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 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2018/dec/06/brexit-debate-theresa-may-deal-latest-may-interviewed-on-today-politics-live

The article has changed 22 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 9 Version 10
Brexit: Hammond tells MPs UK cannot afford economic costs of no deal Brexit - Politics live Brexit: Hammond tells MPs UK cannot afford economic costs of no deal Brexit - Politics live
(35 minutes later)
My colleague Jessica Elgot has more on the cabinet minsters going into Number 10 to see Theresa May. (See 1.52pm.)
Cast list is Smith, Lidington, Gauke, Hammond, Rudd, Bradley, Leadsom, Fox, Barclay and Gove
On the subject of the value of trade deals, it is worth flagging up this chart from the government’s Brexit economic impact analysis (pdf) - which confirms that the government does disagree with David Davis. (See 2.02pm.)
It shows how, under various Brexit options, some economic factors would be good for growth (they are the shaded blocks above the line) and others would be bad for growth (the ones below the line). The gains to the economy from new trade deals are relatively minuscule compared to the extra costs generated by the UK being outside the single market or the customs union.
David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, is speaking in the Commons now. He says that, while a no-deal Brexit would create some difficulties, it would not be as bad as some people claim.
He says trade through Calais would continue. And, if there were problems, up to 40% of trade could be diverted to other ports, he says.
He says he is sorry Philip Hammond, the chancellor, is not in the chamber now. He says he and Hammond disagree on the value of trade deals. Hammond does not think they deliver “a big bang for your buck”. Davis says he disagrees, and that trade deals have had a very big impact on growth in the last 40 years.
In the Commons debate Sir Nicholas Soames, the Conservative pro-European, spoke after John McDonnell. He said that he voted remain, but that he thought the referendum result had to be honoured and was backing Theresa May’s deal because it did that.
He was followed by the SNP’s Stewart Hosie, who said that every single Brexit outcome would be bad for the country. Borrowing the language used by May about Scottish independence, he said that there was “no positive case for Brexit”, that “now is not the time for Brexit”, and that “Brexit must be taken off the table”.
This is from my colleague Jessica Elgot.
Cabinet ministers seeing the PM in No10 now - seems to be informal Brexit discussion
The Brexit department has today published a paper (pdf) saying what the government would do to protect the rights of EU nationals in the UK and British citizens in the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
In a written ministerial statement announcing the publication of the document, Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, says the government is considering what it could do to help Britons living in the EU with access to benefits and housing if they have to return to the UK after a no-deal Brexit because they cannot stay where they are living now. He says:
If UK nationals in the EU were unable to continue to live their lives in the EU as they do now in a no deal scenario and returned to the UK to live, there are a number of steps the government would consider to address concerns that they have raised. This includes access to healthcare, education, benefits, and housing. We recognise that these would be an important part of a transition back to life in the UK.
The document does not say what help the government might provide with housing but, on benefits, it says “arrangements will be made to ensure continuity of payments for those who return and are already in receipt of UK state pension or other UK benefits while living in the EU”.
The European court of justice has posted more on Twitter about the decision to announce its ruling in the article 50 case on Monday.The European court of justice has posted more on Twitter about the decision to announce its ruling in the article 50 case on Monday.
Case C-621 Wightman (Judgment 10th December at 09:00 CET) has been dealt with using the ECJ’s expedited procedure at the request of the Court of Session “[i]n light of the urgency of the issue in terms of parliamentary consideration and voting” #BrexitCase C-621 Wightman (Judgment 10th December at 09:00 CET) has been dealt with using the ECJ’s expedited procedure at the request of the Court of Session “[i]n light of the urgency of the issue in terms of parliamentary consideration and voting” #Brexit
This special procedure allows a national court to request that its case be treated urgently in light of the special circumstances. Using this procedure reduces the deadlines for the various stages and prioritises treatment of the case within the Court.This special procedure allows a national court to request that its case be treated urgently in light of the special circumstances. Using this procedure reduces the deadlines for the various stages and prioritises treatment of the case within the Court.
The Order granting the accelerated procedure in Case C-621/18 Wightman can be found here: https://t.co/wdMdOubHRzThe Order granting the accelerated procedure in Case C-621/18 Wightman can be found here: https://t.co/wdMdOubHRz
This is from Sky’s Beth Rigby.This is from Sky’s Beth Rigby.
NEW: Two cabinet sources tell me that at least four cabinet ministers - Gauke, Hammond, Clarke & Perry - have made it clear they could not support a move to No Deal. With Guake apparently saying as much in cabinet meeting (so it’s not just Brexiteers on resignation watch)NEW: Two cabinet sources tell me that at least four cabinet ministers - Gauke, Hammond, Clarke & Perry - have made it clear they could not support a move to No Deal. With Guake apparently saying as much in cabinet meeting (so it’s not just Brexiteers on resignation watch)
The UK supreme court won’t deliver its judgement whether the Scottish and Welsh government’s emergency Brexit legislation breaches the law until after MPs stage their crucial vote on May’s deal next week.The UK supreme court won’t deliver its judgement whether the Scottish and Welsh government’s emergency Brexit legislation breaches the law until after MPs stage their crucial vote on May’s deal next week.
The supreme court announced it would hand down its decision on the so-called “continuity bills” passed by the devolved legislatures on Thursday 13 December, effectively leaving MPs in the dark on whether those bills were legally valid or not when they decide whether to back Brexit or not next Tuesday. It heard the legal challenge by the UK government in July.The supreme court announced it would hand down its decision on the so-called “continuity bills” passed by the devolved legislatures on Thursday 13 December, effectively leaving MPs in the dark on whether those bills were legally valid or not when they decide whether to back Brexit or not next Tuesday. It heard the legal challenge by the UK government in July.
By contrast the European court of justice will issue its judgement on 10 December, only two weeks after holding an emergency hearing on whether article 50 could be unilaterally revoked, in a case brought by a cross-party group of Scottish parliamentarians.By contrast the European court of justice will issue its judgement on 10 December, only two weeks after holding an emergency hearing on whether article 50 could be unilaterally revoked, in a case brought by a cross-party group of Scottish parliamentarians.
The UK, Scottish and Welsh governments are at loggerheads over whether the devolved legislation is permissible, because it gives both legislatures legal powers over repatriating EU legislation.The UK, Scottish and Welsh governments are at loggerheads over whether the devolved legislation is permissible, because it gives both legislatures legal powers over repatriating EU legislation.
The UK government insists that is ultra vires, since foreign treaties are reserved to Westminster; Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, and her former Welsh counterpart, Carwyn Jones, accused UK ministers of a “power grab” for taking control of some policy areas.The UK government insists that is ultra vires, since foreign treaties are reserved to Westminster; Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, and her former Welsh counterpart, Carwyn Jones, accused UK ministers of a “power grab” for taking control of some policy areas.
Ken Clarke, the Conservative former chancellor, asks what McDonnell means by Labour collaborating with the single market. Is Labour advocating full regulatory convergence?Ken Clarke, the Conservative former chancellor, asks what McDonnell means by Labour collaborating with the single market. Is Labour advocating full regulatory convergence?
McDonnell says Labour wants a permanent customs union, with the UK having a say in future EU trade deals. He says Labour wants close collaboration with the single market. That would be its opening negotiating position, he says.McDonnell says Labour wants a permanent customs union, with the UK having a say in future EU trade deals. He says Labour wants close collaboration with the single market. That would be its opening negotiating position, he says.
Alex Chalk, a Conservative, intervenes. He says Labour would keep the UK in the customs union permanently. But it would not be in the single market, and so under Labour’s plan a backstop would still be needed, he says.
McDonnell says that Labour would organise comprehensive customs union deal with the EU and that this would make it “so much more unlikely” that a backstop would be need. He says the “permanence” of the agreement would also help.
McDonnell appears to concede that a backstop might be needed under Labour’s Brexit plans. The general Labour line has been to argue that there would be no need for a backstop under its plans. But, when pressed on this, McDonnell just said that Labour’s plans would make a customs union “much more unlikely”.
Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, agrees with my colleague Daniel Boffey. (See 10.41am.)
The PM says she wants to let Parliament choose whether to enter the backstop or extend the 'transition'. This is simply not possible. Under her deal the EU has the legal right to stop us extending the transition and make us enter the backstop - whatever the PM or Parliament says
McDonnell says, under the government’s deal, every region of the UK, every sector, and every household will suffer.
McDonnell says the financial services industry were offered “enhanced equivalence” agreements. But they have not got that, he says.
The Conservative MP Vicky Ford intervenes. She says what the political declaration (pdf) says about financial services on page 9 amounts to enhanced equivalence.
McDonnell says he does not accept that.
The DUP’s Ian Paisley intervenes. Would Labour drop the backstop?
McDonnell says he will address this later in the speech. But under Labour’s plan for the UK to stay in the customs unions, and for a close relationship with the single market, a backstop would not be necessary, he claims.
This is from the Telegraph’s Michael Deacon.
Not saying the Government is getting desperate, but in the Commons a Tory MP has just asked John McDonnell: "Would you consider voting for this deal, so that we can please get on with our lives?"
UPDATE: Here’s the clip.
Tory MP David Morris intervenes on John McDonnell's speech, asking Labour to back the Brexit deal "so we can all get on with our lives". pic.twitter.com/Sbalhrf9L6
John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, is speaking now.
He says he wants to stress four point.
First, a no deal Brexit must be avoided
Second, Theresa May’s deal is not acceptable to MPs.
Third, Labour’s plan would honour the result of the referendum, while being good for jobs.
Fourth, it is important to consider the impact on communities.
The SNP’s Angus MacNeil asks McDonnell what he would choose: no deal, or no Brexit.
McDonnell says he does not accept that choice. He says the government will soon have to accept the need for an alternative approach.
Hammond says the UK has to make its choice as a nation.
After two and a half years, it is time to choose. This deal will ensure the UK can move forward as a nation, he says.
He says this deal will set the UK on course for a prosperous future.
Hammond is close to winding up now.
He says MPs need to act now, to end divisions and uncertainty.
But what if they do not? Some people claim the UK has nothing to fear from a no deal Brexit. But there would be restrictions on Britons travelling in the EU. And Britain would be the only major economy trading with the EU on WTO terms, he says.
He says this would generate tariffs and paperwork.
Cars would face tariffs of 10%, clothing 12%, and agricultural goods would face even higher tariffs.
He says 90% of beef exports and and 95% of lamb exports to go the EU. They would face tariffs of 70% and 45% respectively.
I do not believe we can afford the economic costs of a no deal Brexit.
But he says he also does not believe the UK can afford the society costs of ignoring the results of the referendum.
The Times’ Sam Coates has got hold of the note distributed by the Tory whips ahead of today’s debate to encourage helpful interventions.
Here we go: let me know the most egregious government toadies.... pic.twitter.com/BsXl1qP6fg