This article is from the source 'bbc' 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.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46451970

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Commons row as Brexit legal advice published Commons row as Brexit legal advice published
(35 minutes later)
Theresa May has been accused of "misleading Parliament, inadvertently or otherwise" as the full legal advice on her Brexit deal was published.Theresa May has been accused of "misleading Parliament, inadvertently or otherwise" as the full legal advice on her Brexit deal was published.
The Scottish National Party said the PM had "concealed the facts" after the advice, which warns of an "indefinite" backstop deal with the EU. The Scottish National Party said the PM had "concealed the facts" after the advice, which warns of an "indefinite" backstop deal with the EU, came out.
Ministers were found in contempt of Parliament on Tuesday for only publishing an overview this week. Ministers were found in contempt of Parliament on Tuesday for providing only a legal overview of the deal.
But the PM said the two documents were consistent and the position was clear.But the PM said the two documents were consistent and the position was clear.
While the UK would have no unilateral right to withdraw from the backstop - a measure designed to prevent the return of physical checks on the Irish border - she insisted neither the UK nor the EU wanted the backstop to come into force in the first place.
But the Democratic Unionists said the legal viewpoint was "devastating" for Mrs May's prospects of getting the backing of MPs for her deal in a vote on 11 December.
The government argued that attorney general Geoffrey Cox's analysis of the Brexit deal, published on Monday, was adequate and disclosing the full advice would be against the national interest.
Labour and other opposition parties said ministers had "wilfully" refused to comply with a binding vote in the Commons last month which demanded full disclosure and MPs agreed in a vote on Tuesday.
What does the full advice to PM say?
In the six-page letter, dated 13 November, Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said the proposed backstop arrangement with the EU to prevent a hard Irish border could "endure indefinitely".In the six-page letter, dated 13 November, Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said the proposed backstop arrangement with the EU to prevent a hard Irish border could "endure indefinitely".
The UK, he said, would not be able to "lawfully exit" the arrangement without a subsequent political agreement and this could lead to "stalemate".The UK, he said, would not be able to "lawfully exit" the arrangement without a subsequent political agreement and this could lead to "stalemate".
Ministers agreed to publish the advice after being found in contempt of Parliament by MPs on Tuesday, in one of a series of Brexit defeats for Theresa May.
Mr Cox published a legal overview of the repercussions of Mrs May's Brexit deal earlier this week but argued that disclosing the full advice would compromise client confidentiality and be against the national interest.
Labour and other opposition parties said ministers had "wilfully" refused to comply with a binding vote in the Commons last month which demanded full disclosure.
The Irish backstop, a key feature of the EU withdrawal agreement, would see the whole of the UK remain in a single customs territory with the EU until their future relationship was sorted out.The Irish backstop, a key feature of the EU withdrawal agreement, would see the whole of the UK remain in a single customs territory with the EU until their future relationship was sorted out.
Its legal status has become a defining issue for many Tory critics of the PM's deal - who say the UK could be trapped indefinitely because there is no unilateral right to withdraw.Its legal status has become a defining issue for many Tory critics of the PM's deal - who say the UK could be trapped indefinitely because there is no unilateral right to withdraw.
In his November letter to the PM, Mr Cox said signing up to the backstop was a "political decision". In his letter to the PM, Mr Cox said signing up to the backstop was a "political decision".
"Despite statements that it is not intended to be permanent… in international law the protocol would endure indefinitely until a superseding agreement took its place," he wrote."Despite statements that it is not intended to be permanent… in international law the protocol would endure indefinitely until a superseding agreement took its place," he wrote.
"In the absence of a right of termination, there is a legal risk that the UK might become subject to protracted and repeated rounds of negotiations.""In the absence of a right of termination, there is a legal risk that the UK might become subject to protracted and repeated rounds of negotiations."
"This risk must be weighed against the political and economic imperative of both sides to reach an agreement that constitutes a politically stable and permanent basis for their future relationship.""This risk must be weighed against the political and economic imperative of both sides to reach an agreement that constitutes a politically stable and permanent basis for their future relationship."
At PMQs, the SNP's Ian Blackford said: "Is it time that the prime minister took responsibility for concealing the facts on her Brexit deal from members in this House and the public? Analysis: In black and white
"Will she take responsibility?" The BBC's legal correspondent Clive Coleman
The PM told MPs that she had made it clear that the UK could not unilaterally leave the backstop plan, so had not been at odds with the legal advice, which made it clear the UK had no sovereign right to withdraw. When lawyers give legal advice they are expected to speak frankly.
But she insisted that it was an "insurance policy" that neither side want it to come into force and was only intended to be a "temporary" arrangement. Many will conclude this advice is franker and starker than the way in which the government has presented the legal implications of the Withdraw Agreement.
Labour said it showed the "central weakness" of the PM's Brexit deal. In particular on the Northern Ireland backstop, it is there in black and white, that in the absence of an agreement replacing it, the backstop will continue indefinitely. The UK could not force the EU to conclude an agreement bringing it to an end.
That punctures the government's optimism on the issue. Whereas Article 50 allowed the UK to pull out of the EU, there is no provision for the UK to pull out of the withdrawal agreement. That will pour petrol on the flames of the political debate.
May defends advice at Prime Minister's Questions
The prime minister came under fire at Prime Minister's Questions from the SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford.
"Is it time that the prime minister took responsibility for concealing the facts on her Brexit deal from members in this House and the public? Will she take responsibility?"
The PM told MPs there was "no difference" between the 50-page legal overview published on Monday and Mr Cox's letter from November published on Wednesday.
She also said she had made it clear that the UK could not unilaterally leave the backstop plan, so had not been at odds with the legal advice, which made it clear the UK had no sovereign right to withdraw.
But she insisted that it gave the UK a number of competitive advantages and therefore the EU would not want the UK "to be in it any longer than necessary".
But the DUP's Westminster leader Nigel Dodds said it was now apparent why the government had tried to "hide" the legal position.
Labour said the advice showed the "central weakness" of the PM's Brexit deal while the Lib Dems said it would leave the UK trapped in a "Brexit hamster wheel".
Debate on Brexit deal continues
The second of five days of debate on Mrs May's Brexit agreement is under way, focusing on security.
The government suffered three embarrassing defeats on Tuesday, on the role that MPs will play if Mrs May's deal in rejected as well as the disclosure of the legal advice.
International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has warned there is a risk of Parliament trying to "steal Brexit from the British people" if the PM's agreement is rejected.
He said there was a "natural Remain majority" in Parliament and that any attempts to delay the UK's departure or overturn the 2016 referendum result would be a "democratic affront".
But former attorney general Dominic Grieve said claims Parliament was trying to block Brexit were a "little far-fetched" and MPs like him were merely concerned with averting a national crisis if Parliament was deadlocked.