This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/28/david-davis-risk-contempt-parliament-brexit-reports-speaker
The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| David Davis at risk of contempt over Brexit reports, says Speaker | David Davis at risk of contempt over Brexit reports, says Speaker |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The House of Commons Speaker has told David Davis to appear in front of the Brexit select committee within days or face the prospect of being held in contempt of parliament. | |
| John Bercow warned the Brexit secretary that no engagements should take precedence over showing respect to parliament as the Speaker pledged to “do my duty” in the face of angry representations from MPs. | John Bercow warned the Brexit secretary that no engagements should take precedence over showing respect to parliament as the Speaker pledged to “do my duty” in the face of angry representations from MPs. |
| A string of opposition politicians, and some Conservatives, expressed fury that reports outlining the potential impact of Brexit on 58 sectors had been heavily edited before Davis handed them over to the committee. | A string of opposition politicians, and some Conservatives, expressed fury that reports outlining the potential impact of Brexit on 58 sectors had been heavily edited before Davis handed them over to the committee. |
| They argued that Davis – and as such Theresa May’s government – had chosen to ignore a binding and unanimous vote by MPs demanding that the information be handed over in full. | They argued that Davis – and as such Theresa May’s government – had chosen to ignore a binding and unanimous vote by MPs demanding that the information be handed over in full. |
| The committee chair, Hilary Benn, suggested that the edited documents were “not in keeping with the resolution that was passed by the House of Commons”. | The committee chair, Hilary Benn, suggested that the edited documents were “not in keeping with the resolution that was passed by the House of Commons”. |
| He was also unhappy about a suggestion from Davis in a letter that the committee had not provided assurances that it would keep sensitive information out of the public domain. | He was also unhappy about a suggestion from Davis in a letter that the committee had not provided assurances that it would keep sensitive information out of the public domain. |
| “I do object to any suggestion that the select committee or I cannot be trusted to do our job,” he said. | “I do object to any suggestion that the select committee or I cannot be trusted to do our job,” he said. |
| Labour’s Keir Starmer asked the Speaker if he believed ministers could be in contempt of parliament, while the SNP’s Pete Wishart said he wanted to refresh his call for contempt proceedings to begin. | Labour’s Keir Starmer asked the Speaker if he believed ministers could be in contempt of parliament, while the SNP’s Pete Wishart said he wanted to refresh his call for contempt proceedings to begin. |
| Bercow called on the Perth MP to resubmit his letter in light of developments, and said he would consider it in a timely way. He said he would advise an “urgent audience” between the committee and the Brexit secretary. | Bercow called on the Perth MP to resubmit his letter in light of developments, and said he would consider it in a timely way. He said he would advise an “urgent audience” between the committee and the Brexit secretary. |
| “I think when it is suggested that that meeting should be soon, it means soon, not weeks hence. It means very soon indeed. No other diarised engagement is more important than respecting the house, and in this case the committee of the house, which has ownership of this matter and to which the papers were to be provided,” said Bercow. | “I think when it is suggested that that meeting should be soon, it means soon, not weeks hence. It means very soon indeed. No other diarised engagement is more important than respecting the house, and in this case the committee of the house, which has ownership of this matter and to which the papers were to be provided,” said Bercow. |
| “As and when matters evolve, if a further representation alleging contempt is made to me I will consider it very promptly and come back to the house. I hope the house knows me well enough to know that I will do my duty.” | “As and when matters evolve, if a further representation alleging contempt is made to me I will consider it very promptly and come back to the house. I hope the house knows me well enough to know that I will do my duty.” |
| Labour had triggered an urgent question on the issue, in which Starmer made clear that the motion had demanded “not some of the reports, not redacted copies, the full reports”. | Labour had triggered an urgent question on the issue, in which Starmer made clear that the motion had demanded “not some of the reports, not redacted copies, the full reports”. |
| “Whether he is in contempt of parliament is a matter we may have to come to. He is certainly treating parliament with contempt.” | “Whether he is in contempt of parliament is a matter we may have to come to. He is certainly treating parliament with contempt.” |
| Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, also complained that the documents – which were demanded after Davis said officials were drawing up detailed impact assessments covering the 58 sectors – were squeezed into two lever arch files. | Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, also complained that the documents – which were demanded after Davis said officials were drawing up detailed impact assessments covering the 58 sectors – were squeezed into two lever arch files. |
| “That’s the volume of paperwork I would have expected for a pretty routine crown court trial in my old world.” | “That’s the volume of paperwork I would have expected for a pretty routine crown court trial in my old world.” |
| Davis did not attend parliament to respond, with the Brexit minister Robin Walker appearing instead and insisting that the issue was being taken “very seriously”. | Davis did not attend parliament to respond, with the Brexit minister Robin Walker appearing instead and insisting that the issue was being taken “very seriously”. |
| He argued that there had never been 58 separate reports in the form that had been demanded, and revealed that officials had spent three weeks collating the information it had in a way that is “accessible and informative”. | He argued that there had never been 58 separate reports in the form that had been demanded, and revealed that officials had spent three weeks collating the information it had in a way that is “accessible and informative”. |
| He said material that was commercially sensitive or thought likely to hamper Britain’s negotiating position had been kept out. | He said material that was commercially sensitive or thought likely to hamper Britain’s negotiating position had been kept out. |
| Walker told colleagues that all MPs would be able to read the documents in a special room in parliament, and said Davis would appear in front of the committee. | Walker told colleagues that all MPs would be able to read the documents in a special room in parliament, and said Davis would appear in front of the committee. |
| However, Seema Malhotra – a committee member who has been pushing for the release of the information – cited Davis himself saying more than once that more than 50 analyses had been carried out and were close to completion. | However, Seema Malhotra – a committee member who has been pushing for the release of the information – cited Davis himself saying more than once that more than 50 analyses had been carried out and were close to completion. |
| Even the Brexit-supporting committee member Jacob Rees-Mogg warned that the government could risk breaching privilege, as he suggested ministers could still try to amend the original motion. | Even the Brexit-supporting committee member Jacob Rees-Mogg warned that the government could risk breaching privilege, as he suggested ministers could still try to amend the original motion. |
| However, other Brexiters on the committee – such as John Whittingdale – took a different view, arguing that select committees had a history of leaking information and that it was right to protect sensitive material. | However, other Brexiters on the committee – such as John Whittingdale – took a different view, arguing that select committees had a history of leaking information and that it was right to protect sensitive material. |
| Two Labour committee members disagreed. Pat McFadden said the committee would not divulge information against the national interest, but it was right to give the public the full risks. “This is the biggest decision we have taken since the war. I believe the public has a right to know what the consequences are of the different options facing us. And if the government has that information I don’t think they should withhold it.” | Two Labour committee members disagreed. Pat McFadden said the committee would not divulge information against the national interest, but it was right to give the public the full risks. “This is the biggest decision we have taken since the war. I believe the public has a right to know what the consequences are of the different options facing us. And if the government has that information I don’t think they should withhold it.” |
| And Stephen Kinnock agreed, calling on the government to “stop treating the committee and British public like children and then get on with what parliament mandated”. | And Stephen Kinnock agreed, calling on the government to “stop treating the committee and British public like children and then get on with what parliament mandated”. |