Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Brexit minister apologises to peers for saying article 50 cannot be revoked - Politics live

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, speaking on his mobile phone during a meeting of the EU general affairs council. He is briefing the EU27 on the state of the Brexit talks.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, speaking on his mobile phone during a meeting of the EU general affairs council. He is briefing the EU27 on the state of the Brexit talks. Photograph: John Thys/AFP/Getty Images

Afternoon summary

  • Lord Callanan, a Brexit minister, has apologised to the House of Lords for wrongly telling peers that article 50 cannot be revoked. (See 3.34pm.)
  • The 10 cabinet ministers who sit on the EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) sub committee have been meeting in Downing Street to discuss increasing the UK’s financial offer to the EU. The meeting seems to be still going on.

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Sir Ivan Rogers, who was the UK’s ambassador to the EU until he resigned unexpectedly in January after falling out with Number 10, has been speaking at an NFU event today. Thomas Cole from Open Britain has some of the highlights.

Boris Johnson arriving in Downing Street ahead of this afternoon’s meeting of the EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) cabinet sub committee.
Boris Johnson arriving in Downing Street ahead of this afternoon’s meeting of the EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) cabinet sub committee. Photograph: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP/Getty Images

And, while we’re on the subject of Brexit and Germany, Robert Peston’s Facebook post on the Brexit bill issue is worth a read. Here’s an extract.

Second, can the EU actually accept a new offer from the UK on how much we think we owe - £40bn versus EU estimates of more than £60bn - when the most powerful country in Europe Germany is in political turmoil?

In other words, is there any point making a better divorce offer when Angela Merkel is focussed on her own political survival, and is unlikely to prioritise what for her is the irksome secondary issue of whether the UK is adequately recognising its debts?

May and her Cabinet big hitters will have a genuine debate today. And they are likely to license May and Davis to offer that £40bn or so.

But it is a potential problem that some EU governments think we should pay much more. It would be of a piece with the chaos of the Brexit talks to date if the EU says thanks and they’ll get back to us when Germany has a stable leader.

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

Electoral Commission announced investigation into Vote Leave

The Electoral Commission has announced it is investigating whether Vote Leave broke campaign spending rules during the EU referendum. It is also investigating Darren Grimes, who received £625,000 from Vote Leave despite being a student, and Veterans for Britain, which received £100,000 from Vote Leave. Grimes and Veterans for Britain both spent money on digital marketing.

In a press statement the commission said:

The Electoral Commission has today announced it has opened an investigation to establish whether Vote Leave Limited, Mr Darren Grimes and/or Veterans for Britain breached campaign finance rules in relation to spending at the 2016 EU referendum ...

The opening of this investigation follows a review of previous assessments that the Electoral Commission conducted in February and March 2017 which, at the time, resulted in no further action being taken. Since that time, new information has come to light which, when considered alongside the information obtained previously, has given the Commission reasonable grounds to suspect an offence may have been committed.

Vote Leave, Grimes and Veterans for Britain were all “permitted participants” in the referendum, meaning they were allowed to spend money on campaigning up to a certain level.

The commission said its investigation would look at four issues.

whether or not Mr Grimes may have delivered a return that was incorrect in relation to a donation he received from Vote Leave and related campaign spending;

whether or not Veterans for Britain delivered a return that was incorrect in relation to a donation it received from Vote Leave and related campaign spending;

whether or not Vote Leave delivered a return that was incorrect in relation to campaign spending;

whether or not Vote Leave exceeded its spending limit in the referendum.

My colleague Jessica Elgot has written this up here.

The Conservative MP George Freeman has now responded to the Labour press announcement about his resignation. (See 3.57pm.) And, in doing so, he has clarified that it was not so much a matter of standing down as chairman as winding up the whole enterprise.

For the record, this is what Labour’s Jon Trickett actually said about the “resignation”.

For a man who once said that the ‘raison d’ être’ of his role in No.10 was to face the challenge of renewal in office, his resignation speaks volumes on the current state of the Tories in government.

Jon Trickett.
Jon Trickett. Photograph: Sky News

We like our live blogs at the Guardian. But even we drew the line at a live blog of the EU27 deciding at the general affairs council which countries are going to host the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and and the European Banking Authority (EBA) when they leave London after Brexit.

But, don’t worry, Politico Europe are on the case. They are covering all the drama, including the Eurovision-style voting system, in a blog here.

Jon Trickett, the shadow minister for the Cabinet Office, triggered a story alert in the press gallery at Westminster a few minutes ago by putting out a press release about the Conservative MP George Freeman resigning from his role as a policy chief at Number 10. This took journalists by surprise because no one knew he had resigned.

It turns out Trickett was referring to this line, buried in the middle of a long ConservativeHome article by Freeman that was posted online at around 7am this morning. Freeman said:

And it’s why I’ve stood down as chair of the prime minister’s policy board in Number Ten, to focus on my role as chair of the Conservative policy forum.

But Freeman was not talking about resigning today, or indeed any time recently. MailOnline’s James Tapsfield says that the prime minister’s policy board was wound up at the time of the election, and has not been revived since, and so his “resignation” appears to be a bit of a non-event.

George Freeman.
George Freeman. Photograph: BBC

Brexit minister apologises to peers for saying article 50 cannot be revoked

Lord Callanan, who was appointed a Brexit minister last month to replace Lady Anelay, who stood down for health reasons, has just apologised in the House of Lords for telling peers last week that article 50 could not be revoked.

Asked a week ago today to confirm that the supreme court, in the Gina Miller case, said article 50 was irrevocable, he said:

I can confirm that. It is also stated by the European commission that article 50, once invoked, is irrevocable unless there is political agreement on it.

The Labour peer Andrew Adonis said he would be reporting Callanan to the privileges committee over this because it was a false statement that Callanan was refusing to correct.

And today Callanan did apologise. In a statement to peers, he said that his statement last Monday was incorrect. That was a result of “a misunderstanding of the question”, he said.

To reiterate, for the avoidance of any doubt, the supreme court proceeded in the Miller case on the basis that article 50 would not be be revoked, but did not rule on the legal position regarding its irrevocability. It was, and remains, the government’s policy that our notification of article 50 will not be withdrawn ...

I recognise that my comments have caused confusion and I apologise to the House.

Lord Kerr, the British diplomat credited with drafting article 50, has repeated said article 50 could be reversed.

Lord Callanan.
Lord Callanan. Photograph: Parliament TV

The Conservative MP John Redwood told BBC News a few minutes ago that he did not see why the UK should have to pay any money to the EU after it left. He said:

I have not yet seen any legal base for payments other than our contributions up to the date of leaving. Bear in mind how generous that is. Because of the extra nine months delay over the court proceedings, it does mean that roughly £30bn payments will be made from the date when we decided to leave until the date when we do leave, and it gives you a long transitional period for both sides, which I think should be sufficient.

John Redwood.
John Redwood. Photograph: BBC/BBC News

Michel Barnier is now briefing ministers from the EU 27 on the Brexit talks.

Michel Barnier, left, speaks with Spain’s secretary of state for the European Union, Jorge Toledo Albinana, during a meeting of EU ministers in Brussels.
Michel Barnier, left, speaks with Spain’s secretary of state for the European Union, Jorge Toledo Albinana, during a meeting of EU ministers in Brussels. Photograph: Virginia Mayo/AP

Simon Coveney, the Irish foreign minister, has welcomed what Michel Barnier said about Ireland in his speech today. (See 12.24pm.)

The Freight Trade Association has welcomed Michel Barnier’s speech, my colleague Lisa O’Carroll reports.

Best for Britain, a group campaigning for a second Brexit referendum, has said the Michel Barnier speech calls the bluff of “extremist Brexiters”. Its chief executive, Eloise Todd, says:

Michel Barnier has called the bluff of extremist Brexiters in the government who have spent the last year falsely claiming we can get the best free trade deal by not getting any deal at all.

The Brexiters are too busy briefing rubbish about each other to the press to look at the real consequences of Brexit. Putting their fingers in their ears while singing Rule Britannia is not how adults negotiate.

The “Rule Britannia” line is a reference to this anecdote in a Financial Times column (paywall) by Philip Stephens last month. He wrote:

I am told that [Boris] Johnson’s response when presented with inconvenient truths is to cover his ears and hum the national anthem until the bearers of the bad news go away. One of the things that gets him humming most loudly is the hard evidence that falling back on WTO rules would decimate Britain’s professional services businesses.

Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, has been engaged in a Twitter war with the Royle Family actor Ralf Little over mental health funding. It was triggered by Little claiming that Hunt had lied about increased mental health provision. Little clearly struck a nerve because Hunt has responded today with a 26-item Twitter thread in which he defends his record, but admits that one figure he gave to the House of Commons was wrong. The thread starts here.

Open Britain, which is campaigning for a soft Brexit, has put out this statement about Michel Barnier’s speech. It is from the Labour MP Wes Streeting. He said:

Today we’ve learnt that British families are already becoming worse off by £400 a year as a result of the Brexit squeeze. And now Michel Barnier has confirmed that a hard Brexit will put more jobs at risk in our financial services sector.

The government’s decision to leave the single market will make it impossible for firms to carry out some of their business in the UK. They are driving jobs to move out of London to Frankfurt, Dublin and Paris. And later today we will see the announcement that the European banking authority will pull out of London, putting yet more jobs at risk.

Labour members have got to elected three new people to serve as constituency party representatives on the national executive committee (NEC) following reforms agreed at the party conference in Brighton. Constituency Labour party (CLP) nominations closed yesterday and Momentum, the Labour group for Jeremy Corbyn supporters, has released figures showing that the three candidates on its slate, Yasmine Dar, Rachel Garnham and Jon Lansman, have got far more nominations than the three candidates being backed by the centrist groups Labour First and Progress, Eddie Izzard, Johanna Baxter, and Gurinder Singh Josan.

According to Momentum, here are the figures.

250 CLPs cast the following nominations:

170 for Yasmine Dar

155 for Rachel Garnham

148 for Jon Lansman

71 for Eddie Izzard

69 for Johanna Baxter

54 for Gurinder Singh Josan

6 for Sarah Taylor

5 for James Craigie

5 for Jason Donovan

21 for others

Having the most CLP nominations doesn’t guarantee victory in internal Labour party elections, because all that matters is how individual members actually vote, but they are often a good guide to how an election is going. These figures suggest Momentum-backed candidates are on course to take all the vacant seats, as they did in the 2016 NEC elections. Laura Parker, Momentum’s national coordinator, said

This welcome news shows a thirst among ordinary Labour party members for change in the way our party operates and a move towards a more member-led party.

Momentum badges.
Momentum badges. Photograph: Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Theresa May has been visiting an engineering training facility in Birmingham this morning to publicise a government announcement about a new £1.7bn transforming cities fund and an R&D investment. She was there with Philip Hammond, the chancellor, and Greg Clark, the business secretary.

Asked about paying extra money to the EU, she was not exactly forthcoming. All she said was:

I set out in my Florence speech that we will honour our commitments. I was very clear about that, as I said - for the current budget plan - no other European Union country needs fear that they will have to receive less or pay in more.We’ve been very clear that we will honour our commitments.

At least the wheels haven’t come off yet - Theresa May visits an engineering training facility in Birmingham,
At least the wheels haven’t come off yet - Theresa May visits an engineering training facility in Birmingham, Photograph: WPA Pool/Getty Images
Theresa May and Philip Hammond (right) on the visit.
Theresa May and Philip Hammond (right) on the visit. Photograph: WPA Pool/Getty Images

The Conservative MP Peter Bone told Sky News this morning that he did not think the government should pay any more money to the EU. Asked how much was too much, he replied:

One pound is too much. There is no legal obligation whatsoever for us to pay any money. We are net contributors, over £200bn over the years to to the European Union superstate. If anyone should get any money from this divorce, it’s us. The idea we would pay £38bn is absurd.

I was at a meeting yesterday with constituents and they said, ‘Look, Peter, if you’ve got £38bn available, use it to support the NHS.’ I find that a pretty strong argument.

Peter Bone.
Peter Bone. Photograph: Sky News

Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader, has said that if British banks lose financial passporting, as Michel Barnier said they would (see 12.24pm), that would be a “major blow”. Cable said:

Over 5,000 UK businesses and billions of pounds of tax revenue depend on access to European markets through financial passporting.

Loss of this access risks blowing a hole in the budget at a time when our public services are already seriously underfunded.

All of this could be avoided if the government chose to stay in the single market.

In Brussels, arriving for a meeting of EU minister, the German foreign minister Michael Roth said Britain had to “move” on its financial settlement if it wants the EU to agree to open talks on the future trade relationship. Roth said:

It is about the money. In the end, it’s about the rights of the citizens of the EU and it’s about the money. I have already made it clear that the British must make a move. They must stand by their contractual obligations. They can’t be released from them.

The Conservative MP Henry Smith has said the government should not offer more money to the EU. He said:

Especially as Germany struggles to form a government, now is not the time for Britain to offer more money than her obligations are due in EU Brexit negotiations. The EU27 will of course miss UK cash but no deal would damage their economies and trade surplus with us far worse.

Michel Barnier's speech - Summary and analysis

Here are the main points from Michel Barnier’s speech.

  • Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, suggested EU parliaments will block a Brexit trade deal if the UK plans to diverge too much from the EU regulatory model. The UK had to decide what it wanted, he said.

The UK has chosen to leave the EU. We respect this choice. Does it want to stay close to the European model? Or does it want to gradually move away from it? And the UK’s reply to these questions will be very important, and even decisive, because it will shape the discussion on our future relationship, and shape also the condition for ratification of that partnership in many national parliaments, and obviously in the European parliament.

I don’t say that to create a problem. I just say that to avoid problems, to say clearly what are the conditions for the success of ratification in this second stage of the negotiation.

In this passage Barnier identified the key dilemma for the UK - and one which is probably more even more contentious than the size of the Brexit bill. Last month it was reported that Theresa May was “leaning” towards advocating a Brexit outcome that would keep the UK broadly in line with EU regulation. But, as the recent Mail on Sunday leak reveals, Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, and Michael Gove, the environment secretary, told May in their secret letter to her that the UK should go for regulatory divergence. The two Vote Leave campaign leaders wrote:

It is critically important to improve our country after we leave the EU. It requires a final EU deal that allows us a wide degree of regulatory freedom. We may choose to remain identical to the EU - or we may embrace a vision more aligned with pro-competitive regulation.

Philip Hammond, the chancellor, is thought to be one of those in cabinet most keen on maintaing a degree of regulatory equivalence with the EU. But even he may be wavering. Yesterday he told Peston on Sunday that leaving the EU would allow the UK to “explore regulatory innovations”. He explained that by that he meant “things like creating a regulatory environment where new tech businesses can flourish and prosper more quickly here than they would be able to in a more heavily regulated environment.”

  • Barnier said that, if the UK was willing to stay close to the EU regulatory regime, the EU would offer it its “most ambitious” free trade agreement. He said:

If we manage to negotiate an orderly withdrawal, fully respecting the integrity of the single market, and establish a level playing field, there is every reason for our future partnership to be ambitious. This is our preferred option. This is why we have started internal preparations with member states to be ready to talk about the future as soon as we will have agreed how to settle the past. The EU will be ready to offer its most ambitious FTA [free trade agreement] approach.

  • He said the UK had to offer better ideas about how to avoid a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. “Those who wanted Brexit must offer solutions,” he said. He said that although the British say they will not undermine the integrity of the UK single market, there are already numerous exceptions for Northern Ireland.

Some in the UK say that specific rules for Northern Ireland would endanger the integrity of the UK single market. But Northern Ireland already has specific rules in many areas that are different to the rest of the UK. Think of the whole island electricity market. Or the specific regulations for plant health for the whole island of Ireland. Think of rules that prevent and handle animal disease, which I know quite well as a former minster for agriculture. There are over 100 areas of cross-border cooperation on the island of Ireland, and such cooperation depends, in many cases, on the application of common rules and common regulatory space.

  • He said UK banks would lose their “passport” rights allowing them to provide services easily in the EU after Brexit. He said:

On financial services UK voices suggest that Brexit does not mean Brexit. Brexit means Brexit everywhere. They say there would be no changes in market access for UK-established firms. They say joint UK-EU rules would be decided in a new symmetrical process between the EU and the UK and outside of the jurisdiction of the European court of justice. This would contradict the April European council guidelines which are my mandate ... The legal consequence of Brexit is that the UK financial service providers lose their EU passport.

  • He mocked Brexit supporters for making contradictory claims about what Brexit would mean for the UK. The UK would not be allowed to cherry pick, he insisted. He said:

There are in fact two contradicting soundbites from ardent advocates of Brexit: the UK will finally set itself free from UK regulation and bureaucracy, some claim; others claims that after Brexit it will still be possible to participate in parts of the single market simply because we have been together for more than four decades, with the same rules.

Ladies and gentlemen, none of these views seems to offer a sound basis for going forward. The same people who argue for setting the UK free also argue that the UK should remain in some EU agencies ...

Those who claim that the UK should cherry pick parts of the single market must stop this contradiction. The single market is a package with four indivisible freedoms, common rules, institutions and enforcement structures. The UK knows its rules very well ... We took note of the UK decision to end free movement of people and this means clearly that the UK will lose the benefits of the single market. This is a legal reality.

The EU does not want to punish. It simply draws the logical consequence of the UK’s decision to take back control.

  • He insisted the EU did not want a no deal Brexit - and criticised those in the UK who float this as an option. He said:

I regret that this no deal option comes up so often in the UK public debate. Only those who ignore or want to ignore the current benefits of EU membership can say that no deal would be a positive result.

Michel Barnier speaking at the Centre for European Reform conference.
Michel Barnier speaking at the Centre for European Reform conference. Photograph: Geert Vanden Wijngaert/AP

Updated

Downing Street won’t brief from cabinet sub committee meeting, but I understand it is scheduled for 4pm. In order to be ready for the December European council Theresa May would need to put forward a new figure for the “Brexit bill” a week in advance - so around December 8. But strategists also want to wait until the last possible moment.

At the Number 10 lobby briefing Theresa May’s spokesman was asked repeatedly about what might come from the cabinet sub-committee meeting on the Brexit divorce bill, and it’s fair to say we didn’t learn that much.

There would be no details released after the meeting, the spokesman said. He went on:

The PM’s been clear the UK will honour commitments that we’ve made during the period of our membership.

She said in Florence that no EU member will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave, but beyond that, specific figures, scenarios, they’re all subject to negotiation and I’m not going to discuss them here.

Asked about Robert Halfon’s view that the public would “go bananas” if a figure north of £40bn was agreed, there was also no comment. The spokesman went on:

I’m not going to be getting into speculation about any figures, any hypotheticals. We’ve been clear that once we leave the EU the days of sending large sums of money to Brussels will be over, we will be taking back control of our own money. Beyond that I’m not going to be getting into the negotiations or anything else.

And here is the Telegraph’s James Crisp on the Barnier speech.

UPDATE: Sabine Weyand, Barnier’s deputy, has tweeted a link to James Crisp’s thread. So presumably she thinks its a fair summary ...

Updated

This is from the Economist’s Tom Nuttall.

And this is from the Economist’s John Peet.

And that’s it. Barnier has finished.

He is not taking questions, because he says he has to leave.

I will post a summary of his speech soon.

Barnier says it will be in the UK’s interests to have a strong EU as a partner.

Barnier hints EU national parliaments could block trade deal allowing too much UK divergence from Europe

Barnier says the UK has chosen to leave the EU.

Does it want to stay close to the European model? Or does it gradually want to move away from it? The UK’s response to this will be decisive, because the answer will decide the future relationship, and what happens when the deal has to be ratified by national parliaments and by the European parliament.

  • Barnier suggests EU national parliaments could refuse to ratify a future trade deal if the UK plans to diverge significantly from the European model.

Barnier says, if the UK agrees to have a level playing field, there is “every reason” to believe that the UK and the EU can have a future partnership that is “ambitious”.

Barnier says the EU and the UK will have to have a level playing field after Brexit.

For the first time in a trade negotiation, the challenge will not be maximising convergence. It will be managing divergence, he says.

Barnier turns to financial services.

He says when the UK leaves the EU, City firms will lose their financial passports.

The EU will never compromise on financial stability, he says.

The integrity of the single market is not negotiable, he says.

Barnier accuses Brexit supporters of having ambitions that are mutually incompatible

Barnier turns to the single market.

He says there are two contradictory soundbites from ardent advocates of Brexit: that the UK will set itself free from EU bureaucracy; and that after Brexit the UK will still be able to participate in the single market, because the UK and the EU have shared common rules for 40 years.

He says these do not form a sound basis for going forward.

Freedom implies responsibility, he says.

He says the EU 27 will continue to maintain the EU regulatory agencies. They will pay for them. And their work will be based on EU laws that the UK is rejecting.

He says those who want to cherry pick must stop being contradictory.

The EU knows these rules “like the back of its hand”, he says.

The UK has decided to give up the free movement of people. That means the UK will lose the benefits of the single market. That is a reality, he says.

  • Barnier accuses Brexit supporters of having ambitions that are mutually incompatible.

Barnier says it is not clear what rules will apply in Northern Ireland after Brexit.

He says the UK needs to show what it will do to ensure that there is no hard border after Brexit.

Those who wanted Brexit must offer solutions.

Barnier says the EU does not want a no deal Brexit to be an option.

He turns to Ireland.

He knows that some in the UK argue that a special deal for Northern Ireland would undermine the integrity of the UK.

But there are already special rules in place for Northern Ireland, he says, not least covering animal health.

Michel Barnier says it is odd to be talking about Brexit at a conference about the future of the EU. But he goes on:

Brexit could prove to be a turning point in the European project.

The year 2016 could be seen as a moment of reckoning. It could be the point where the EU realises “no one will do for us what we don’t do for ourselves.”

Barnier shows a slide which he says David Cameron used to use to justify his faith in the single market.

It shows that by 2050 there will be no European countries amongst the world’s eight biggest economies.

But if the EU sticks together, it will be a top five economy, he says.

We can’t see the slide from the live feed, but it may look like this.

Biggest economies in 2050
Biggest economies in 2050 Photograph: PwC

Updated

Michel Barnier's speech

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, is about to speak at the Centre for European Reform conference in Brussels.

There is supposed to be a live feed, here, but it has just crashed.

If it comes back, I’ll cover what he is saying.

If you are interested in more details of the Brexit bill, this is worth studying. It is a graphic published by the Financial Times last week explaining how the UK’s Brexit bill liability could end up anywhere between €86.4bn and €32bn.

Brexit bill,
Brexit bill. Photograph: FT/Financial Times

Here are three thinktank reports estimating how much the UK could be expected to pay: a report from the FT’s Alex Barker putting the figure at €60bn; a Centre for European Reform putting the figure at between €82bn and €113bn; and a Bruegel report putting the figure at somewhere between €25.4bn and €65.1bn.

And here is a briefing paper (pdf) from the House of Commons library on the “exit bill”. It says:

Estimates of the settlement reported in the media have ranged from €6bn to €75bn net. The range of estimates highlight the fact that almost every element of the settlement is subject to interpretation and negotiation.

Tory-supporting papers split over whether or not UK should offer another £20bn to EU

Conservative-supporting newspapers are divided over the wisdom of offering the EU more money for the so-called “Brexit bill”.

As I reported on the blog on Thursday, the pro-Brexit Sun has come out in favour of offering another £20bn or so, on top of the £20bn already on the table. In an editorial last week, it said: “If the government calculates that the long-term benefits are worth substantially more than the £18billion we have so far put up, so be it. Offer more.” That marked a shift from August, when the Sun was defending paying a total of £24bn, but only provided it unlocked a deal on free trade.

In an editorial this morning (paywall), the Times also backs the plan to effectively double what the UK is offering. But the EU needs to open talks on a trade deal in return, it says.

While Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the EU Commission, has talked of a “hefty” bill estimated to be as much as €100 billion, Boris Johnson has poo-pooed the idea that it could be even as much as a fifth of that. Neither sum was ever realistic ...

The new proposal is likely to include commitments towards both the EU’s budget for the next few years (to which the UK, as a member, once agreed) and towards longer-term liabilities including pensions for officials and MEPs. Although no concrete figure has been put forward, something in the region of €40 billion to €50 billion is seen as likely, with much of it to be paid over a number of years ...

Consensus among a divided cabinet is no small thing. The remainder of the EU should understand that further stalling will make a “no-deal” Brexit considerably more likely. Mr Tusk has repeatedly made it plain that progress and unity must be visible on British side for negotiations to progress. Leaders across the EU should recognise that this represents both.

But the Daily Mail, which probably has more clout in Number 10 than either of the two Murdoch dailies. In an editorial today mostly attacking Philip Hammond, the chancellor, it says:

More worrying by far is why, when he should have been focusing on the budget, the chancellor waded into the Brexit debate, hinting he was ready to pay a significantly larger divorce bill than the generous sum pledged by Theresa May.

It is not as if the EU has offered a single concession to justify an improved offer. Chief negotiator Michel Barnier has merely issued an ultimatum: cough up much more than the £18bn on the table, or we won’t even discuss our future relationship.

Why should we surrender to blackmail?

The Daily Mail is famously pro-May and the leader writer is presenting it as it it is Hammond’s decision to offer the EU more money, not the prime minister’s. This displays a rather poor understanding of how the system works. It is May who chairs the EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) sub committee, and if upping the Brexit bill offer is on the table for discussion today, it is because she put it there. It is as if the Mail doesn’t want to acknowledge what the PM that its editor, Paul Dacre, admires so much is actually up to.

The Mail does not absolutely rule offering to pay the EU more. Its argument is with the timing of an increased offer. It suggests the UK should “make Mr Barnier sweat” and refuse to offer more until the EU provides a better idea of what London will get in return.

That means the Mail is not as hostile to a £40bn offer as Tories like Robert Halfon. (See 9.11am.) But May has spent most of her time as home secretary and prime minister cleaving closely to the Mail’s agenda, and there will probably be some nervousness in Number 10 about what it is saying on this issue.

Voters will 'go bananas' if UK offers £40bn to EU, former Tory minister warns May ahead of key meeting

There are 10 people in cabinet who sit on the sub committee that will decide how the UK negotiates Brexit. It is the EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) cabinet sub committee (pdf). Theresa May only set it up recently, and it is meeting for the first time today. Here are the members.

Members of EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) sub committee
Members of EU exit and trade (strategy and negotiations) sub committee Photograph: No 10

Today, as the Guardian reports, Theresa May will be trying to get the sub committee to agree a strategy for increasing the UK’s Brexit financial offer to the EU. In her Florence speech May promised that the UK would keep paying into the EU budget for the remainder of the current EU budget period, lasting until 2020, so that other member states don’t lost out. That offer was worth roughly £20bn. But it was not enough to persuade the EU to agree to open talks on a future trade deal, and now ministers are considering offering much more.

This morning the BBC was saying that Downing Street had “dismissed as ‘speculation’” reports that around £40bn would be on offer. BBC reporting is mostly impeccable, but this formula wasn’t right. “Speculation” is the very weakest form of non-denial denial available to a Whitehall spin doctor. When applied to something that is being reported or claimed, it is often tantamount to saying it is true. You might describe something as speculation, but government press officers never “dismiss” it is such.

It is thought that most or all members of the cabinet sub committee accept in priniciple the case for offering the EU more, but the Brexiters want this offer to be conditional. This is from Rowena Mason’s report in today’s Guardian.

Senior Brexiters are particularly concerned about the idea of signing over a high sum as part of the withdrawal agreement but later ending up with an unsatisfactory deal on the future relationship.

Johnson is not thought to be opposed in principle to a divorce bill higher than the£20bn already offered by May but would need assurances that the UK was heading for the right type of relationship with the EU when it leaves. At the moment, there is a cabinet agreement on seeking a two-year transitional period after Britain leaves the EU in March 2019, but nothing has been agreed on what the future relationship should look like after that.

And this is from George Parker’s story in today’s Financial Times (paywall).

David Davis, who is leading talks in Brussels, is insisting that Mrs May keeps some money in reserve to use as a bargaining chip when Britain negotiates a final trade deal with the EU next year, a view shared by Mr Johnson.

However, the foreign secretary’s allies denied suggestions he had drawn a “red line” on money or that he would fight to stop Mrs May handing over more than the €20bn she has already offered to cover transition payments in 2019 and 2020.

“Boris’s point is that if we are handing over increasing amounts of taxpayer’s money, we should have a better idea of what we are getting in return,” said one ally. Both Mr Gove and Mr Fox have taken a nuanced stance on the exit bill.

But even a conditional offer to pay more to the EU could trigger a backlash. This is what Robert Halfon, a former deputy chairman of the Conservative party and a former minister, told the Westminster Hour on Radio 4 last night. He said:

We’ve just been talking about budget constraints, and the difficulty the chancellor has in public spending, and if we start saying that we’re going to give 40 to 50 billion to the EU, I think the public will go bananas, absolutely spare.

I voted remain because I believe in alliances of democracies in an uncertain world, but we voted to leave, the public want to leave, and I cannot believe that the public would accept such a huge amount when we need money for our schools, our hospitals, our housing, and many other things. So I think that is going to be very difficult if it is going to be that sum, amount of money.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: The OECD publishes a report on UK skills and productivity.

10.30am: Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, speaks at a Centre for European Reform conference on the future of the EU.

11am: Downing Street lobby briefing

2.30am: Amber Rudd, the home secretary, takes questions in the Commons

3pm: Officials from the Home Office, HM Revenue and Customs, the department for the environment, food and rural affairs and the UK border force give evidence to the Commons public accounts committee about Brexit and borders.

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 post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.

You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.

Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news from Jack Blanchard’s Playbook. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’ 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 BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Netflix director responds to report Zayn Malik punched Louis Tomlinson on set: ‘There goes the last year of work’
Malik is alleged to have punched his former bandmate during an on-set row while shooting the three-part series
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Ice Spice speaks out after ‘unprovoked attack’ at McDonald’s
Rapper’s lawyer said they intend to ‘hold the perpetrators responsible for their actions’
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
88% Still Stalk Exes on Facebook? New 2026 Data Reveals Persistent Post-Breakup Habits
Nearly nine in 10 people admit to checking their ex's Facebook profile after a breakup, according to recurring research that continues to circulate widely in 2026, even as broader cyberstalking statistics show technology playing an ever-larger role in monitoring former partners.
Latin Times
Latin Times
Surge In Celebrity Baby News Leaves Fans Stunned, Here’s Who’s Expecting
Here are all the celebrities baby news that stunned the online viewers.
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
War isn’t a ‘moral’ issue – at least not for the Trump administration
The US president’s grudge match with the pope underlines how religion really functions in American politics
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
WrestleMania 42 is live on ESPN and Netflix this weekend — here's who's going to win
WrestleMania 42 is live this weekend across two nights and 13 matches. I've been watching WWE for 30 years, and I've gone through every match on the card, given you my prediction, and picked out the best merch to buy before the bell rings.
Tom’s Guide
Tom’s Guide
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play