Afternoon summary
- Jeremy Corbyn has used a statement to the Commons to restate his call for any Brexit deal agreed by parliament to be put to the public in a second referendum. (See 4.07pm.)
- David Lidington, the de facto deputy prime minister, has said he would trust Jeremy Hunt more than Boris Johnson to deal with a 3am emergency facing No 10. (See 5.37am.)
That’s all from me for tonight.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
Sturgeon mocks idea first-past-the-post delivers 'strong and stable' government
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, also spoke at the Law Society of Scotland conference. In a speech to mark the 20th anniversary of devolution, she ridiculed the traditional English claim that first-past-the-post delivers strong and stable government. She said:
Perhaps most importantly of all, the Scottish parliament was always envisaged as a place where parties would have to seek compromise and consensus. The use of proportional representation in elections is the key reason for that.
By contrast, the first past the post system used at Westminster is clearly unsuited to an age of multi-party politics. And the claim that used to be made for it was that it delivered strong and stable government. Nobody looking to Westminster at present would make that case.
The emphasis on consensus at Holyrood is even reflected in the design of the parliament. MSPs sit in a horseshoe. At Westminster, MPs face each other- in a chamber designed to keep them two swords’ lengths apart.
I don’t want to idealise the Scottish parliament too much. Anybody who watches first minister’s questions will know that consensus has limits.
Parties at Holyrood seek political advantage and argue strongly against each other – of course we do. But we also get a lot done. And we consistently work together. All of the legislative successes I’ve mentioned had the support of more than one party. Several were passed unanimously.
And it’s hard not to look at Westminster – and particularly the deadlock that exists over Brexit – without thinking that these cultural differences have real consequences. The UK government’s consistent inability to reach out to parties other than the DUP has been striking. And that’s maybe partly because confrontation – not compromise – is inherent in the UK parliament’s design, traditions and working methods.
Updated
Hunt would be better than Johnson at dealing with 3am emergency call, says Lidington
One of Hillary Clinton’s most striking adverts in the 2008 US presidential election campaign asked voters who they would want answering the phone at 3am in the White House in a crisis. David Lidington, Theresa May’s de facto deputy, who is now backing Jeremy Hunt, has been asking the same question. Speaking to reporters in Edinburgh, where he has been attending a Law Society of Scotland, he said the key issue for Tories in choosing a new leader should be who would be best best for security.
When I’ve tried to weigh up in my mind the criteria. It seems to me first is which man is going to be better to shoulder the security responsibilities that come with the job of prime minister.
Lidington said prime ministers had to consider how to respond to terror attacks and hostage situations. He went on:
The prime minister will have to take those decisions often under severe time pressure and almost inevitably on the basis of intelligence evidence that is by it’s very nature going to be incomplete.
Asked who would deal best with these situations, Lidington said he would choose Hunt. Then, asked if he was saying Johnson did not have the temperament to be PM, Lidington replied:
I am not implying anything … I am saying very clearly from having worked with both of them in cabinet … In my judgement Jeremy is the one who is best equipped to deal with the 3am call.
Lidington also criticised Johnson for avoiding the media.
I think it’s wrong and it’s also unwise for him to duck out of interviews and debates.
We’re choosing not just a party leader, we’re choosing a prime minister, so I think the country is entitled to know what both the candidates for that office would have as their priorities and how they would go about discharging those responsibilities. So I hope he thinks again and I hope he does agree to take part.
Updated
Labour's Jess Phillips condemns MPs for implying neighbours should ignore suspected domestic abuse
Over the weekend a lot of Boris Johnson supporters have been criticising the couple who alerted first the police, and then the Guardian, after they heard Johnson having a furious row with his girlfriend, Carrie Symonds, in her flat, involving loud screaming, shouting and banging. The police did attend the flat, and left after being satisfied that all was well. Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory Brexiter, was typical of the those criticising the neighbours when he said this morning that they were “Corbynista curtain-twitchers”. (See 10.35am.)
Speaking in the Commons on a point of order, the Labour MP Jess Phillips, who ran refuges for the Women’s Aid Federation before entering parliament, said she was “shocked and appalled” this weekend to hear MPs suggesting that incidents like this were just private family matters. She went on:
I’m certain that in almost any circumstance people in this house don’t believe that that is the case. However, I guess they had their priorities elsewhere when they went out to say it. What that has led to is that all the women’s charities in this country have today had to issue a statement to assert that of course people should call the police, of course people should gather evidence where they can, and of course people should try and intervene. Because the message that came from this house ... was people should not try to help. Please, Mr Speaker, will you assert that domestic abuse is never just a domestic, it is never a personal family matter.
This morning we are pleased to issue a joint statement with domestic abuse charities and experts across the sector, explaining why it is so important we all take action if worried about someone's safety: https://t.co/9exF2uiK1o pic.twitter.com/Wu7eSwlJoc
— SafeLives (@safelives_) June 24, 2019
Updated
Today’s Evening Standard editorial claims that Sir Mark Sedwill, the cabinet secretary, has told Theresa May that she should only advise the Queen to appoint Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt as her successor if she is confident that they can command a majority in the Commons.
Ken Clarke now says he could vote against in a no confidence motion - our editorial today @EveningStandard reveals that the Cabinet Secretary has told Theresa May to consider carefully her advice to the Queen on who she should appoint as PM. https://t.co/ZDZFaEmbu8
— George Osborne (@George_Osborne) June 24, 2019
Earlier this month Downing Street gave a briefing implying that May could delay her resignation if she thought that a successor like Johnson would not command the confidence of the Commons. Subsequently Number 10 said that the prime minister’s spokesman’s comments had been misunderstood, and that May would definitely be going as soon as the new Tory leader was elected.
But what if it were to look as though a new leader like Johnson would lose an immediate confidence vote? Unfortunately the cabinet manual, which is the nearest thing the UK has to a constitutional rulebook, does not explain what should happen in a scenario exactly like this. But, as a recent report (pdf) from the public administration and constitutional affairs points out, the manual does imply that, if a PM loses a confidence vote, he or she is “under a duty not to resign unless and until it is clear another person commands the confidence of the house”.
In the Commons Tom Brake, the Lib Dem Brexit spokesman, asked May if she agreed that the new prime minister should come to the Commons before the summer recess to explain his Brexit plan, and to show that he had the confidence of the house. But May said this would be a matter for the next PM.
Updated
May suggests new PM may not face questions from MPs until September
Labour’s Chris Bryant asks if the new prime minister will address the Commons about Brexit within a week of taking office. It would be a disgrace if he waited until September, he says.
May says this is not a matter for her.
- May suggests new prime minister may not face questions from MPs until September.
Under a draft timetable for the announcement of the Tory leadership election winner, May’s final PMQs and the start of recess, the new prime minister would take office the night before recess, meaning he probably would not face MPs for the first time until September.
Updated
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Wesminster, also invited Theresa May to criticise Boris Johnson for suggesting that the UK would be able to negotiate changes to the backstop during the transition period.
May did not really respond to this point when Jeremy Corbyn raised it, but she did second time round. Responding to Blackford, she said David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, refuted this claim in a tweet at the weekend.
Erm, the Implementation Period is actually part of the Withdrawal Agreement. It's in Part 4 of the Agreement, articles 126 to 132. No Deal exit = no Withdrawal Agreement = no Implementation Period. https://t.co/dAr3pJXQ4E
— David Lidington (@DLidington) June 22, 2019
Corbyn says Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt have 'no grip on reality' in relation to Brexit
This is what Jeremy Corbyn said in his response to Theresa May about no deal:
The two Tory leadership candidates are still saying that if they can’t renegotiate the backstop – which the EU leaders said was not possible last week – then they would pursue a no-deal exit.
Will the prime minister tell us, whether she believes no deal should be on the table as a viable option?
And, in her view, what would be worse: crashing out with no deal in October, or putting this issue back to the people for a final say?
And this is what Corbyn said Boris Johnson, and about a second referendum:
Neither of the Tory leadership candidates have a credible plan. One even claims we can crash out on WTO terms and still trade without tariffs ...
The former foreign secretary also told us that under his no-deal plan he could, and I quote, ‘solve the problem of free movement of goods in the context of the free trade agreement … that we’ll negotiate in the implementation period’.
Mr Speaker, can the prime minister confirm that if there is no deal there will not be an implementation period?
It is deeply worrying that those who seek to lead this country have no grip on reality.
The prime minister said the council reiterated its wish to avoid a ‘disorderly Brexit’. I’m not sure they will have been reassured by the statements of her potential successors.
Labour put forward a plan that could bring this country back together, but the prime minister refused to compromise.
Whoever the next prime minister is, they will barely hold the support of this House, so they certainly have no mandate to force a disastrous hard-right Brexit on this country.
And I make it clear that Labour will work across the House to block no deal.
But whatever Brexit plan the new Tory leader comes up with, after three long years of failure, they should have the confidence to go back to the people on a deal agreed by parliament.
Updated
May is responding to Corbyn.
She says he asked about Brexit and the Tory leadership election, which were subjects that did not come up at the EU summit.
But she says no deal is “the default option”.
She says she wanted to leave the EU on 29 March. If Labour had voted for it, “we would already be out.”
She says she had voted for a deal three times, while Corbyn had voted against the deal, increasing the chance of no deal.
She says the Tories are not divorced from reality; the person most divorced from reality is Corbyn himself, who wants to follow the Venezuelan economic model, she claims.
Updated
Corbyn restates call for any Brexit deal to be put to public in second referendum
Corbyn asks May if she agrees with Boris Johnson that it would be possible to negotiate a solution to the backstop during the transition.
He says Labour will work with other MPs to block no deal.
And he ends by saying the government should let the public decide on Brexit.
Whatever Brexit plan the new Tory leader comes up with, after three long years of failure they should have the confidence to go back to the people on a deal agreed by parliament.
Corbyn implies second referendum would be preferable to a no-deal Brexit
Turning to Brexit, Corbyn says there have been three wasted years since the vote to leave the EU. And we will soon be on our third prime minister, he says.
He says Theresa May wasted time appealing to the wilder extremes in her party, instead of reaching out across the Commons.
Does she accept it was a mistake to legitimise the idea of no deal?
Does May believe no deal should be on the table as a viable option?
What would be worse? Crashing out in October? Or putting it back to the people for a final say?
- Corbyn implies a second referendum would be preferable to a no-deal Brexit.
He asks May to confirm the UK would not be ready to crash out in October.
Updated
Back in the Commons, Jeremy Corbyn is responding to Theresa May.
He starts by saying it is 10 years since John Bercow became Speaker. “Congratulations on the first 10 years,” he says.
He also sends his best wishes to John Prescott.
And then he turns to Iran. Last week the world was only minutes away from a US-Iran war, he says. He says the Iran nuclear deal should be defended.
Turning back to migration for a moment, Liz Truss, the chief secretary to the Treasury who currently seems to be spending much of her time acting as Boris Johnson’s chief media spokesperson, has warmly welcomed Sajid Javid’s decision to review income thresholds for immigrants after Brexit.
This is right from @sajidjavid. We need proper control at our borders and an immigration system that allows those who will contribute to our country to come to the UK. https://t.co/8hq5gjztWR
— Liz Truss (@trussliz) June 24, 2019
Updated
Theresa May starts by wishing John Prescott a full recovery.
She says the EU summit focused on climate change, disinformation, the EU’s external relations, and what the EU calls its “top jobs”.
She says she was there because the UK has agreed to continue contributing fully to EU discussions while it remains a member.
Updated
Theresa May's statement on EU summit
Theresa May is about to make a Commons statement on last week’s EU summit.
She may get quite a lot of questions about Brexit but, unless she decides to comment on the Brexit plans being floated by her two potential successors (which seems unlikely), it is hard to see what she might say that will qualify as news.
Here are two questions from below the line on a topic that is the subject of much chatter at Westminster at the moment – how the timing of a no-confidence vote might interact with the article 50 process.
So a question for Andrew.
If some hard core Tory Remainers try to bring down the government voting with the opposition on a no confidence motion to stop no deal, will they have to do so before the minimum time allowed for a GE stays before the 31st October?
Can you see the point I'm making as if it is under the time allowed a GE means no active government to stop the UK leaving without signing the WA. We would leave by default if they brought the government down. Should add that even if the EU offer another extension wouldn't that be worthless as it would still have to go through Parliament.
It is not easy to answer these questions, because the article 50 process is unprecedented – no other country has every used article 50 to leave the EU – and the UK has never seen a no-confidence vote lead to a general election under the procedure set out in the Fixed-term Parliaments Act.
But it is possible that a no-confidence vote in September, followed by a 14-day wait to see if a new government could win a vote of confidence, followed by the calling of an election, which would have to take place 25 working days after the dissolution of parliament, would leave little or no time for the UK to request an article 50 extension before the 31 October deadline.
There is no provision for parliament to request an article 50 extension. The request to the EU would have to come from the PM. A responsible PM might make such a request in the event of a pending general election, to keep options for whoever won, but if Boris Johnson were in this position in September, he would probably argue that he was elected party leader and prime minister on a mandate to deliver Brexit by 31 October come what may.
I’m afraid the monarch has not had the power to sack the prime minister, and appoint another one, for at least a century, and probably longer. And she does not have the power to request an article 50 extension, even if she wanted one.
Updated
Labour is to examine the readiness of City firms to cut carbon emissions and invest responsibly to tackle the climate emergency, the shadow chancellor John McDonnell said this morning. As my colleague Philip Inman reports, a review into City practices and how investments can be directed to promote technologies that cut carbon emissions will report by October as part of the party’s support for policies tied to the green industrial revolution. Speaking to City executives in central London, McDonnell said he also wanted the Bank of England to help monitor the City’s progress towards lower carbon emissions. This new responsibility would be on top of Labour’s plan to make the central bank also adopt policies that will boost the productivity of British firms.
Updated
Javid suggests new migration salary rules could vary region by region as he shelves May's £30k threshold
Theresa May still has a month left to serve as prime minister, but already her policy agenda is being shredded. A relative hardliner in Tory terms on immigration, she pushed hard for a high salary threshold for skilled workers coming to the UK after Brexit and, when the government’s white paper on immigration was published in December, it proposed a rule saying migrants would have to be earning £30,000 a year to qualify as a skilled worker for a five-year visa. As a concession to the Treasury and the business department, which wanted a more open regime, it was agreed that this threshold would be subject to consultation.
Sajid Javid, the home secretary, has now published details of that consultation – and his announcement strongly applies that the salary thresholds in the white paper are going to be abandoned. He is also floating the idea of having different salary thresholds for different areas of the country. This is from the Home Office news release.
The home secretary Sajid Javid has today asked the migration advisory committee to review and advise on salary thresholds for the future immigration system, which will start to take effect from 2021.
The migration advisory committee previously recommended that we should retain the existing minimum salary thresholds in the future immigration system, which includes paying experienced workers at least £30,000, and new entrants (including recent graduates) at least £20,800.
The home secretary has asked the migration advisory committee to consider how future salary thresholds should be calculated, the levels of salary thresholds, whether there is a case for regional salary thresholds for different parts of the UK, and whether there should be exceptions to salary thresholds, for example because they’ve newly started the occupation or because they work in an occupation in shortage.
A final decision would be taken by the next Tory MP (assuming the Conservatives stay in power). But Javid will be making this announcement knowing that both Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt are much more relaxed about immigration than May.
Variable salary thresholds for different parts of the UK would be a policy with particular significance for Scotland, which is much more dependent on immigration than other parts of the UK. The SNP-led Scottish government has for years been saying it should have control over immigration policy in Scotland. At an event last week Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, said that getting more power over immigration would be her top demand in terms of extending devolution. She also revealed that, at the recent D-day commemoration event, Johnson was joking with her about what might be needed to “buy you guys off” (ie to quash the demand for independence).
Updated
Lunchtime summary
- The People’s Vote campaign has criticised plans published by the Alternative Arrangements Commission for an alternative to the backstop as unworkable. In a statement responding to the report (see 12.27pm) issued by People’s Vote, the Labour MP Owen Smith said:
The idea of trying to replace the Northern Ireland backstop with so-called ‘alternative arrangements’ has already been tested to destruction. There is no political will to do so from either Ireland, the rest of the EU or most importantly the people of Northern Ireland, particularly those living on or near the border. This new report does nothing to address that crucial underlying point.
Talk of vague ‘technological solutions’, special economic zones or checks away from the border still fail to meet the basic test for a durable solution to this intractable problem. It needs to have the consent of both the people of Northern Ireland and of the Republic of Ireland – those who it will affect the most. And it’s clear it doesn’t have that consent on either side of the border.
The Alternative Arrangements Commission is nothing more or less than a desperate attempt to make a square peg fit into a round hole in order to try and hold the warring factions of the Conservative party together. The future of Northern Ireland is too important to be treated like this. The only way to a deliver a lasting and stable solution to this problem is to give the public the final say.
- The former deputy prime minister John Prescott has been admitted to hospital after having a stroke, prompting messages of support from current and former Labour leaders. This is from Jeremy Corbyn.
My thoughts are with my good friend @JohnPrescott and his family and friends at this difficult time. I hope he makes a full and speedy recovery. I'd like to thank the paramedics and hard-working staff at Hull Royal Infirmary. We know John loves our NHS and today the NHS loves him pic.twitter.com/hYw0POD0u3
— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) June 24, 2019
Updated
Ken Clarke, the Tory pro-European, has reaffirmed his willingness to vote against the government in a no-confidence debate to stop a no-deal Brexit. Asked about this possible scenario on The World at One, he said:
It depends on the circumstances at the time and what whoever is prime minister is putting forward as the policy he is going to pursue.
But I am not going to vote in favour of a government that says it is going to pursue policies which are totally incompatible with everything the Conservative party has stood for under all those prime ministers for the decades that I have been in parliament.
Updated
Johnson branded 'Bottler Boris' by Hunt's team after favourite's no-show leads to Sky cancelling debate
Here is a source from the Jeremy Hunt camp responding to the news that Sky has cancelled the leaders’ debate planned for tomorrow because Boris Johnson has refused to attend. (See 11.07am.) The source said:
Bottler Boris and his complacent campaign have shown they can’t trust their candidate to turn up and perform.
David Henig, the former civil servant who now heads the UK Trade Policy Project, has written a Twitter thread with a good commentary on the Alternative Arrangements Commission conference. (See 12.27pm and 12.35pm.) It starts here.
Today I'll attend a conference arranged by the 'Alternative Arrangements Commission' - even though I've been critical of the work of some of those involved in the past. They invited me though, and we need proper dialogue to solve our Brexit issues. pic.twitter.com/97uDZDrtI5
— David Henig (@DavidHenigUK) June 24, 2019
Today’s Evening Standard, which is backing Boris Johnson for the Conservative party leadership, is splashing on a story based on a picture apparently showing Johnson making up with his girlfriend, Carrie Symonds.
Today’s @EveningStandard as a picture of the happy couple emerges pic.twitter.com/Yjxa99Ng9B
— George Osborne (@George_Osborne) June 24, 2019
My colleague Owen Jones thinks that, in the light of the way the Johnsonites have been complaining about “Corbynista curtain-twitchers” and the like (see 10.35am), this is an example of hypocrisy.
Hold on, isn’t this entirely spontaneous and non planned photograph Stasi interference into people’s private lives? https://t.co/LrVMffuQ7r
— Owen Jones🌹 (@OwenJones84) June 24, 2019
Updated
These are from my colleague Lisa O’Carroll, who has been attending the Alternative Arrangements Commission conference this morning.
Northern Ireland Retail Consortium director, Aodhán Connolly said the Alt Arrangements economic freezones would create borders within borders.
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) June 24, 2019
This wd not comply with the Dec 2017 joint report to avoid "hard border, including any infrastructure or related checks and controls"
Shankar Singham: Says the UK and the EU were wrong to interpret the December 2017 report as saying there shd not be infrastructure anywhere in NI. "we don’t think that’s a valid interpretation - we don’t think that’s a valid interpretation. "
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) June 24, 2019
Shanker Singham is a member of the commission, and a pro-Brexit trade expert.
Shankar Singham asked about how alternative arrangements will tackle smuggling. Points out there is "considerable amount of smuggling on the EU’s external borders now and in their internal borders".
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) June 24, 2019
Alternative Arrangements Commission point out that Ireland is no stranger to special economic zones - Shannon Free Zone near Shannon Airport is the biggest such zone in EU
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) June 24, 2019
Irish delegate Cathal Lee, former Fianna Fail staffer tells AAC conference that this conversation about alternative arrangements should have been held in "March, April 2016" to explain to voters Irish border was complicated
— lisa o'carroll (@lisaocarroll) June 24, 2019
As my colleague Lisa O’Carroll reports, the Alternative Arrangements Commission, which was set up to look at ways of managing the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland after Brexit to avoid the need for the backstop (which would effectively keep the UK in the customs union), has published an interim report today. There is a 35-page summary here (pdf), and the full 203-page interim report is here (pdf).
On the Today programme this morning Greg Hands, the former international trade minister and one of the co-chairs of the commission, said the ideas in the report were a viable alternative to the backstop. He said he thought it would be possible to negotiate this with the EU before 31 October, although he said it would take up to two to three years to introduce these alternative arrangements. He went on:
We think it is possible to have this. We will be publishing next month an alternative arrangements protocol that could be inserted either into the withdrawal agreement or into any new form of Brexit that might be negotiated by the next UK prime minister.
Hands accepted that, for traders in Ireland, his plans would not amount to “no change” from the status quo. But the proposals would avoid a hard border, he said.
Updated
The Brexit party is to launch a formal legal challenge against the result of this month’s Peterborough byelection, where it was narrowly beaten by Labour, alleging that allegations of corruption connected to postal votes need to be investigated.
Nigel Farage, the party leader, insisted the challenge was about more than the loss to Labour by 683 votes, saying the wider use of postal votes was open to abuse and needed to be investigated. Speaking at a press conference in London, he said:
I know people will say, ‘Oh, but it’s sour grapes.’ It isn’t.
Actually, as far as I’m concerned, this is about a lot more than Peterborough. It is about a system that is wide open to corruption, to intimidation, to bribery, to abuse on a whole number of levels. I have mentioned this a number of times in the past.
The party plans to issue a petition under the 1983 Representation of the People Act, which allows election results to be challenged retrospectively for reasons including errors or corruption connected to the polling.
Such challenges are rare, with the last successful one coming in 2010, when the Labour minister Phil Woolas was ejected from his Oldham East and Saddleworth constituency after a specially convened election court upheld a complaint that Woolas had knowingly lied about his Lib Dem opponent.
Updated
One of the Conservative party’s most generous donors has joined a growing chorus of demands for Boris Johnson to explain why police were called to his home after an altercation with his partner. As my colleague Rajeev Syal reports, John Griffin, the taxi tycoon who has given £4m to the Tories over the last six years, has expressed concerns about the morality of the favourite to become prime minister and called on him to explain the circumstances of a furious row with his partner, Carrie Symonds.
Hunt's claim that Johnson is a 'coward' for dodging debates is 'ridiculous', says pro-Johnson MP
Boris Johnson has not generally been giving interviews since the Tory leadership contest formally started two weeks ago but a large number of his supporters have been touring the broadcast studios speaking on his behalf, with varying degrees of effectiveness.
One has been the Tory Brexiter Marcus Fysh. Speaking on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire show, Fysh said it was “ridiculous” for Jeremy Hunt to call Johnson a coward for avoiding TV debates. (See 9.18am.) Fysh said:
[Johnson] is certainly not a coward, as was said by his opponent today in a very negative way. That’s a ridiculous assertion to make.
In the interview, which was broadcast before Sky News announced it intended to cancel tomorrow’s debate (see 11.07am), Fysh also said “I don’t know” when asked if he thought Johnson should take part in the event. But he said he did not think Johnson needed to attend because he would be taking part in hustings “pretty much every day” for the next month.
Updated
Former deputy prime minister John Prescott recovering from stroke, his family announce
John Prescott, who was deputy prime minister for 10 years during Tony Blair’s Labour government, is recovering from a stroke, his family have said in a statement.
A statement from the family of John Prescott. pic.twitter.com/0wgCNYn0ZV
— John Prescott (@johnprescott) June 24, 2019
Trade union members overwhelmingly back second referendum and remain, poll suggests
Jeremy Corbyn was due to be meeting union leaders this morning, ahead of a shadow cabinet meeting tomorrow where Labour will decide whether to firm up its support for a second referendum and remain. Corbyn has already said that the party would put any Brexit deal to a second referendum, but he has not committed Labour to backing remain, or committed the party to making remain a general election pledge.
Ahead of today’s meeting, the People’s Vote campaign has released a poll from YouGov of almost 2,000 trade unionists showing that, by a wide margin, they want a second referendum and want Labour to campaign for remain.
Here are some of the findings.
The polls show that rank-and-file trade union members:
Support staying in the EU by a margin of 71 to 29% if there is a new referendum.
Back having a people’s vote by 64 to 33%.
Support for such a final say referendum rises to 78% with just 17% opposed among trade unionists who voted Labour in the last general election.
Want Labour to campaign for the UK to stay in the EU by a three-to-one margin of 60 to 21% – rising to 74 to 10% among the party’s 2017 voters.
Commenting on the results, the Labour MP Jo Stevens, secretary of the trade union group of Labour MPs and a People’s Vote supporter, said:
Labour’s official position is still too far behind that of our party members and voters, not to mention grassroots trade unionists who are the bedrock of our movement.
When Jeremy Corbyn meets with trade union general secretaries, I hope he hears the strong message from working people, trade union members up and down the country, that we want a people’s vote just like his constituents do in Islington – because now, more than ever, we need those voices to be heard.
Updated
Sky News cancels plans for Tory leadership debate tomorrow after Boris Johnson's refusal to attend
I’m back in the office. And good news – the Palace of Westminster is not burning down. The fire alarm was a test.
Earlier I said that Sky News was planning a TV debate between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt tomorrow, but that Johnson was refusing to take part. (See 9.18am.) But Sky News has now said it will cancel tomorrow’s event if Johnson refuses to participate and will challenge him instead to attend a debate a week today.
Sky News has been planning to hold a debate tomorrow between the two remaining candidates in the Conservative leadership election.
— Sky News PR Team (@SkyNewsPR) June 24, 2019
Jeremy Hunt has agreed to take part, but Boris Johnson has so far declined the invitation.
We stand ready to host a debate tomorrow evening if both candidates make themselves available. Without both candidates, tomorrow’s debate will not take place.
— Sky News PR Team (@SkyNewsPR) June 24, 2019
But we will reissue our invitation for Mr Hunt and Mr Johnson to debate live on Sky News next Monday, 1 July
Updated
In his LBC phone-in this morning, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory Brexiter, strongly criticised the neighbours who recorded Boris Johnson and his girlfriend Carrie Symonds having a furious row in her flat and who contacted the police because of their concerns, before alerting the Guardian. Rees-Mogg dismissed them as “Corbynista curtain-twitchers”. Asked about the incident, he said:
I think it’s absolutely dreadful.
I think the idea that snooping neighbours are recording what is going on for political advantage and then Class War protesters are coming to politicians’ front doors – which happened to me as well – is not a good place for politics to be.
I think politicians should feel safe and unmolested in their homes. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable thing to ask for ...
And snoopers are always unattractive. Corbynista curtain-twitchers are not attractive.
(I’ve got to leave the office for a while because the fire alarm is going off, in what seems to be a regular Monday morning test. Hopefully I’ll be back in about 20 minutes.)
Updated
Sir Nicholas Soames, the Conservative former minister, has been tweeting critically about Boris Johnson this morning.
As the new week begins we must hope that @BorisJohnson will tell us in detail how he intends to get to Brexit in a way that bears some relationship to the real world #cmonBorisletsheartheplan
— Nicholas Soames (@NSoames) June 24, 2019
Two questions for @BorisJohnson .How do you intend to take Britain out of The EU by Oct31? What is the fallback plan ? #youoweusthedetail
— Nicholas Soames (@NSoames) June 24, 2019
But Nadine Dorries, a strong Johnson supporter, has been tweeting a message of support.
I’ve spoken to @BorisJohnson + @carriesymonds I am totally stunned at the level of harassment they have had to endure. Hate mail, left wing protests outside their flat, eavesdroppers. The stress is immense, more than most could endure.They are together, strong and united.
— Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) June 24, 2019
Here is an extract from Boris Johnson’s Telegraph column today (paywall) where he reasserts his determination to take the UK out of the EU by 31 October. He says:
We are just over four months away from the date on which, by law, we must leave the EU; and this time we are not going to bottle it. We are not going to fail. This time we are not going to shrink in fear from the exit, as we have on the last two occasions. We are going to show all the mettle, the creativity and the energy of this amazing nation. We are going to focus all our efforts on honouring that single great promise – and we are going to come out of the EU on October 31.
Presumably this is not one of those Johnson columns that the Telegraph would describe as “clearly comically polemical” and something that “could not be reasonably read as a serious, empirical, in-depth analysis of hard factual matters”, which was the Telegraph response to the Independent Press Standards Organisation when a reader complained about Johnson making a false claim about Brexit public opinion in one of his columns earlier this year.
Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA
Updated
Hunt calls Boris Johnson 'a coward' for dodging TV debates and interviews
In his regular Daily Telegraph column this morning Boris Johnson, the favourite in the Tory leadership contest, reaffirms his commitment (seen as wobby by some) to deliver Brexit by 31 October in all circumstances. He declares four times that the UK will leave the EU by that date.
TELEGRAPH: Boris: I won’t bottle Brexit #tomorrowspaperstoday pic.twitter.com/cWosoBXTrF
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) June 23, 2019
But this morning we’ve heard fresh evidence as to why Johnson could find delivering a no-deal Brexit by 31 October impossible. We have already heard the Tory MPs Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke say they would vote against a Conservative government in a no-confidence debate to stop no deal, and MPs like Philip Hammond and Rory Stewart have hinted they might do the same. In an interview for the BBC, Tobias Ellwood, a defence minister, has said that in total about a dozen Tories would be willing to back a no-confidence motion in these circumstances. The government currently has a working majority, with the DUP, of around four, and so 12 Tories could easily bring down the new PM. Asked about Tory MPs supporting the “nuclear option”, denying the government Commons support to prevent no-deal, Ellwood said:
I believe that absolutely is the case.
I think a dozen or so members of parliament would be on our side, would be voting against supporting a no-deal and that would include ministers as well as backbenchers.
Jeremy Hunt, Johnson’s rival for the Conservative leadership, has been citing this as one reason why a Johnson administration could quickly collapse. Hunt has been doing a round of interviews this morning and he told ITV’s Good Morning Britain:
[Johnson] is going to come to power on a very fragile coalition of people like Matt Hancock who wants no deal taken off the table, and Mark Francois who wants no deal.
Sometimes in politics you can fudge and get away with it but in the case of Brexit you are going to have to make decisions immediately, and that very fragile coalition will collapse immediately when you have to make those decisions.
If that happens we won’t have another leadership contest, we will have Jeremy Corbyn in No 10 and there won’t be any Brexit at all.
Hunt also argued that this was why Johnson needed to stop dodging media scrutiny and agree to more TV debates, like the one planned by Sky tomorrow night (which Johnson is boycotting). In an article in the Times (paywall) this morning Hunt said Johnson was being a coward. He said:
Boris has done just one interview on Today in the past year. I have done 16. He has not appeared on The Andrew Marr Show this year and his one broadcast interview of this campaign, with World at One, was arranged with just 10 minutes’ notice so Mark Mardell had no time to prepare questions. And now he is refusing point blank to do TV debates. Pathetically, within hours of getting through to the final two he “challenged” me to the ITV debate. I willingly accepted even though it was scheduled for three weeks later, after most members have received their postal votes and after many of them will have voted ...
The first debate that Boris has been invited to will be on Sky News tomorrow evening. I’ll be there. So don’t be a coward Boris, man up and show the nation you can cope with the intense scrutiny the most difficult job in the country will involve.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory Brexiter and chair of the European Research Group, holds an LBC phone-in.
9.35am: Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, speaks at a conference where an interim report from the Alternative Arrangements Commission, which is looking at alternatives to the backstop, is being published.
10.30am: Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, holds a press conference on postal votes.
11am: John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, gives a speech on the economy and Labour’s plans for sustainable investment.
11.20am: Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, gives a speech to the Law Society of Edinburgh.
As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to publish a summary at lunchtime, and another when I wrap up.
You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe roundup of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is 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 questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.
Updated
@Andrew - if the Johnson Government takes the UK to the precipice of no-deal a few days before Oct 31st and the British parliament votes them out in a no-confidence motion, what is the legal position with respect to an extension of Article 50? In these circumstances, can the EU extend Article 50 based on a vote in parliament or will the UK Prime Minister (in this case Boris Johnson) have to explicitly request the extension themselves? In these circumstances, can the Queen intervene by appointing a new PM or does the Queen have the power to request the extension herself if the Government has lost a no-confidence vote?