Summary
- A comfortable win, as expected, for the government as MPs voted by a majority of 77 to approve the internal market bill at its second reading, despite concerns it would give the government the power to override key elements of its own withdrawal agreement with the EU - notably on the Northern Ireland Protocol - and breach international law. Despite 30 Conservative abstentions (which could be for a number of reasons, e.g. some might be away), including from senior Tories, only two actually voted against the government at this stage - Sir Roger Gale and Andrew Percy.
- As it was widely expected the government would win this vote and the potential Tory rebellion would not mount to what some touted, attention turns to Bob Neill’s amendment which, if disillusionment among backbench Conservative MPs continues to fester, will be the real showdown for No 10 and its own party. That amendment would require a vote of parliament before ministers can exercise the new powers in the bill.
- The bill now moves to its committee stage and MPs are due to begin detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the bill tomorrow, with votes expected next week on amendments to the Northern Ireland provisions which some Tories may back.
And that’s it for tonight. Thank you for reading along!
And here is the voting list on the second reading of the bill itself.
It appears only two Tory MPs voted against the bill - Andrew Percy and Sir Roger Gale. There were 30 who abstained (though this could be due to a number of reasons), including the former chancellor Sajid Javid, former attorney generals Geoffrey Cox and Jeremy Wright, and Sir Charles Walker (who, as we’ve established, rather stole the show).
It seems we’ll have to wait until next week to find out how many Tory MPs really have “held their fire” for Bob Neill’s amendment.
Updated
The wider issue at play with the internal market bill saga is the damage Boris Johnson is doing to his own reputation as well as that of his MPs, party and country, writes Paul Waugh in tonight’s Waugh Zone.
He writes that abstainer Sir Charles Walker’s speech was telling of the growing disillusionment among Tory backbenchers after the Cummings affair and a summer of dramatic U-turns, and ought to worry No 10 as it continues to burn political capital over the bill:
Walker first attacked the “profoundly un-Conservative” idea of net-curtain twitchers being encouraged to inform on neighbours’ minor breaches of lockdown (because “granny has followed grandad into a family home of five”). But he also warned the PM that backbenchers were sick of being taken for granted.
In a clear reference to Dominic Cummings’ dripping contempt for many Tory MPs, Walker said: “We are all members of parliament and we deserve to be taken seriously.” And although the PM has long lost any real capacity to be embarrassed or feel shame about anything, many of his MPs do not like to be made fools of. Those who tried to defend their government - over the A-levels fiasco, Cummings’ eye-sight test drive, over the Brexit deal itself or free school meals plans - feel unloved and unconsulted.
Today, neither Johnson nor Michael Gove, who wound up the debate, seemed to take those concerns seriously. Johnson suggested that ministers would allow a Commons vote on any powers they took to break the law, though No 10 sources seemed as unclear as he was about what was actually in the legislation. Gove said that rebel Bob Neill was “on to something” but failed to specify how he would remedy that “something”.
Charles Walker deciding to get a few things off his chest in his speech tonight, from the 'rule of six' to the rule of law.
— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) September 14, 2020
"I'm not going to be voting for this bill. Because if you keep whacking a dog don't be surprised when it bites you back."
You can read tonight’s Waugh Zone here.
Updated
Here is the voting list on Labour’s amendment, which saw 20 Conservative MPs abstain (thought as mentioned before, this could be for a number of reasons).
Among them are Tories who voiced criticisms of the bill publicly, including the former chancellor Sajid Javid and former attorney generals Geoffrey Cox and Jeremy Wright.
It appears only one Tory MP, Andrew Percy, voted with the Ayes.
Updated
Veteran Conservative backbencher Sir Roger Gale said he voted against the bill at second reading.
Ever since the Bill was published I have said that I would vote against it, and I have done so. Even though the Bill has passed this stage, I shall continue to oppose it unless there is a significant amendment which will restore the integrity of this government and the country.
— Sir Roger Gale MP (@SirRogerGale) September 14, 2020
Sir Roger told BBC2’s Newsnight that he voted against the legislation as “a matter of principle”.
I believe very strongly we should obey international law. I believe the United Kingdom’s word is its bond and I think this is damaging our international reputation for honesty and straight-dealing.
He acknowledged he was in a “tiny minority” among Tory MPs but predicted others could rebel when the Commons comes to consider amendments to the bill next week.
I took a view that you fight this tooth and nail at every step. Others have quite clearly decided they want to hold their fire for Bob Neill’s amendment. There is much to play for yet.
Conservative MPs fired a warning shot at Boris Johnson’s conduct of the Brexit process on Monday night, as former cabinet ministers and attorney generals said they would withhold support for a controversial bill which will break international law, the Guardian’s Jessica Elgot and Heather Stewart write.
One government source said the justice secretary, Robert Buckland, was “wobbly” and had asked for additional cabinet scrutiny of a controversial clause of the bill.
Among those who refused to support the bill on Monday were a slew of senior Conservatives, select committee chairs and QCs – most notably the former chancellor Sajid Javid, and ex-attorney generals Sir Geoffrey Cox and Jeremy Wright.
However, Johnson’s sizeable majority meant the UK internal market bill passed with a comfortable cushion of 77 votes on Monday night, by 340 votes to 263. The real showdown is now set to be a forthcoming vote on an amendment by Bob Neill, the Tory chair of the justice select committee.
MPs had urged the government to accept that amendment – rather than proceed with the internal market bill which breaches part of the Northern Ireland Protocol as set out in the withdrawal agreement signed with the EU.
Here is their full story:
Updated
The UK government has welcomed the Commons vote to give the UK internal market bill a second reading.
A spokesman said it was now critical that the legislation completed its passage through parliament by the end of the year.
We welcome the fact that this vital Bill has passed its second reading.
It will protect the territorial integrity of the UK and the peace in Northern Ireland, safeguarding trade and jobs across all four corners of the UK following the end of the transition period.
It is critical that we pass this Bill before the end of the year.
Here is PA Media’s report.
Boris Johnson’s controversial plan to override key elements of the Brexit deal he signed with Brussels has cleared its first Commons hurdle despite deep misgivings by some senior Tories.
MPs voted to give the internal market bill a second reading by 340 to 263 – a government majority of 77.
The prime minister said the legislation was necessary to prevent the EU taking an “extreme and unreasonable” interpretation of the provisions in the withdrawal agreement relating to Northern Ireland.
He said some in Brussels were now threatening to “blockade” UK agri-food exports to the EU and to insist on tariffs on all goods moving to Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.
However, some senior Conservatives warned they could not support the legislation in its present form after ministers admitted last week that it breached international law.
MPs will begin detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the bill tomorrow, with votes expected next week on amendments to the Northern Ireland provisions which some Tories may back.
Even before the debate began, former prime minister David Cameron expressed his “misgivings” and former chancellor Sajid Javid and former attorney general Geoffrey Cox said they could not support the overwriting of the withdrawal agreement.
The intervention by Cameron - who said passing legislation which breaks international treaty obligations was “the very, very last thing you should contemplate” - means all five living former prime ministers have spoken out against the bill.
In the Commons, Johnson - who took the unusual step of opening the debate himself - said the “protective” measures were necessary because the EU was now trying to “leverage” the Northern Ireland protocol in the talks on a post-Brexit free trade deal.
He said Brussels negotiators were threatening to ban the sale of UK agri-food products anywhere in the EU, creating an “instant and automatic” prohibition on the movement of such goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
Absurd and self-defeating as that action would be even as we debate this matter, the EU still have not taken this revolver off the table.
Johnson said some on the EU side even wanted to designate all goods moving from Britain to Northern Ireland as being “at risk” of entering the EU single market, making them liable to EU tariffs.
He said it could mean levies of 61% on Welsh lamb, 90% on Scottish beef and 100% on Devonshire clotted cream, and would “carve tariff borders across our own country”.
We cannot have a situation where the very boundaries of our country could be dictated by a foreign power or international organisation. No British prime minister, no government, no parliament could ever accept such an imposition.
Labour’s shadow business secretary Ed Miliband - standing in for Sir Keir Starmer who is in coronavirus self-isolation - said Johnson had only himself to blame for signing up to the withdrawal agreement.
Either he wasn’t straight with the country about the deal in the first place or he didn’t understand it.Because a competent government would never have entered into a binding agreement with provisions it could not live with.
A number of Tory former ministers made clear that they would not support any measure which breached international law, including Andrew Mitchell, Sir Oliver Heald and another former attorney general Jeremy Wright.
Sir Charles Walker, the vice-chairman of the powerful Tory backbench 1922 Committee, and Wakefield MP Imran Ahmad Khan - a member of last year’s new intake of Conservative MPs - said they would not be supporting the bill at second reading.
Sir Bob Neill, the chairman of the Commons justice committee who has tabled an amendment requiring a vote of parliament before ministers can exercise the new powers in the Bill, urged MPs to “take the opportunity to change and improve these clauses”.
Earlier the intervention of Cox, a committed Brexiteer, was seen as particularly significant as he was attorney general when Johnson signed the withdrawal agreement and his legal advice was crucial in the negotiations.
He told Times Radio the government “knew” what it was signing up to when it ratified the withdrawal agreement.
The breaking of the law leads ultimately to very long-term and permanent damage to this country’s reputation and it is also a question of honour to me. We signed up, we knew what we were signing, we simply can’t seek to nullify those ordinary consequences of doing that and I simply can’t support that.
Updated
Tallying the number of Tory rebels and abstentions has begun. Here are some estimates:
I think probably around 22 Conservative rebels, mostly abstentions. Hard to know absent a division list whether or not that means government is in danger of losing votes at committee stage.
— Stephen Bush (@stephenkb) September 14, 2020
Internal market bill passes second reading - 340 ayes to 263 noes.
— Harry Yorke (@HarryYorke1) September 14, 2020
But worth pointing out, there are 364 Tory MPs. If the DUP's 8 MPs voted with the government, that suggests quite a few abstentions...
(and it's next week when we'll really know how many rebels there are)
Assuming the govt got all 8 DUP votes that does probably indicate quite a few Tory abstentions. Bigger votes to come later In the week. And as I said earlier, this is before the Lords get involved.
— Lewis Goodall (@lewis_goodall) September 14, 2020
BREAKING: MPs vote for the Internal Market Bill to progress to next stage, despite concerns it could break international law.
— Paul Brand (@PaulBrandITV) September 14, 2020
AYEs 340
NOEs 263
Seems there were a fair few abstentions - suggests there may be a closer fight over next week’s amendments.
Government wins second reading vote on internal market bill with majority of 77
MPs have voted to approve the internal market bill at its second reading, with a government majority of 77, despite concerns it would give Boris Johnson’s government the power to override parts of the withdrawal agreement and could breach international law.
Ayes: 340
Noes: 263
The government was widely expected to win the vote, with the focus really on the size of its victory ie Tory rebellions and the number of abstentions. The result indicates a fair number of Tory abstentions, but these are tricky as some may have abstained or could just be away at the moment. Still, this may become more pronounced next week and we will be keeping an eye on the voting lists as they are published.
The bill will now move to committee stage to be debated and amended further.
Updated
Labour’s amendment to block a second reading of the internal market bill has been defeated by 213 votes to 349, a government majority of 136.
MPs are now voting on the second reading of the bill itself. The result is expected shortly.
Updated
The bill is expected to pass its first parliamentary test, despite the reservations of many MPs that it undermines a section of the withdrawal agreement - an international treaty - dealing with the Northern Ireland Protocol and breaches international law. MPs are voting on Labour’s amendment that the bill be rejected on those grounds.
A number of Conservative MPs, including the former chancellor Sajid Javid, have said they will not support the bill as it stands and some could abstain in the hope that the government will back an amendment next week by the chair of the justice select committee, Sir Bob Neill, which would require parliamentary approval before any future decision could be made by the government to disapply the terms of the Northern Ireland protocol in the withdrawal agreement.
The government has not ruled out the possibility that rebels could lose the Conservative whip.
The result is expected shortly.
A socially distanced division is taking place now.
As we wait for the vote on the internal market bill to take place, here are some images from the debate from the official Commons photographer.
Here is the moment Ed Miliband challenged Boris Johnson to explain how the internal market bill would protect Northern Ireland from the threat of a potential food “blockade” that the prime minister claims to exist.
Speaking in place of Sir Keir Starmer, who is self-isolating at home, the shadow business secretary and former Labour leader described the prime minister as “cavalier” said this isn’t an argument about remain versus leave, but rather “right and wrong”.
Summary
- Ed Miliband accused the prime minister of a “failure of governance” as he challenged Boris Johnson to explain how the internal market bill will protect Northern Ireland from a potential - what Johnson calls - food “blockade”. In his speech, the shadow business secretary and former Labour leader said the prime minister had to take responsibility for the failure of the deal he previously called “a triumph”, said was “oven ready” and on which he fought and won the last election.
- Johnson promised in his opening speech that MPs would get a vote on any future decision to use powers in the bill to override the withdrawal agreement. More than 20 Tory MPs said today they planned to abstain on the bill with a number hoping the government will back an amendment next week by the Tory chair of the justice select committee, Sir Bob Neill, which would require parliamentary approval before any future decision could be made by the government to disapply the terms of the Northern Ireland protocol in the withdrawal agreement.
- The Tory former attorney general, Jeremy Wright, said he was “profoundly disturbed” by the bill, meaning every Conservative attorney general since 2010 bar the incumbent Suella Braverman – Dominic Grieve, Wright and Geoffrey Cox - has been critical of the bill.
- The Tory chairman of the justice select committee, Sir Bob Neill, said that at present he has “real concerns” with the bill and could not support it as it stands. Among supporters of his amendment are Sir Oliver Heald who told the Commons: “I do have concerns about part five of the bill, because for our country to break its word and to breach international law is not something that we do.” My colleague Peter Walker has compiled a list of Brexit-backing Conservatives and former lawyers expected to rebel or abstain at the vote tonight.
The politics live blog will be paused for now, thank you all for reading along so far. We may be back later as the debate continues.
Updated
Heald also expressed his unhappiness at the UK government claiming precedent for breaking international law.
He said:
Can I just also say that I was surprised to see this justified by the precedent, allegedly, of the Finance Act 2013 General Anti-Abuse Rule by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
I was a law officer at the time, Dominic Grieve was attorney general. And one thing I can say about Dominic Grieve is that he was very correct and made sure that Government legislation did not offend the rule of law - he was extremely painstaking.
And that Act did not breach Britain’s treaty obligations. This was made clear by ministers at the time and I cannot recall anyone arguing that it did.
Sir Oliver Heald, the Tory MP for Hertfordshire North East, said he has concerns about part five of the bill.
But I do have concerns about part five of the bill, because for our country to break its word and to breach international law is not something that we do.
The former minister added:
Britain stands as a rule of law country and is respected across the world for its stance. All the prime ministers that I served under - that’s three of them - have come out with grave concerns about this bill on the point that I’m concerned about.
I would just comment that Margaret Thatcher made clear herself how important it is on saying ‘democracy is not enough without a love of liberty and the rule of law’.
He pressed the government and the EU to reach an agreement, adding “it really would be the last thing we want to do to break international law”.
Heald said he would be supporting Sir Bob Neill’s amendment.
If we come at the very end to the point where the negotiations have failed, all is lost, and this country really has to contemplate breaking international law, then so be it. But that day is not now, not today. And I think we should give the negotiations more time.
Updated
Neill added that he wanted to be able to support the bill but could not support it as it stands.
I hope that we will take the opportunity to change and improve these clauses and the way in which they might operate so that we do not fall into a means of damaging our reputation.
That is why I can’t support the bill tonight, I hope that we will see amendments to change what I believe are egregious and needless and potentially damaging elements of part five of the bill.
Unless there are those changes, I would have further difficulty supporting the bill. But I do, having listened to what the prime minister has said, want to give the government that chance in a constructive spirit - and I know that [Michael Gove] is listening carefully to that.
But I do hope that the government recognises that to act in a way which unilaterally breaches our international obligations is wholly against the spirit of what this country stands for, is against the spirit I think of the party that he [Gove] and I have always adhered to as a party of the rule of law.
And we need to find a constructive means of making sure that we meet our obligations to the union, but not undermining our obligations to the rule of law either. I do not believe that is impossible with good will.
Updated
The Tory chairman of the justice select committee, Sir Bob Neill, said that at present he has “real concerns” with the bill and wants more assurances from the UK government that it will not breach international legal obligations unless “every one of those legal mechanisms open to us have been exhausted and until there has been a specific vote of this house”.
He told MPs:
I see the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster [Michael Gove] listening, I hope he’ll be able to go further than the prime minister either tonight, or in the course of this bill, and assure us that those provisions will not be brought into effect unless and until every one of those legal mechanisms open to us have been exhausted and unless and until there has been a specific vote of this house.
Not, I think, by a statutory instrument, which does not get enough scrutiny for such a constitutionally significant issue, but by a specific resolution.
That’s why my amendment seeks to give the government an opportunity to have that ‘break in the glass in case of an emergency provision’, but without us triggering a breach of the international legal obligations before it is absolutely necessary.
Updated
As we’ve reported earlier, the Tory former attorney general Jeremy Wright said he could not support the clauses of the bill relating to Northern Ireland but would not vote against the second reading because the vast majority of the bill is “good and sensible and necessary”.
He told the BBC PM programme:
I can’t support the clauses which relate to Northern Ireland. I think the government is mistaken to believe this is the right way to respond to what I understand is a challenging situation in the negotiations with the European Union.
This is far from just another day in parliament and I, along with many others, are profoundly disturbed by what’s going on here... It’s about our authority on the world stage and that matters not just in the UK, but also to the many people around the world who rely on countries like the UK, governments like the UK’s government, to speak up for them and to criticise those countries that are prepared to set aside international law when it suits them. Now if the UK is not in a position to make that case, then the world is a less safe place. That’s why this matters.
What you shouldn’t do is vote to give authority to the government to do something that would break the law. And I think parliament should not give ministers that authority, and if ministers were to use the authority that they are given, if they are given by parliament, I think we’ll all regret it. And that’s why I hope it won’t happen.
I think what’s likely is that second reading of this bill will pass and I will not vote against second reading of this bill because a large proportion of it is good and sensible and necessary. I don’t object to the vast majority of this bill, it’s three clauses in the bill that I think are pernicious and should be changed, I think the more interesting question will be what happens when we get to a detailed discussion of those particular clauses.
Updated
And in his speech Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, urged Tory MPs to vote down the bill tonight. He said:
This is a test for the house this evening, do not wait for the committee stage. Legally, morally, ethically, the right thing to do is to vote down this bill tonight and this house must be accountable.
Do not follow the prime minister in acquiescing in breaking the law because if you vote for second reading tonight, that’s exactly what you’re all doing. So this is a test and I understand the challenge that Conservative members face - don’t support the prime minister by breaking the law this evening, it is as simple as that.
That’s all from me for tonight. My colleague Lucy Campbell is now taking over.
Sir Bill Cash, the Tory Brexiter who chairs the European scrutiny committee, used his speech to argue that there were many instances of international law being over-ridden. He said:
On the question of international law, such law comes in all shapes and sizes. There are many instances of express overriding UK statute law.
The EU itself does sometimes break international law, including refusing certain compliance with WTO rules. EU retaliation by a blockade would be utterly unlawful.
Updated
'What incompetence! What failure of governance!' - Miliband on Johnson
And here is what was probably the most damning passage from Ed Miliband’s speech. He said:
And let’s just get this straight for a minute, because I think it is important to take a step back, what the prime minister is coming to the house to tell us today is that his flagship achievement, the deal he told us was a triumph, the deal he said, as I said, was oven ready, the deal which he fought and won the general election is now contradictory and ambiguous.
What incompetence. What failure of governance. And how dare he try and blame everyone else.
Can I say to the prime minister, this time he can’t blame [Theresa May], he can’t blame John Major, he can’t blame the judges, he can’t blame the civil servants, he can’t sack the cabinet secretary again.
There’s only one person responsible for it, and that is him. This is his deal, it’s his mess, it’s his failure.
Miliband said Johnson had to take responsibility.
For the first time in his life it is time to take responsibility, it is time to fess up.
Either he wasn’t straight with the country about the deal in the first place or he didn’t understand it.
Because a competent government would never have entered into a binding agreement with provisions it could not live with.
And if such a government somehow missed the point but woke up later it would have done what any competent business would do after it realised it can’t live with the terms of a contract, it would negotiate a way out in good faith.
And that’s why this is all so unnecessary - because there is a mechanism designed for exactly this purpose in the agreement, the joint committee on the Northern Ireland protocol.
Updated
Here is one clip from Ed Miliband’s speech - when he challenged Boris Johnson to explain how the bill would protect Northern Ireland from the threat of a potential food blockade that Johnson claims to exist.
"He didn't read the protocol, he hasn't read the bill, he doesn't know his stuff" @Ed_Miliband accuses @BorisJohnson of making bogus arguments over the Internal Market Bill | https://t.co/5ol23lxcmD #Brexit pic.twitter.com/vRUJ4V7SdS
— RTÉ News (@rtenews) September 14, 2020
And here is another clip from the speech.
Ed Miliband has congratulated Boris Johnson on "having in just one short year united his five predecessors."
— SkyNews (@SkyNews) September 14, 2020
He says their point of agreement is Boris is "trashing" the UK's reputation.
Follow live here: https://t.co/mZtYsJm7FE pic.twitter.com/pY9dvj7cPm
There have been 2,621 new coronavirus infections in the UK, according to the latest figures. We will be focusing mostly on the internal market bill debate here for the rest of the evening, but the coronavirus coverage continues on our global live blog.
Johnson and Miliband's opening speeches - Snap verdict
Ed Miliband had his moments as Labour leader, but he found it hard to wipe the floor with David Cameron and for the last five years he has not been much of a presence in the Commons chamber. But now, speaking for Labour as shadow business secretary and deputising for Sir Keir Starmer, who is self-isolating at home, he has just delivered the outstanding Commons speech of this parliament - clear, forensic, witty and above all compelling. It is very rare to see the case of a piece of government legislation get shredded so comprehensively by a single opposition speech. If you are at all interested in how a parliamentary speech should be delivered (and why it matters, when it is done well), do watch or read it in full; you won’t regret it.
It helped, of course, that he was following Boris Johnson, who was cursory and unconvincing. That showed not least in his reluctance to take interventions. The main news line in his speech was his promise that MPs would get a vote on any future decision to use powers in the bill to override the withdrawal agreement. This effectively concedes the main demand in the Sir Bob Neill amendment, which reporting over the last 72 hours has described as the main focus of the Tory rebels. Normally once rebels get what they want, the rebellion goes away. But that does does not seem likely in this case (because the Neill amendment does not address the central objections to the bill), and over the next week or so the rebellion may coalesce around something much more robust.
Updated
Miliband says British business think no deal would be disastrous.
It is not a game. It is about the livelihoods of millions, he says.
And he says Johnson may think he has a friend in President Trump, but Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, has said there is no chance of the US agreeing a trade deal with the UK if this bill passes.
The government must reject this bill, he says. It is a pivotal moment for the country. We must stand up for what matters - our commitment to the rule of law, he says.
Johnson is cavalier on our traditions and on international law. That is why the bill must be defeated.
And that’s it. Miliband has finished.
Miliband turns to the fifth argument used by the government to defend the bill - that it breaks the law, but only in a limited and specific way.
He says this amounts to a new defence of law breaking. It is the Johnson defence, pioneered by Dominic Cummings, and implemented by Johnson.
Miliband says the government claims passing this bill will make a deal with the EU more likely. But why would the EU be more likely to trust the UK if it had reneged on a deal passed a year ago, he says.
Miliband turns to the fourth argument - that this bill could be a fire alarm.
He says this bill does not just allow the government to break international law; passing the bill breaks international law, he says.
He says the Bob Neill amendment would breach the protocol, and so it would break the law.
Sir Bob Neill intervenes. He says a bill only becomes law when it is implemented.
Miliband disagrees. He says Labour would not risk this interpretation.
Updated
Miliband turns to what he calls “the third excuse - the ‘it was all a bit of a rush’ excuse”.
He says ministers have been warned about these issues for months.
He says Johnson is coming to the Commons to say that his flagship deal, the deal he says was a triumph, the deal on which he won the election, is ambiguous.
What incompetence, Miliband says.
Miliband says he cannot blame anyone else this time. He has to accept responsiblity.
It it time to fess up, he says. Any competent government would not have signed an agreement that it could not live with. And, if it did, it would negotiate a way out.
And there is exactly a process in the agreement to deal with this, through the joint committee, he says.
Miliband says the issues to which the bill speaks “are not insignificant, but they are not insurmountable”.
Miliband says the second argument has been that this bill will protect the peace process.
But he says the PM should listen to people who created the peace process. He says Tony Blair and Sir John Major have both said the bill threatens the peace process.
And if Johnson does not believe them, he should believe himself. He quotes Johnson saying the protocol would protect Northern Ireland.
Miliband says he wants to address the many arguments used by the government to justify this move. When you have to make different arguments, you are losing the argument, he says.
First, there is an argument that the EU is threatening a blockade.
Miliband says he does not like the way the EU has ramped up its rhetoric in recent days.
But he says, as Geoffrey Cox argued in his Times column this morning (see 11.01am), if the EU were to try this, there would be remedies available to the UK.
(He also says it would be up to Defra to enforce the blockade the PM supposedly thinks might happen.)
He says the answer to any challenge like this would not be to suspend the Northern Ireland protocol, but to enforce it.
Ed Miliband, the shadow business secretary, is speaking now for Labour.
He says that, although he had many disagreements with David Cameron when he shadowed him, he never thought they would disagree on a matter so fundamental as whether or not the UK should uphold international law.
Sir Bernard Jenkin, a Tory Brexiter, asks Miliband if he thinks the EU is negotiating in good faith. Miliband responds by quoting from the government response to the Northern Ireland select committee this morning. (See 12.36pm.)
Jeremy Wright has told the BBC’s PM programme that he is “profoundly disturbed” by this bill, Laura Kuenssberg reports.
AS PM is on his feet, another former Attorney General, Jeremy Wright, comes out against the changes, telling @BBCPM “This is far from just another day in Parliament and I, along with many others, are profoundly disturbed by what's going on"
— Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) September 14, 2020
This means that every Conservative attorney general since 2010 - Dominic Grieve, Wright and Geoffrey Cox - has now criticised the bill, apart from the present incumbent, Suella Braverman (a Brexiter and much more junior lawyer, who some suspected was appointed precisely because she would be amenable to policies like this).
Steve Brine, a Conservative, says the Tories promised in their manifesto that Northern Ireland would have “unfettered access” to Great Britain.
He asks for an assurance that getting a free trade deal with the EU is still government policy.
Johnson says passing the bill will “make the possibility of that great free trade agreement more real”.
He claims the bill will protect the territorial integrity of the UK and peace in Northern Ireland.
And that’s it. Johnson has finished. It was a surprisingly short and shallow speech for a bill with such massive implications.
Updated
Johnson says ministers are obliged to uphold the territorial integrity of the UK.
And the bill will allow money to be spent on levelling up, he says.
He says this time last year the Commons was deadlocked.
He says MPs should use this bill to send a message of unity to the EU.
Johnson says MPs would get vote on any proposal to use powers in internal market bill to overrride withdrawal agreement
Jeremy Wright, the former attorney general and the former culture secretary, says when he was attorney general, his view was that the ministerial code obliged ministers to obey not just domestic law, but international law too. Has that changed?
Johnson claims it has not.
He says he has no desire to use these measures. “They are an insurance policy,” he says.
If there is an agreement with the EU, these powers will never be invoked.
He says if the powers do have to be used, ministers would return to the Commons with a statutory power, on which a vote would have to be held.
This effectively concedes the point Sir Bob Neill is demanding in is amendment.
- Johnson says MPs would get a vote on any proposal to use the powers in the internal market bill to override the withdrawal agreement.
Updated
Johnson claims some in EU have floated plan for tariffs on all GB/NI trade in event of no deal
Johnson has been refusing interventions from opposition MPs, but he takes one from a sympathetic Tory who backs his case.
Moving on, Johnson says the EU threat is extraordinary. But he says the bill will not neutralise the threat made by the EU. Instead it will address the “intention” of some in the EU, he says.
Sir Bob Neill, the Tory chair of the justice committee, says there are already procedures in place in the withdrawal agreement to settle disputes. He suggests it would be better for the UK to use these first. That would protect Britain’s reputation.
Johnson agrees. He says the UK must go through the legal procedures.
But there are other avenues the EU could use if they are determined to interpret the protocol in “absurd” ways, he says.
He says some in the EU are arguing that, in the event of there being no UK-EU trade deal, all goods going from Britain to Northern Ireland would have to face tariffs because they would be at risk of going into the Irish market. That could mean tariffs of 90% by value on Scottish beef going to Northern Ireland.
He says no British PM or no parliament would accept this.
He says he still hopes this can be resolved in the joint committee reasonably.
Johnson says in recent months the EU has suggested it is willing to go to extreme and unreasonable lengths in interpreting the withdrawal agreement.
It has suggested it might refuse to list the UK as a third country for the sale of food. That means animal products from Britain could not be sold in Northern Ireland. That would constitute a blockade, he says.
Johnson says the bill will uphold the Tory manifesto commitment to guarantee “unfettered” trade between Britain and Northern Ireland after Brexit.
Boris Johnson is opening the debate.
He says the internal market bill will guarantee an internal market in the UK after Brexit.
Labour’s Stephen Doughty intervenes to ask why a Tory MP, Tobias Ellwood, described this as “Nixonian madman theory”.
Unamended I cannot support this Bill.
— Tobias Ellwood MP (@Tobias_Ellwood) September 12, 2020
Let’s secure Brexit-but remember what we stand for.
Already this Bill is damaging brand UK, diminishing our role-model status as defender of global standards. As we go to the wire let’s see more British statecraft-less Nixonian Madman Theory pic.twitter.com/pD5Sl55cC6
Johnson indicates he does not accept that analysis.
Boris Johnson opens debate on internal market bill
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, says he has selected the Labour amendment. That means it will be put to a vote at 10pm.
This is what the Labour amendment says.
That this house notes that the UK has left the EU; calls on the government to get on with negotiating a trade deal with the EU; recognises that legislation is required to ensure the smooth, effective working of the internal market across the UK; but declines to give a second reading to the internal market bill because this bill undermines the withdrawal agreement already agreed by parliament, re-opens discussion about the Northern Ireland protocol that has already been settled, breaches international law, undermines the devolution settlements and would tarnish the UK’s global reputation as a law-abiding nation and the UK’s ability to enforce other international trade deals and protect jobs and the economy.
Sajid Javid joins Tory rebels saying he can't back internal market bill in current form
Sajid Javid, the former chancellor, has said he cannot back the internal market bill in its current form. He is probably the most senior Conservative in the House of Commons to rebel on this issue.
(But saying he will not support the bill does not mean he will vote against at second reading. Most of the Tories who have spoken out are planning to abstain at second reading, not vote against. That still amounts to a defiance of the whip, but it is not viewed as seriously as voting against.)
It is not clear to me why it is necessary for the UK to break international law. I am regretfully unable to support the UK Internal Market Bill unamended. pic.twitter.com/ID0CeyXCeJ
— Sajid Javid (@sajidjavid) September 14, 2020
As a result of the coronavirus crisis, the House of Commons has now started publishing in advance lists of MPs due to speak in proceedings in the chamber. Here is the list of MPs down to speak in the internal market bill’s second reading debate. There are 105 names on the list. The debate will end at 10pm, and so it is likely that not all of them will be called.
Growing number of Tory MPs expected to abstain or vote against bill
More than 20 Conservative MPs, including a number of former lawyers, are expected to rebel or abstain at the vote on Boris Johnson’s internal market bill, which the government admits will break international law, risking the possibility that they will lose the Conservative whip, my colleague Jessica Elgot reports.
The debate on the internal market bill will start in about 20 minutes.
For information about what is in the bill, it is always hard to beat the analysis from the House of Commons library. Here’s its briefing paper on this bill (pdf), running to 74 pages.
As Boris Johnson arrived at the House of Commons, he may have seen our old friend Mr Stop Brexit (Steve Bray) back protesting outside the House of Commons with a new slogan. Bray got a special mention in the speech that Johnson delivered to Tory activists early on the morning of 13 December, after winning the general election.
Updated
More readers have been in touch to share their experience of problems with coronavirus testing. Here are three of them.
@Andrew. Similar pains here trying to get a Covid test. My son developed a cough, snuffy nose and a temperature over the weekend. Almost certainly a cold but school have told us until he receives a test then we all need to self-isolate for 14 days. But we can't get a test for love no money. It was inevitable that on schools opening, kids would get infections like colds which mirror covid and tests should have been made available. It now looks like he will miss 14 days of school.
@Andrew: For the second time, I was instructed to take a test by the C-19 by ZOE app. On both occasions, I requested and received an 'at home' test.
Last time around, 20th July, I received my results (negative) within 48 hours of sending my swab back to the lab.
This time, I sent the swab back on 8th September and have heard nothing since...
Updated
In the Commons Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, is making a statement about the UK-Japan free trade deal announced on Friday. She said signing the deal showed that “economic powerhouses like Japan” wanted trade deals with the UK, and that the UK could succeed outside the EU.
It also showed that the UK could go “further and faster” on trade on its own than as a member of the EU, she claimed. She said the new deal went “far beyond” the EU-Japan free trade deal (which the new deal will replace) on tech. She also said it included improved market access for services, and that as a result of it up to 70 British products would get geographical indication protection in Japan, compared with just seven under the EU deal.
Updated
There is more evidence of growing concern in Wales at the prospect of a second wave of Covid-19 with the Welsh government announcing £33m funding for a new 400-bed facility in Cardiff for coronavirus patients.
The “temporary surge” unit will be built to replace the beds that were available earlier this year at the Principality Stadium in the city.
Health minister Vaughan Gething said: “This investment will help Cardiff and Vale University health board manage any potential increase in admissions caused by Covid-19 in what is likely to be a challenging winter for health and social care services.”
Len Richards, chief executive at Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, said:
This will support our planning for increased capacity of up to 400 additional patients in response to the current modelling predictions and a second wave of Covid-19.
The build will be aligned to the de-commissioning programme of the Dragon’s Heart hospital at the Principality Stadium which we will have vacated by the end of October.
Updated
There have been no further coronavirus deaths in Northern Ireland, the Department of Health there has said in its latest update.
There have been no further coronavirus deaths in Wales, Public Health Wales reports on its daily dashboard. But 183 further cases have been reported in Wales.
This chart shows how the number of people testing positive (the blue bars) has been gradually increasing in Wales over the last month, although the number of tests being carried out (the green bars) has been rising too.
The UK government’s latest Brexit gambit, threatening to override the withdrawal agreement, has “backfired”, Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s deputy prime minister, said today. He explained:
I think what they [UK government] have done, if it was a negotiating tactic, has now backfired. Countries all around the world, the United States and other countries, are wondering if this is the kind of place we can do any deal with or any treaty with.
Updated
NHS England has recorded a further five coronavirus hospital deaths. Three were in the Midlands, and two were in the north east and Yorkshire. The people who died were all aged between 67 and 86 and they all had underlying health conditions. The full details are here.
From LBC’s Ben Kentish
EXCL: There are currently no tests at all available in ANY of the top 10 Covid-19 hotspots in England, LBC can reveal. No walk-in, drive-through or home tests available for people in Bolton, Salford, Bradford, Blackburn, Oldham, Preston, Pendle, Rochdale, Tameside or Manchester.
— Ben Kentish LBC (@BenKentish) September 14, 2020
UPDATE: And this is from my colleague Josh Halliday.
I'm told tests are available in some/all of these places but there are major problems accessing them. Testing centres are open yet many are not testing people despite increasing demand. Backlog in labs being blamed. "Complete meltdown," says one official. https://t.co/irbiWCnUX3
— Josh Halliday (@JoshHalliday) September 14, 2020
Updated
Downing Street says it's 'working hard' to increase testing capacity
Here are some of the point points from the Downing Street lobby briefing.
- The prime minister’s spokesman suggested that the EU was no longer showing “good faith” in the talks on implementing the withdrawal agreement. He said:
When we and the EU agreed to the joint committee process, it was based on an assumption that good faith would be shown by both sides in resolving outstanding matters and that’s what we still want to see happen and we stand ready to engage constructively with the EU on this ...
I think what both the prime minister and Lord Frost have set out is that there have been issues which have been raised during the course of the talks which have given cause for significant concern.
Asked to explain why the government has told a Commons select committee that it is “extremely confident that the EU is working in good faith” on this matter in a document published just this morning (see 12.36pm), the spokesman was unable to explain the inconsistency. Instead he just referred reporters to what Boris Johnson said on this on Saturday in his Telegraph article.
- The spokesman said the government was “working hard” to increase testing capacity. Asked about the test shortages, he said there was a high demand for tests and that laboratories were turning them around as quickly as possible. He said:
We are working hard to increase capacity. We have recently announce a new lab in Leicestershire which will process around 50,000 antigen tests a day in the next few weeks, and we have also opened new lab at Newport. We are also increasing the number of testing sites to 500 and have announced £500m to pilot new tests to further boost our capacity ...
We have assembled the largest testing network in British history, including 72 drive-through sites, 55 walk-in sites, 21 satellite sites and 236 mobile units, in order to allow people to get tested at places which are more accessible to them.
- The spokesman said the PM continues to believe that there are benefits from people being back in the workplace - despite the Welsh government saying trying to get everyone back into the office is not its policy for Wales.
- The spokesman suggested the police would not immediately start imposing fines today on people who break the “rule of six” restrictions. He said:
What you would expect to happen is for the police to be out today encouraging people to follow the new rules but in the coming days, if we see people continuing to flout the new rules, it is right that people could face a fine.
- The spokesman played down the suggestion that the government wants people to report their neighbours to the police if they are not obeying the rule of six. (See 8.46am.) Asked whether people should report neighbours who breach coronavirus rules, the spokesman said:
What we want people to be focused on is following the new rules and ensuring that they, themselves, help again as they have in the past to slow the spread of the virus.
What you have seen in recent weeks is some egregious flouting of the rules, such as the holding of large illegal parties, and members of the public have been contacting the police about those because they have been concerned about the risk to public health.
- The spokesman said that data on school attendance in England would be published tomorrow, but that around 99% of schools have reopened.
- The spokesman said he was unable to comment on the email from Sir Patrick Vallance saying he received a “telling off” after arguing strongly for a lockdown. (See 2.24pm.) He was not aware of the story, he said.
Updated
Vallance says he got 'telling off' from cabinet secretary after arguing strongly for lockdown, email reveals
Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, told colleagues that he received a “telling off” from Sir Mark Sedwill, the then permanent secretary, Prof Chris Whitty, the chief medical adviser, and Sir Chris Wormald, permanent secretary at the Department of Health, after arguing harder than others for a lockdown early in the crisis, it has been revealed.
These are from the BBC’s Secunder Kermani.
As UK Covid cases rise, new insight into the debate over lockdown restrictions back in March
— Secunder Kermani (@SecKermani) September 14, 2020
I've obtained this email from Govt's Chief Scientific Adviser
Vallance says he "argued stronger than anyone for action for lockdown" but received a "telling off" from senior officials pic.twitter.com/UExfBPBbOf
The "telling off" was from the Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty and the Cabinet Secretary
— Secunder Kermani (@SecKermani) September 14, 2020
The email, obtained via FOI request, appears to be a discussion about a Sunday Times article on 23rd May, criticising the delays in announcing a full lockdown:https://t.co/8aT36MMFvg
Unclear when the "telling off" occurred. Scientific advisors did call for "additional social distancing" on 16th March, but a full lockdown was announced on 23rd March
— Secunder Kermani (@SecKermani) September 14, 2020
It's now thought cases soared in that periodhttps://t.co/5tPE374SVf
Department of Health says there were no delays in ordering a lockdown, and the Govt followed the advice of scientists
— Secunder Kermani (@SecKermani) September 14, 2020
These are from HuffPost’s Paul Waugh.
NEW: Boris Johnson's Rule Of 6 has a controversial exemption - for grouse shooting and similar field sports.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) September 14, 2020
Upto 30 people can gather to hunt with guns cos classed as a licensed outdoor sport.
EXCLUSIVE: Cab Office drafted special meeting on exemptionhttps://t.co/ENegIZlOL1
HuffPost has learned that a special meeting of the govt's Covid-19 Operations sub committee - chaired by Michael Gove - was arranged for Saturday afternoon with just one item on the agenda: exemptions for shooting/hunting.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) September 14, 2020
The meeting was pulled just a few hours beforehand with a message to ministers and officials that the issue would be discussed another time via correspondence. But then the regulations went up just before midnight the following day.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) September 14, 2020
Some insiders think the govt axed the meeting and went ahead anyway cos they feared some ministers could have tried to block the exemption.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) September 14, 2020
Govt sources say that it was the 'hunting/shooting' exemption that held up the entire Rule Of 6 regulations last night.
— Paul Waugh (@paulwaugh) September 14, 2020
Hence being published just before midnight, hours after they were expected.
In Scotland no deaths of confirmed Covid-19 patients have been recorded in the past 24 hours and the number of fatalities remains at 2,499. There are 264 people in hospital confirmed to have the virus, up by five in 24 hours. As PA Media reports, of these patients, seven were in intensive care, the same as the previous day.
At the European commission’s daily press briefing the commission’s spokesman insisted that the EU had played a “straight bat” when it came to implementing the withdrawal agreement. He would not respond to specific allegations made in the UK about the EU’s conduct. He told reporters:
The withdrawal agreement is the underpinning, and it’s the framework for our relationship with the UK - no ifs, no buts.
Questions relating to the implementation of the withdrawal agreement are meant to be discussed and resolved in the joint committee.
We have played a straight bat on this. We have set this out extremely clearly, and the rest, frankly, is internal debate in the United Kingdom.
We are not going to get involved in the comments and remarks that are made by different players.
This is from Boris Johnson.
I’ve spoken with @Keir_Starmer to pass on my best wishes. Sincerely hope he & his family are well.
— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) September 14, 2020
(According to Labour, Sir Keir Starmer is fine. He’s just self-isolating because a family member has symptoms.)
Ed Miliband, the shadow business secretary, will be opening for Labour in the internal market bill debate later, the party has confirmed. He will be responding to Boris Johnson instead of Sir Keir Starmer, who is self-isolating. (See 11.55am.)
Boris Johnson to open Commons debate on internal market bill
The Downing Street lobby briefing has just ended. And we’ve been told that Boris Johnson will be opening the second reading debate this afternoon on the internal market bill instead of the business secretary, Alok Sharma.
There will be a statement first from Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, on the UK-Japan free trade deal, and so Johnson will be on his feet soon after 4.30pm. (There are no urgent questions.)
I will post other lines from the lobby briefing shortly.
And here is another Tory rebel. Damian Collins says he will support the amendment to the internal market bill tabled by Sir Bob Neill, the Conservative chair of the justice committee, that would require ministers to win a fresh vote in the Commons if they wanted to use the powers in the bill to depart from the Brexit withdrawal agreement.
I've added my name in support of the @neill_bob amendment to the Internal Market Bill. This requires parliamentary approval before any future decision could be made by the government, to disapply the terms of the Northern Ireland protocol in the Withdrawal Agreement. pic.twitter.com/6HsFxj9a7O
— Damian Collins (@DamianCollins) September 14, 2020
This is from Gary Streeter, another Conservative MP who says he cannot support the government’s internal market bill in its current form.
Just to let constituents know that I will not be supporting the government over the Internal Market Bill. I will explain my reasons in my Facebook article later this week. Those constituents who have emailed me will get a response today.
— Gary Streeter MP (@garystreeterSWD) September 14, 2020
Ireland’s foreign minister, Simon Coveney, has suggested that Boris Johnson was advised by “hawks” in Downing Street to use the internal market bill as leverage in both the negotiations over the future EU-UK relationship and implementation of the withdrawal agreement. Coveney said:
The negotiations were going in a way that was building pressure on the British government to compromise on some things they had agreed to do, like agree with the EU a level playing field, so we’d have fair competition between the UK and EU markets.
Last weekend, the hawks within No 10 managed to convince the prime minister to take a much more aggressive approach to these negotiations ... where effectively the UK government is saying to the EU and Ireland ‘give us what we want in these negotiations ... some of which is not consistent with international law’. In many ways, it’s an extraordinary approach to take in a negotiation with a partner you’re looking to build a future relationship with.
But Coveney said he was convinced Johnson wanted a deal and that the issues raised in the internal market bill, such as the reach of EU state aid rules into the whole of the UK or the need for export declarations on goods going from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, could be resolved. He explained:
I think the British prime minister does want a deal, but he has a strange way of going about it ... I think in the privacy of the negotiating rooms what needs to happen here is the EU needs to understand what are the real issues here the UK has that need to be solved , and how do we solve them within the parameters of the withdrawal agreement and the protocol on Northern Ireland that is signed off on.
Coveney said that he thought it would be possible to resolve the outstanding border trade issues (state aid, tariffs and exit declarations), but that these matters should be settled “in the appropriate place, which is the joint committee, the specialised committee, and negotiating rooms in a way that’s consistent with the withdrawal agreement”. He said failure to strike a deal would be a “nightmare scenario” for Britain and Ireland, and to a lesser extent for the rest of the EU too.
Updated
Sturgeon demands urgent explanation from UK government for reasons for test result delays
Nicola Sturgeon has said the Scottish government has raised urgent concerns with the UK government about significant delays getting Covid test results from the UK’s rapid testing centre.
The first minister said there were only 70 positive tests produced in Scotland overnight, compared with 221 on Saturday and 244 reported yesterday, because of significant delays getting results back. She said those 70 cases were likely to be a significant underestimate, because positive findings were being delayed.
“We now have very serious concerns that the backlog with test results affecting the UK lab network is starting to impact on the timeous reporting of those results,” she said, during her regular coronavirus briefing.
She said Jeane Freeman, the Scottish health secretary, had resisted requests from the UK government to cut back on its testing by the Lighthouse laboratory in Scotland, and was seeking urgent talks today to press for quicker test results. Sturgeon went on:
We need the UK government to share the full scale and nature of the issues that they’re facing so we can collectively and very quickly find solutions.
Even though the number of cases was much lower, the positive cases still represented 2.7% of the results available in the last 24 hours. That was still close to the 3% positive rate being seen in recent days, which was triple the proportion of positive cases three weeks ago. Yesterday, the positive rate was 3.7%.
“It’s another reminder that we’re in a more precarious position as we go into winter,” she said.
Updated
Government tells committee that EU is 'working in good faith' on Brexit implementation, undermining claim made by PM
The government claims it needs to legislate to give it the power to overrule the Brexit withdrawal agreement because the EU has been threatening a move that could prevent Britain supplying food to Northern Ireland. In his Telegraph article on Saturday Boris Johnson said that “in the last few weeks” he had become aware of a problem with the way the EU was interpreting the withdrawal agreement and he explained:
We are now hearing that unless we agree to the EU’s terms, the EU will use an extreme interpretation of the Northern Ireland protocol to impose a full-scale trade border down the Irish sea. We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI.
I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a Treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off; or that they would actually threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK.
But this morning the Commons Northern Ireland affairs committee has published the government’s response to a report it published on customs arrangements in Northern Ireland after Brexit. And that document says the government believes that the EU working with the UK on how to implement the withdrawal agreement “in good faith”. It says:
The government is extremely confident that the EU is working in good faith and shares our desire to avoid these serious consequences. However as a responsible government we must ensure there is no risk of these damaging consequences coming into force. It is therefore important for the government to be able to act as necessary if a negotiated outcome in the joint committee should not be possible. This is not an outcome that we expect, or hope for, but one that any responsible government must be prepared for.
This latest statement, in a document sent to the select committee by Brandon Lewis, the Northern Ireland secretary, undermines the claim being made by Johnson on Saturday.
🆕We have published the Government's response to our report on Unfettered Access: Customs Arrangements in Northern Ireland after Brexit.
— Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (@CommonsNIAC) September 14, 2020
📄Read the response: https://t.co/87JsPyqZsQ#UnfetteredAccess | #Brexit | #NorthernIreland pic.twitter.com/ZREaTKIuBy
Updated
'If we give our word, then we must honour it' – Tory MPs quits role as PM's envoy over internal market bill
The Conservative MP Rehman Chishti has resigned as the prime minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief because he says he cannot support the internal market bill in its current form. In his letter Chishti says:
During my 10 years in parliament and before that as a barrister, I have always acted in a manner which respects the rule of law. I feel strongly about keeping the commitments we make; if we give our word, then we must honour it.
I’ve written to the PM resigning as PM’s Special Envoy on FoRB. I can’t support Internal Market Bill in its current form, which unilaterally break UK’s legal commitments. As an MP for 10yrs & former Barrister, values of respecting rule of law & honouring one’s word are dear to me pic.twitter.com/dZq2TzX3kG
— Rehman Chishti (@Rehman_Chishti) September 14, 2020
Updated
Starmer self-isolating after family member develops possible Covid symptoms, says Labour
Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman has just issued this statement.
This morning Keir Starmer was advised to self isolate after a member of his household showed possible symptoms of the coronavirus. The member of his household has now had a test. In line with NHS guidelines, Keir will self-isolate while awaiting the results of the test and further advice from medical professionals.
Starmer himself does not have any symptoms, we’re told. He will be working from home and will not be speaking in the Commons this afternoon. He was only told about the family member developing symptoms after his LBC phone-in this morning. Labour has alerted LBC. Starmer was in the studio with Nick Ferrari, the presenter, although from the video footage they did seem to be trying to socially distance.
Readers to continue to get in touch to say that they cannot book a coronavirus test. Here is just one comment from below the line today.
@Andrew I don’t think the state of the testing system is being reported - I tried to get one at 4am: no tests. Tried every half an hour until 8am when it appeared that appointments were available, but the site crashed so I couldn’t select a test centre. Tried again at 9am and no tests available. This is a disaster.
To sum up, in March they delayed implementing Covid control measures by a week (allowing a racing event to go ahead) & didn’t have enough tests
In September they delayed implementing Covid control measures by a week (allowing a racing event to go ahead) & don’t have enough tests
I am cross
ITV’s political editor Robert Peston has been hearing the same stories. In a series of tweets, he says NHS Test and Trace is being overwhelmed by demand.
I am being inundated with messages from people with what they fear may be #Covid_19 symptoms who cannot work because they can’t get a test. So what is going on? It is not all about the growing incidence of the virus. Though that is part of it. Here is what a source from...
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
NHS Test and Trace tells me: “demand for testing has gone through the roof. It’s almost like the loo roll phenomenon early on the year. We are doing more testing per head of population than other European countries but at current demand...
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
“even once we have doubled that testing capacity (which we will do by end Oct) we will still have the problem you describe. HMG has made a fundamental choice to test all care home staff once a week which uses a huge amount of our testing capacity...
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
“but I think that’s right as that’s where the biggest risk is. We see a lot of people coming forward for testing who don’t have symptoms and just like every other bit of the NHS if we don’t manage that demand there is a problem”. Or to put it another way, if you want a test...
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
you will have to be patient. But as I said last week, this shortage of tests may lead schools and other institutions to shut temporarily if too many teachers and other staff are off work not really knowing if they are properly ill or not. This testing shortage is a big problem.
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
PS I understand that 100,000 tests are being delivered to social care settings every day. So that is two-fifths of all testing capacity being absorbed to protect the elderly and vulnerable. Which most people would say makes sense. But it means that with infections...
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
rising, there may well be inadequate capacity for the rest of the population for weeks and months, unless @BorisJohnson’s derided “moonshot” of exponential expansion based on new technologies actually works.
— Robert Peston (@Peston) September 14, 2020
On the new rule of six, the barrister Adam Wagner has a very good thread on Twitter on the detail of the regulations enforcing this new rule, which he says were published just 15 minutes before they were due to come into force. (See 9.55am.) It starts here.
🚨They are here. 15 minuets before they come into force. A new record - and not a good one.
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) September 13, 2020
The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2020https://t.co/qTNAgoT0BN pic.twitter.com/Ddr2bfbCUK
On the Today programme this morning Kit Malthouse, the policing minister, said (after a bit of prompting) that people should report neighbours to the police if they were breaking the new “rule of six”. (See 8.46am.) But when Martin Hewitt, chairman of the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), was asked on the same programme a bit later if he too would encourage people to report their neighbours in that way, he gave a more nuanced answer. He replied:
Well, in the first instance I guess someone could speak to that person ....
But I think the real point here is about individuals taking responsibility. As an individual, as a family member, as a person in whatever business, we all have to take responsibility.
It is really important to say that, over the last six months, our experience is that the vast majority of people have adhered to the regulations, have followed the guidance, to try and keep the virus at bay.
In a statement on the NPCC’s website Hewitt said that, when enforcing the new rule, police would continue to follow the “engage, explain and encourage” approach, only fining people when they refused to comply.
Welsh health minister warns that national lockdown could be just weeks away
The Welsh health minister has warned that a national lockdown could be a few weeks away unless people follow the new Covid-19 regulations.
On the day most people in Wales are obliged to wear masks when they go into shops and other public places, Vaughan Gething said the country was in a “parallel position to early February”, adding: “We were in national lockdown in the third week of March.”
Speaking on BBC Radio Wales, Gething said:
We have a number of weeks to be able to get to a position where we can recover some of the ground with a return to effective social distancing, with a return to respecting the rules we have in place to save people’s lives or we will be forced into greater local lockdowns and the potential for another national lockdown.
He said that if a widespread lockdown was necessary he hoped all four governments would work together, but said he would also take Wales-only action if needed.
Gething called for Cobra meetings involving the four UK governments to take place. He was also critical of a “unilateral decision” taken to cap the number of tests from Wales being processed by the UK’s Lighthouse labs.
In Caerphilly, south Wales, where a local lockdown was put in place last week, the minister said Covid was being detected not just in young people but in over-40s and 50s. He said that this would result in more people being hospitalised in the next three weeks.
Updated
In an interview with Times Radio this morning Geoffrey Cox, the Conservative Brexiter and former attorney general, said that he had spoken to Boris Johnson before announcing his opposition to the internal market bill in an article in the Times (paywall) this morning. Cox told the station:
I have spoken to the prime minister. We’ve had long discussions and I know the prime minister is giving very careful thought to these things.
In his Times article Cox says that it would be “unconscionable” for the UK to abandon treaty obligations that it accepted less than 12 months ago. He says:
When the Queen’s minister gives his word, on her behalf, it should be axiomatic that he will keep it, even if the consequences are unpalatable. By doing so he pledges the faith, honour and credit of this nation and it diminishes the standing and reputation of Britain in the world if it should be seen to be otherwise ...
He says that when it signed the withdrawal agreement treaty, the UK accepted “the inevitable application of EU tariffs and customs procedures to certain goods entering Northern Ireland from Great Britain and of the EU’s state aid regime to the province”. He goes on:
If the powers that the House of Commons is asked today to confer on the government by assenting to the UK internal market bill are to be used to nullify those perfectly plain and foreseeable consequences, they would amount to nothing more or less than the unilateral abrogation of the treaty obligations to which we pledged our word less than 12 months ago, and which this parliament ratified in February.
It is unconscionable that this country, justly famous for its regard for the rule of law around the world, should act in such a way.
As David Frost, the UK’s Brexit negotiator, explained in a Twitter thread yesterday, the government is arguing that it needs to take powers to suspend parts of the withdrawal agreement because the EU is refusing to commit to listing the UK as a third country for food imports, which means there is a risk of it being unable to send food from Britain to Northern Ireland if this matter remains unresolved by 1 January 2021.
But, in his article, Cox argues that if the EU is using this as a threat, the UK has other remedies available. He explains:
These include triggering the agreed independent arbitration procedure set out in the withdrawal agreement and, in extremis, these might legitimately extend to taking temporary and proportionate measures, where they are urgently necessary to protect the fundamental interests of the UK (in my view if, and only if, specifically approved at the time by the House of Commons,) for the period until that arbitration has concluded.
What ministers should not do, however provoked or frustrated they may feel, is to take or use powers permanently and unilaterally to rewrite portions of an agreement into which this country freely entered just a few months ago.
Simon Hoare, the Conservative MP who chairs the Northern Ireland affairs committee, has welcomed Cox’s intervention.
Geoffrey is a man for whom respect for the Rule of Law (and it’s defence) is paramount. His intervention cannot be overlooked, ignored or swatted away https://t.co/xegfmeBcVE
— Simon Hoare MP (@Simon4NDorset) September 14, 2020
I remember hearing lots of colleagues saying at the time: ‘if Geoffrey says it’s no dice; I’m not playing’. Lots saying ‘if Cox unhappy I’m not going for it’. As a committed Brexiter he should remain an important lightening rod https://t.co/dzzGC9RYQr
— Simon Hoare MP (@Simon4NDorset) September 14, 2020
On the Today programme this morning Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader who is now shadow business secretary, described the government’s plan to overrule parts of the Brexit withdrawal agreement as “legislative hooliganism”. He said:
I’ve come on your programme many times to discuss many issues – I have never been on your programme discussing a British government coming along and seeking to break international law, an agreement it signed.
It is honestly a sad day and that’s why I think you hear people across the political spectrum condemning the government ...
Of the most sensitive issues around Northern Ireland, at the most sensitive stage of the Brexit negotiations – I mean it’s sort of legislative hooliganism that the government is engaged in and it will be self-defeating, I fear.
Updated
Here’s a good question from BTL.
@Andrew
Has the UK government actually passed the legislation to move the "rule of six" into law?
Because, evidently, as of late last night, they had not..?
https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1305256006583291904
No point in "reporting your neighbours" if the police can't do anything about it..?
The legislation was published very late last night. It’s here (pdf). Like much of the legislation implementing lockdown, it takes the form of regulations passed under the Public Health Act 1984. Regulations like this effectively become law when signed by a minister.
The final question was about Scottish independence. Ferrari played a clip of the Welsh first minister saying that no UK prime minister should stand in the way of an independence referendum in Scotland or Wales if that is what people wanted.
Starmer said Labour would go into next year’s Scottish parliament elections supporting the union and opposing a second independence referendum. But he did not say whether he would continue to oppose one if the SNP won a majority (which would give them a mandate for one).
Q: Why is Pete Willsman still in the Labour party?
Starmer says it has taken too long to deal with this disciplinary cases. But new processes are in place, he says.
The next caller asks why the Labour Hammersmith and Fulham council and the Labour mayor of London have not been able to do anything to open Hammersmith bridge. It was closed to everyone recently, after being closed for cars for months.
Starmer says he does not know the full reasons for this, but he says he is the sort of leader who likes to sort out problems. He will makes some calls on this, he says.
Q: Why were you so angry when Johnson accused you of supporting Jeremy Corbyn despite his failure to condemn the IRA?
Starmer says he spent years working with the police prosecuting terrorist cases. And he has never failed to condemn the IRA.
Q: You told Corbyn this?
Starmer says Corbyn knows his view. He says he has family members affected by terrorism.
Q: When Corbyn was leader, did you publicly speak out about his views on the IRA?
Starmer says he has often spoken out on these issues. He says Johnson also accused him of saying nothing about Salisbury - even though Starmer had.
Updated
Starmer says Labour is not calling for tax increases, particularly at the moment, when the economy needs to recover.
But he says Labour will produce tax plans before the next election to address how to manage the rising level of debt.
Q: What would you do about furlough?
Starmer says Labour wants to extend the furlough scheme for certain sectors. It is clear which ones need help, he says: retail, theatre/arts/culture, aviation and travel.
Starmer says it is unacceptable that some tower blocks are still covered with Grenfell-type cladding.
Starmer says, at PMQs, Boris Johnson always saves up his insults against Starmer until he is replying to the sixth question, so that Starmer does not get a come-back.
Ferrari says, if Starmer wants, he is free to come on LBC on the Thursday to reply.
Q: Why did you criticise Extinction Rebellion for blocking newspaper printing plants? I feel we are lacking an opposition with any strength, an opposition willing to do what is necessary to protect the future?
LBC’s Nick Ferrari makes the opposite point; he suggests Starmer took too long to criticise the Extinction Rebellion blockade.
Starmer does not accept that. He says Labour did criticise the move, and he put out his own statement. He says a free press is necessary, and this action was counter-productive.
The caller says protests have to have an impact.
Starmer says he has nothing against protests. But he thinks this one was counterproductive.
Q: Dawn Butler and Diane Abbott seemed to endorse it. Have you spoken to them about this?
Starmer says he has not, but he says he does not agree with them on this.
Q: Do you think the rule of six is a good policy?
Starmer says he does. He says he thinks the government needs a rule that is easy to understand.
He says he is urging people to follow the rules.
Q: Why six?
Starmer says the scientists are backing this rule.
Q: If Johnson were here, he would quote figures saying how well the test and trace system is doing?
Starmer says, when people criticise the system, Johnson always responds with a new promise about the future. He says he just wants Johnson to fix the current problems.
Updated
A caller says the local lockdowns are in areas with large numbers of BAME people. Why is Labour not talking about that?
Starmer says the group most likely to have Covid at the moment are younger people. He wants the government to get a grip.
Starmer says Labour will not go along with breaking international law. He says quite a few Conservative MPs say the same.
He says he suspects Boris Johnson is doing this to get leverage in the trade talks.
He very much hopes there’s a deal, he says.
Q: Who’s right on the internal market bill - Tony Blair or Boris Johnson.
Starmer says Johnson is all over the place. He says Johnson must have known what was in the withdrawal agreement when he signed it. He says it is possible to agree a deal with the EU. Johnson should get on and do it.
Q: Should the government break a treaty?
Starmer says if the UK breaks a treaty, it will lose trust.
He says the government should drop these reckless clauses and come back to the Commons with something that would work. At that point Labour will look at it.
He says his message to Johnson is: “Get on with it.” Johnson should get a deal.
Q: What if the EU refused to grant third country status to the UK? Would you back the government breaking the law then?
Starmer says the government claims made by this are not accurate.
He says this matter can be resolved with the EU.
Updated
Keir Starmer's LBC phone-in
Sir Keir Starmer is starting his LBC phone-in.
You can watch/listen here.
Cameron joins all four other living former PMs in criticising internal market bill
David Cameron has said he has “misgivings” about the internal market bill, the government legislation that would overrule parts of the Brexit withdrawal agreement. He did so in a brief broadcast interview this morning, following in the footsteps of all the other former prime ministers still alive - Sir John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Theresa May - who have already criticised the bill.
Cameron said:
Passing an Act of Parliament and then going on to break an international treaty obligation is the very, very last thing you should contemplate. It should be an absolute final resort. So, I do have misgivings about what’s being proposed.
But, I would just make this point. So far what’s happened is the government has proposed a law that it might pass, or might not pass, or might use, or might not use depending on whether ... certain circumstances do, or do not appear.
And, of course, the bigger picture here is that we are in a vital negotiation with the European Union to get a deal and I think we have to keep that context, that big prize in mind. And that’s why I have perhaps held back from saying more up to now.
Cameron’s comment is interesting not just because of his criticism, but because he sounds very sceptical as to whether it will ever become law in anything like its current form. Ministers have been strongly hinting that they have been using it primarily as a negotiating tactic. There have been claims that is has no chance of getting through the House of Lords in its current form and, although ministers have set aside four days for its committee stage debate in the Commons (on Tuesday and Wednesday this week, and Monday and Tuesday next week), they have not yet scheduled a date for its third reading in the Commons.
This is from Sky’s Joe Pike.
WATCH: David Cameron expresses ‘grave misgivings’ about Boris Johnson’s Internal Markets Bill.
— Joe Pike (@joepike) September 14, 2020
He is the fifth (and final) former Prime Minister to do so. #Brexit pic.twitter.com/QWT9tsFKUB
Updated
Report your neighbours to police if they're breaking rule of six, says policing minister
Good morning. We’ve got another busy day ahead, with Britain moving into a new phase in the fight against coronavirus - the “rule of six” is coming into force in England, Scotland and Wales (in slightly different forms), joining Northern Ireland (where a version already applies) and MPs will get their first chance to vote on the government legislation that would overrule the Brexit withdrawal agreement, a bill whose publication has brought relations between Brussels and London to a new low.
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister, was on the Today programme this morning talking about the “rule of six” and, when pressed by the presenter Mishal Husein, he said that people should report their neighbours to the police if they thought they were ignoring the rule.
Asked about what people could do, Malthouse said:
We are in discussions about what reporting mechanisms there might be but there is obviously the non-emergency number that people can ring and report issues they wish to.
Certainly during the initial stage of lockdown, we did see a surge in those reports coming through to the police.
If people are concerned, if they do think there is contravention then that option is open to them.
Then, pressed on whether that would involve reporting a gathering of seven or more in a neighbour’s garden, Malthouse said:
It is open to neighbours to do exactly that through the non-emergency number and if they are concerned and they do see that kind of thing, then absolutely they should think about it.
Asked if he was saying residents should be concerned about local breaches of law in neighbouring properties and report them to the police, he replied: “Yes.”
Here is the agenda for the day.
9am: Sir Keir Starmer hosts his LBC “Call Keir” phone-in.
11.10am: Frances O’Grady, the TUC general secretary, speaks on the first day of the TUC’s virtual annual conference.
12pm: Downing Street is expected to hold its lobby briefing.
12.15pm: The Scottish government is expected to hold its daily coronavirus briefing.
12.30pm: Vaughan Gething, the Welsh government’s health minister, holds a coronavirus briefing.
After 3.30pm: MPs begin the debate on the second reading of the internal market bill. They will vote at 10pm.
Politics Live has been doubling up as the UK coronavirus live blog for some time and, given the way the Covid crisis eclipses everything, this will continue for the foreseeable future. But we will be covering non-Covid political stories too, like Brexit, and where they seem more important and interesting, they will take precedence.
Here is our global coronavirus live blog.
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. I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Updated
@andrew Trying to find a test site for my postcode directs me to Warminster (70 miles away) saying there are slots available, but when you try to find a time it has none for today or any day (I got as far as October...).