her reply.

My colleague Alan Travis has filed a preview story.

On the World at One Andy Burnham, the former shadow home secretary and now Labour’s candidate for mayor of Greater Manchester, said he was worried that Rudd was going to announce a limited form of inquiry, amounting to a judge-led review of evidence. He said he feared that could amount to an “establishment stitch-up”. He told the programme:

The point I have made in response to that is that’s precisely what the Hillsborough families were offered in 1998. That was an establishment stitch-up, and that led to the Hillsborough cover-up lasting another decade. So if that is the announcement then that will fall short of what the campaign and others have been calling for.

He also said there were very strong parallels between the way South Yorkshire police behaved at Orgreave and the way they behaved at Hillsborough five years later.

As we learn more about the injustices of the past, and the 1980s, we’ve got to be prepared wherever the evidence takes us, however difficult that might be. And, after Hillsborough, that evidence trail led directly to the door of Orgreave. Same police force, same tactics. They tried to put the miners in the worst possible light after the events at Orgreave.

Lunchtime summary

I don’t think I’m going to be backing anyone at the moment. It’s a poor state of affairs if those [Paul Nuttall and Suzanne Evans] are the two choices. On a personal level I like Paul a great deal. But I think a number of the people that he associates with, particularly Suzanne Evans and Douglas Carswell, I really just don’t get on with ... The problem is the party’s executive has been taken over by supporters of these people.

Banks also said in the light of the announcement that he might stop funding Ukip. Asked if he would carry on giving money to the party, he replied:

I don’t know. I will have to see what happens and what emerges. But I’m certainly not impressed with it so far.

  • Downing Street has said that Theresa May wants Mark Carney to stay on as governor of the Bank of England until 2021. My colleague Graeme Wearden has more on this on his business live blog.
Boris Johnson with US secretary of state John Kerry and other European foreign ministers at the Foreign Office in London holding talks about Libya.
Boris Johnson with US secretary of state John Kerry and other European foreign ministers at the Foreign Office in London holding talks about Libya. Photograph: Yui Mok/PA
  • The Living Wage Foundation has announced new living wage rates. Its living wage, which is set at a rate calculated on the basis of what workers need to live, is not the same as the government’s “national living wage”, a beefed-up minimum wage. The foundation said in a news release:

The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan today announced that the new London Living Wage has increased from £9.40 to £9.75 per hour to reflect the higher cost of living facing families in the city – an increase of 3.7 per cent. This year over 300 more London-based employers have signed up to pay their staff the hourly rate required to make ends meet in the capital, bringing the number of London Living Wage employers to nearly 1000.

The UK rate has increased by 2.4% from £8.25 to £8.45. This is 17% higher than the government minimum for over 25s which is £7.20 per hour. And in total nearly 1,000 employers have signed up since Living Wage Week last year bringing the total number of accredited Living Wage organisations to nearly 3000.

Raheem Kassam is now backing Peter Whittle, the Ukip member of the London assembly, for the Ukip leadership. (See 9.43am.) Whittle was on the Daily Politics earlier and said he wanted Ukip to replace Labour as the main opposition to the Tories.

The Lib Dems are confident that Nigel Farage’s endorsement of Zac Goldsmith will come back to haunt the newly independent candidate in his Richmond Park seat on polling day. On a walk around Richmond town centre with the Lib Dem candidate, Sarah Olney, Nick Clegg, the latest big name brought in to boost the campaign, was keen to stress the temporary Ukip leader’s support for Goldsmith to constituents who stopped to chat. He said:

For all those people who were originally attracted to Zac Goldsmith as a modern, idealist, attractive, faintly glamorous ... minor royal, for those people, if you look back to his demeanour (when he was first elected), I think many people will be gobsmacked that he’s now Nigel Farage’s favoured candidate.

The Lib Dems projected an aura of confidence about their chances with Olney declaring her chances of winning at 10/10. She said it could not be a referendum on Heathrow as there was no candidate in favour of a third runway while Clegg said Goldsmith had been unable to stop the government taking the Heathrow decision when a Tory so would be even less influential as an independent. He recalled:

All the hours and hours I spoke to David Cameron and George Osborne (about Heathrow)... Goldsmith’s name never came up. Boris Johnson’s did, they were worried about Boris Johnson (and his opposition to Heathrow).

There appeared to be plenty of support for the Lib Dems from passers-by, with Heathrow and Brexit - around 70 per cent of Richmond voters backed remain in the referendum - the big topics of concern.

Elizabeth, a floating voter said: “We all feel very unsettled [by the Brexit vote].” She told Clegg she wanted to see a more proactive approach by the government.

Sarah Olney said a Lib Dems victory in Richmond Park would tell the government “their current approach [to Brexit] is broken”. Olney, who lives in the north Kingston part of the ward, only joined the party after the 2015 election and until recently there was speculation the party would parachute in a big name candidate.

But, on Monday, Clegg was there to provide the glamour. It was the former Lib Dems leader in charming “I agree with Nick form” who attracted the passers-by and who people wanted their picture taken with.

Outside a coffee shop, a woman said: “ I’m trying to think of your name, Nick somebody.” Inside longstanding Richmond tapas restaurant Don Fernando, Clegg was able to show off his Spanish, presumably picked up from his wife, with a member of staff who subsequently complimented him, albeit Clegg received it somewhat sheepishly.

“You did alright when you were with David Cameron,” the restaurant worker said.

“It didn’t exactly end well,” deadpanned Clegg.

Nick Clegg with Sarah Olney campaigning in Richmond Park
Nick Clegg with Sarah Olney campaigning in Richmond Park Photograph: Haroon Siddique

We’re also getting an urgent question on health funding, according to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

We’re getting a statement from Greg Clark, the business secretary, on Nissan this afternoon, after one from Damian Green, the work and pensions secretary, on the work, health and disability green paper.

No 10 lobby briefing - Summary

Here are the key points from the Number 10 lobby briefing.

  • Theresa May thinks Mark Carney is the best person to be governor of the Bank of England and wants him to stay, the prime minister’s spokeswoman said. Asked whether May wanted him to stay on, the spokeswoman said:

The prime minister has been clear in her support for the governor and the work he is doing for the country. It is clearly a decision for him but the prime minister would certainly be supportive of him going on beyond his five years.

Pressed on whether May saw the governor as “the right man for the job”, the spokeswoman replied: “Absolutely.”

  • The spokeswoman refused to be drawn on whether Greg Clark’s comments yesterday meant the government wanted the UK to remain in the EU customs union. (See 9.25am.) Asked about this, the spokeswoman said that May made it clear in the Commons last week that she did not see staying in or leaving the customs union as a binary choice.
  • The spokeswoman sidestepped a question about whether May Nadhim Zahawi’s call for the UK to continue to pay money into the EU’s budget when it leaves. Zahawi was a leading pro-Brexit campaigner, but in an article in the Mail on Sunday yesterday he argued that paying money into the EU budget after Brexit would be worth it to stop the EU being damaged and to preserve access to the single market. Asked if May welcomed this proposal, the spokeswoman said May had been clear that in future “decisions on taxpayers’ money should be taken in the UK”.
  • Downing Street rejected the claim from Dr Sarah Wollaston and other members of the Commons health committee about the government’s claim that the NHS is getting an extra £10bn being misleading. (See 9.12am.) The spokeswoman said:

[There will] be an increase in real-terms funding of £10bn by 2021. This is [the sum] that NHS leaders told us they needed and we have delivered on it.

10 Downing Street
10 Downing Street Photograph: Dylan Martinez/Reuters

May thinks Carney best man for job of Bank of England governor and wants him to stay, No 10 says

I’m back from the Number 10 lobby briefing. The main point to emerge was that the prime minister’s spokeswoman gave strong backing to Mark Carney, saying that Theresa May would like him to stay on as Bank of England governor.

I will post a summary soon.

These are from Sky’s Faisal Islam.

This is from Channel 4 News’s Michael Crick on Raheem Kassam.

I’m off to the Number 10 lobby briefing now. I will post again after 11.30am.

What Kassam's announcement means - A 3-point analysis

Until about a fortnight ago Raheem Kassam was a figure largely unknown outside Ukip circles. He was one of Nigel Farage’s chief advisers in the run-up to the 2015 and was credited/blamed for encouraging Farage to adopt increasingly hard right positions, especially on immigration. When he announced his leadership bid he seemed an unlikely candidate, partly because of his age (30) but more because his Twitter feed is littered with offensive comments that make Donald Trump sound diplomatic, but he campaigned energetically, and was good at generating publicity. Given the internal dynamics of Ukip, his decision to withdraw from the contest may be more significant than it looks.

Here are three takeaways from the announcement.

1 - Paul Nuttall is now even firmer favourite to win than he was. His main rival is Suzanne Evans, the party’s former deputy chairwoman. Evans is a strong media performer but, as her interview with the Guardian at the weekend showed, one many issues her views don’t square with traditional Ukip thinking. A survey of Ukip councillors last week showed Nuttall well ahead.

2 - Nigel Farage is losing his grip on the party. Kassam was running as the Faragist candidate. “Our legacy is Nigel, Nigel is our legacy,” he said at his campaign launch last Friday. Now there does not seem to be a strong Faragist candidate in the contest, although Kassam is urging his supporters to back Peter Whittle, the leader of the (two-man) Ukip group on the London assembly.

3 - Arron Banks, the millionaire Ukip donor who was supposedly backing Kassam, was not willing to fund him properly. Kassam announced he had Banks’ backing less than two weeks ago. But today Kassam says he cannot afford a proper campaign, implying that Banks is not willing to bankroll him. Banks is planning to fund an online “People’s Movement”, sometimes seen as a Ukip version of Momentum, and today’s news will reinforce suspicions that he is more interested in this than in continuing to fund Ukip. This morning, on Twitter, Banks has been coy about his plans.

In response to this

Banks tweeted

Raheem Kassam launching his bid for the Ukip leadership last week. Today he has pulled out.
Raheem Kassam launching his bid for the Ukip leadership last week. Today he has pulled out. Photograph: Neil Hall/Reuters

Updated

Raheem Kassam withdraws from Ukip leadership contest

Raheem Kassam has announced that he is pulling out of the Ukip leadership contest. Kassam, a former aide to Nigel Farage who was running as the continuity Farage candidate, was always a relative outsider, and in a statement he says he is suspending his campaign because he has decided he cannot win.

Paul Nuttall, the former deputy Ukip leader, was already the strong favourite, and Kassam’s move means his chances of winning are now even higher.

Here is his statement in full.

As of today, I am formally suspending my campaign for UKIP leader.

After much consideration, I have decided not to pursue my campaign to be UKIP leader any further. This was a very difficult decision, and I want to thank everyone who supported me in the process.

It is a decision I have not taken lightly, but following meetings this weekend I realised the path to victory is too narrow. I would encourage my supporters to back Peter Whittle, who I think would make a fantastic leader of the party.

On their own, the following issues would not have caused me to take this decision, but taken together, the following reasons created an impossible route forward for me:

1. The top of the party is treating this like a coronation: I am not satisfied about the integrity of the process, and having put a number of complaints in to the party chairman, I was disappointed that incidents whereby Members of the European Parliament are using party databases to effectively campaign against me – ostensibly against the rules – were not challenged.

2. Disgraceful treatment by the media: I am tough and I can take it, but whenTimes journalists show up at my elderly parents’ house at dusk, intimidating them, I draw the line. Billy Kenber at the Times has a lot to answer for and I will be pursuing a harassment complaint further.

3. Fundraising: While we raised enough for our deposit, and got over 200 assentors to my nomination, we could not raise enough for this to be more than a digital campaign run from SW1, and to not feature at events all around the country would have made me a hypocrite, given how much I criticise the establishment for ignoring the country.

Over the next few weeks I will be providing a statement of accounts for all my donors, and in-keeping with my money pledge on my website, I will be giving them the choice as to what happens with the remainder of the money they donated. I will suggest we either: donate to the Royal British Legion or Help for Heroes, donate to the party, donate to Peter Whittle’s campaign. Those who want refunds are welcome to contact me.

I wish the UK Independence Party and whoever its new leader is all the best in ensuring Brexit happens, and in the upcoming electoral tests next year. I remain commited to the causes of the UK Independence Party, but sadly, at this campaign, it was a bridge too far for us.

I will be continuing at my job as Editor in Chief of Breitbart London, returning to the United States this week to cover the last leg of the presidential elections.

Updated

NHS Providers, a group representing hospitals, has put out a statement backing what the MPs from the health committee are saying. This is from Chris Hopson, its chief executive.

We share the health committee’s concerns that short term pressures, combined with cuts to public health, social care and capital funding, risk overwhelming the NHS’ ability to provide the quality of care we all want when funding increases significantly tail off from 2017/18 onwards. This points to an inevitable conclusion – that we need a new financial settlement for both the NHS and social care system that places both on a more sustainable footing.

As my colleague Patrick Wintour explains in a detailed analysis of what Greg Clark, the business secretary, said yesterday about the assurances the government has offered Nissan, Clark implied that he wants the UK to remain in the EU customs union.

This morning Damian Green, the work and pensions secretary, was asked on the Today programme if Britain would remain in the customs union. We should assume nothing, he replied.

Assume nothing at the moment because, I think, a lot of this discussion tends to be fairly simple, fairly black and white.

Autumn and winter are always the seasons when the state of the NHS becomes a growing concern and, right on cue, a day after the clocks went back, health funding is on the front pages. The Guardian has splashed with the news that five MPs, including Sarah Wollaston, the Conservative who chairs the Commons health committee, have written to the Treasury saying it should stop claiming that it has put an extra £10bn into the NHS because that’s not true. Here’s our story.

The Daily Telegraph has also got this on its front, but it has headlined on the revelation that almost half of health authorities are planning to close hospital beds.

This morning Wollaston has been on the Today programme defending her claims that the government’s £10bn ‘extra money for the NHS’ figure is wrong. She told the programme.

Well, it’s only technically correct if you’re looking at spending on NHS England and you add an extra year to the spending review and you also take account of the switch from other budgets that we would normally think of as health spending. So, for example, you can only arrive at the £10bn by shifting money from public health budgets and from health education and training, and also by changing the date at which you calculate real terms increases. So, yes, you can see how they have arrived at the figure. But the real figure we feel should be quoted at £4.5bn which is considerably less ... That’s over the period of the spending review and that’s the period that we usually talk about increases in spending. We wouldn’t normally, say for other government departments, just add an extra year.

She also rejected the claim that Simon Stevens, NHS England’s chief executive, has said that the government has given him what he wants. In fact, health spending is due to fall on a per head basis towards the end of this parliament, she said.

[Stevens] was very clear when he came before our committee during our inquiry that if you look at the middle years, next year and the year after, we are going to be seeing a far more constrained situation, and certainly not what he asked for. So, certainly, for 2018-19 we will be seeing a per capita fall in funding for the NHS at a time when our demographics [are changing], the increase in older people, a 21% increase in the number of people over 65 in the last decade up to 2015.

Here is a clip from Wollaston’s interview.

I will report more on this if the story moves on.

Otherwise, it’s a patchy day. Here is the agenda.

10am: The Orgreave Truth and Justice campaign holds a meeting ahead of an announcement expected today from Amber Rudd, the home secretary, about whether to hold an inquiry into allegations of police rigged evidence after a clash between police and miners at Orgreave in 1984.

10.25am: Nick Clegg, the former Lib Dem leader, campaigns in the Richmond Park byelection.

11am: Number 10 lobby briefing.

12pm: Nominations close in the Ukip leadership contest.

Afternoon: The department for work and pensions publishes its health and work green paper.

Also today Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, is holding talks today with his US counterpart John Kerry about Libya.

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 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
“We played a song or two, and I said, ‘Hey, you guys want to jam on some Isley Brothers?’ Nobody laughed”: Les Claypool looks back on his disastrous Metallica audition
Following the death of the sorely missed Cliff Burton, James Hetfield and co. auditioned the bassist of the then-emerging band Primus
Guitar World
Guitar World
The Hulk may be hiding in plain sight in one of the Spider-Man: Brand New Day teasers
Marvel fans think one of Spider-Man: Brand New Day's teasers includes the Hulk, but we just can't see him
Total Film
Total Film
MCU Stars Are Spoiler Experts At This Point, But I’m Still Amused By Chris Pratt Evading Avengers: Doomsday Questions
Star-Lord isn't spilling the beans.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Val Kilmer set to be be resurrected with AI for new film
As Deep As the Grave, the true story of 1920s archeologists, will bring late actor back with support from his estate
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
If you think your toddler’s often ill, you’re right – what going to nursery means for catching colds and building immunity
There’s no nice way to put it: small children are snotty. A research study that tested children for multiple respiratory viruses every week for a year found that under-fives are carrying one or more viruses 50% of the time. A child aged 15 months will have 12-15 colds per year…
The Conversation
The Conversation
Everyday essential or kitchen clutter: do you really need an air fryer?
They’re one of the most-hyped kitchen appliances of the last decade, but are these low-fat cookers worth the cost and counter space?
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play