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.
Brexit vote: MPs told they face choice between order and 'chaos' as May heads for huge defeat - Politics live
Brexit vote: MPs told they face choice between order and 'chaos' as May heads for huge defeat – Politics live
(35 minutes later)
Turning away from the debate for a moment, the Vote Leave campaign group has lost its bid to bring a High Court challenge against the Electoral Commission. As the Press Association reports, the group wanted to challenge the commission’s decision to publish a report in July last year, following an investigation into spending by leave-supporting groups during the EU Referendum campaign. The report said Vote Leave broke electoral law. Lawyers for Vote Leave argued there had been “reputational damage” suffered by the group’s officials as a result of the report being issued. But, following a hearing today, Mr Justice Swift refused permission for a judicial review, saying the publication of the report was within the commission’s powers.
In the debate Ben Bradshaw, the Labour former cabinet minister, says he might have been willing to back a Norway option a year ago. But Theresa May has wasted time. Now he thinks the country needs a general election, or a referendum. He says the country is facing an economic and constitutional crisis, and says he hopes that there will be a no confidence vote tomorrow.
The Press Association has more on European commission president Jean-Claude Juncker’s decision to return to Brussels for possible emergency talks tomorrow. (See 3.27pm.) The PA reports:
Jean-Claude Juncker has pulled out of an event in Strasbourg on Wednesday because the Brexit vote in the Commons means he has to remain in Brussels, a European commissioner has said.
The commission president had been due to take part in a debate on the future of Europe with Spanish prime minister Pedro Sanchez but has been replaced by his deputy Frans Timmermans.
Pierre Moscovici, commissioner for economic and financial affairs, told a press conference today: “President Juncker would have liked to have attended the debate, but the circumstances of it, which I am sure you are aware of, the vote in another country... I’m talking about Brexit.
“President Juncker needed to be in Brussels and that is why Vice President Timmermans is standing in.”
The Daily Mirror is reporting that an RAF plane is on standby to take Theresa May to Brussels tomorrow for emergency talks. (Cynics point out that RAF plans are always on standby, for anything.)
Labour’s Alison McGovern says offering the public to make a choice as to whether the Brexit they are being offered matches the Brexit they were promised in the referendum is probably the only way forward.
This is from the BBC’s Ross Hawkins.
Cons Mps anticipating 80-100 defeat; expect no con vote tomorrow; some who want no deal v happy with May in her place, think she’s only running down the clock cos she can’t do anything else; ministers thinking Lab votes could be only way out. Situation: 😱
Shailesh Vara, a Conservative, says he resigned as minister because of his opposition to Theresa May’s deal. It is not a compromise, he says, it’s a cave-in
And here is another line from Dominic Grieve.
Quote of the day is Grieve on Cox:"Entertaining as it was..it filled me with a slight sense of gloom to see that the government had got to such a pass that it had to rely on the skills of a criminal defence advocate to get it out of its difficulties."
People’s Vote and no-deal Brexit supporters were demonstrating side-by-side outside Parliament as they joined forces to oppose Theresa May’s apparently doomed deal to leave the European Union.
Hundreds of demonstrators were standing in Parliament Square, outside the gates of the Palace of Westminster and by the College Garden, flying European flags and Union Jacks, and placards calling for every kind of possible permutation of a deal, except the one arranged by the prime minister.
Cars beeped their horns as they passed the groups standing on pavements. At one point a phalanx of no-deal Brexit supporters marched into the middle of a group of remain campaigners and burned an EU flag. The scene was animated but peaceful.
#NoDealBrexit supporters burn European flag after marching into the middle of #PeoplesVoteNow rally opposite Parliament#BrexitVote #MeaningfulVote #PeoplesVote pic.twitter.com/O4qkA0aost
Alex Kay, 60, the mayor of Bradford on Avon, who stood with two friends on the green behind Westminster Abbey, said she hoped tonight’s vote on whether to accept the deal would be “the beginning of the end of Brexit.”
Her friend Maria af Sanderberg, 47, a Swede who has lived in the UK for 20 years, said:
It’s astonishing that with this bad deal - which is much worse than staying in the EU - [May] has managed to unite the remainers and the brexiteers against he, which is actually an irony of perfection.
Maria af Sandenberg, 47, left, from Chesham: "It's astonishing that with this bad deal May has managed to unite Remainers and Brexiters against her." #Brexit #BrexitVote #PeoplesVote pic.twitter.com/YxHH03T8Fd
Closer to the gates of the palace, Philip Hodson, 60, from Newmarket in Suffolk, stood holding a placard reading: “Uphold our English constitution.”
“I hope the outcome will be no deal, and that’s the most important thing,” he said. “We should leave straight away and then Europe will come looking for us for a deal.
Philip Hodson, 60, from Suffolk: "Remainers and leavers are together... Everybody recognises this is a terrible, terrible deal."#NoDealBrexit #PeoplesVote #MeaningfulVote #Brexit #BrexitVote pic.twitter.com/uUvSnBtOcg
The reason this deal should be thrown out is it’s offering £39bn to the EU for nothing. It’s taking away our right to vote in the EU and our veto, while leaving us subject to its rules.
That’s why most remainers and leavers are together … Everybody recognises this is a terrible, terrible deal. A child could get a better deal.
Dominic Grieve, the Tory pro-European who has been leading attempts to get parliament to block a no-deal Brexit, is speaking now.
He says Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, referred to the withdrawal agreement as an “airlock” for the UK before it entered “the fields of ambrosia”. Grieve says that he thinks, once the UK leaves the airlock, it is more likely the the UK will “choke to death”.
He says the UK has been living in a “fools’ paradise” since the referendum. Where was the reference to the backstop during the referendum, he asks.
He says that it is no surprise that only 20% of the public now favour Theresa May’s deal.
And he accuses Downing Street of briefing against him at the end of last week. No 10 claimed that Grieve was involved in a scheme promoted by Sir Oliver Letwin to change Commons procedural rules, despite the fact that he had no involvement, Grieve says.
He restates his support for a second referendum and says that he is still getting death threats as a result of his stance against Brexit.
Nicky Morgan, the Conservative pro-European, told MPs in her speech in the debate that, if Theresa May loses, she should abandon her plan.
This is from the Sun’s Nick Gutteridge.
This is from the Sun’s Nick Gutteridge.
President Juncker is travelling back to Brussels because he needs to be in town tomorrow morning to deal with ‘emergency’ Brexit-related business, Commissioner Moscovici announces. Looks likely we can expect a flying visit from the PM for (yet more) crisis talks.
President Juncker is travelling back to Brussels because he needs to be in town tomorrow morning to deal with ‘emergency’ Brexit-related business, Commissioner Moscovici announces. Looks likely we can expect a flying visit from the PM for (yet more) crisis talks.
Here is the Conservative MP Nick Boles having a dig at Dominic Raab.
Did anyone else just hear someone launch his campaign for the Conservative leadership?
John Bercow, the speaker, has now imposed a five-minute time limit on speech. Dominic Raab, the former Brexit secretary, is speaking now. He says Theresa May’s deal would lead to the UK giving up control, and would precipitate a “democratic cliff-edge”.
Sir Bill Cash, the Tory Brexiter, has just finished his speech in the debate. He said he was willing to consider backing Theresa May until she published the details of her Chequers plan.
He ended his speech saying if May lost she should consider her position.
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, is speaking now. He says he thinks article 50 will have to be extended. He says the government should allow a series of votes to see if the Commons can agree a way forward. If that does not happen, then the only way forward will be to allow the public a vote, he says.
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, has just finished speaking.
He said the SNP amendment (see 2.47pm) to the motion calls for article 50 to be extended.
Much of his speech was devoted to attacking Labour, and he criticised the party for not explicitly backing a second referendum. The party should “get off the fence”, he said.
(Actually, the SNP amendment does not call for a second referendum either – even though the party now favours one. That is in line with the wishes of the People’s Vote campaign. If the SNP amendment did not mention a second referendum, then the vote on it would become a second referendum vote. The People’s Vote campaign does not want this matter to come to the floor of the Commons until it has the best chance of winning, and that would come after a decision by Labour to formally back the idea. That is why the Lib Dems are not making a fuss about their second referendum amendment not being called.)
Blackford ended his speech by saying that the day would soon come when Scotland would vote to declare independence from the rest of the UK.
Here is the full text of the amendments that will be put to a vote later.
The Labour amendment (Jeremy Corbyn’s)
Line 1, leave out from “House” to end and insert “declines to approve the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship because it fails to provide for a permanent UK-EU customs union and strong single market deal and would therefore lead to increased barriers to trade in goods and services, would not protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, allows for the diminution of the United Kingdom’s internal and external security and is likely to lead to the implementation of a backstop provision in Northern Ireland that is neither politically nor economically sustainable; declines to approve the United Kingdom’s leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement; and therefore resolves to pursue every option that prevents the United Kingdom’s either leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement or leaving on the basis of the negotiated withdrawal agreement laid before the House.”
The SNP amendment (Ian Blackford’s)
Line 1, leave out from “House” to end and insert “declines to approve the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship in line with the views of the Scottish parliament and the Welsh assembly that they would be damaging for Scotland, Wales and the nations and regions of the UK as a whole; notes the legal opinion of the advocate general of the European Court of Justice that the United Kingdom has the right to unilateral revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU, until such time as the withdrawal agreement is formally concluded; therefore calls on the UK government to request an extension to the period of negotiation under article 50 of the treaty on European Union so that the UK does not leave the EU without a withdrawal agreement or on the basis of the negotiated agreement laid before the House on Monday 26 November 2018; and calls on the UK government to respect the will of the Scottish parliament in its vote on 5 December 2018 and the Welsh assembly in its vote on 4 December 2018, which both rejected the withdrawal agreement as it now stands.”
Tory MP Sir Edward Leigh’s amendment
At end, add “notes that the Northern Ireland backstop is intended to be temporary; notes that the Vienna convention on the law of treaties makes it absolutely clear that a sovereign state can abrogate any part of a treaty with an international body in case of a fundamental change of circumstances since the Treaty was agreed; notes that making the Northern Ireland backstop permanent would constitute such a fundamental change of circumstances; and therefore calls for an assurance from the government that, if it becomes clear by the end of 2021 that the European Union will not agree to remove the Northern Ireland backstop, the United Kingdom will treat the indefinite continuation of the backstop as a fundamental change of circumstances and will accordingly give notice on 1 January 2022 to terminate the withdrawal treaty so that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland shall become an independent country once again.”
Tory MP Sir John Baron’s amendment
At end, add “subject to changes being made in the withdrawal agreement and in the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol so that the UK has the right to terminate the protocol without having to secure the agreement of the EU.”
You can read the full list of amendments tabled, including the names of MPs who have signed each amendment, here (pdf).
Clarke says the UK should revoke article 50 as a means of delay. Having revoked it, it could then trigger it again, he says.
Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, intervenes. He says Clarke is wrong. He says if the UK wants to revoke article 50, it would have to provide “satisfactory evidence to the EU that we are cancelling our departure form the EU”.
Clarke does not push his point. If Cox is right, then the UK needs to ask for an extension of article 50, he says.
Cox says the UK cannot revoke article 50 unilaterally just to buy further time for negotiation.
The difference between revoking article 50 and extending it is important. The UK can revoke article 50 unilaterally. But to extend it it needs the unanimous support of the EU27.
The European court of justice ruling (pdf) before Christmas confirmed that the UK can revoke article 50 unilaterally. But the court said the UK’s decision would have to be “unequivocal and unconditional”, and an earlier opinion (pdf) from the court’s advocate general said the UK would be bound by conditions of “good faith and sincere cooperation” – implying revocation as a negotiating tactic would not be allowed.
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the shadow solictor general, opens the debate for Labour. As he set out the party’s policy, he was challenged by Michael Gove, the environment secretary, who said the opposition wanted to be in a customs union with the EU, but also to have a say in its trade deals, and that this amounted to a “unicorn”. Thomas-Symonds rejected this, suggesting Turkey had some influence in EU trade policy.
Ken Clarke, the Conservative pro-European and the father of the Commons, is speaking now. These are from my colleague Lisa O’Carroll.
1. Vintage Ken Clarke He is supporting the Withdrawal agreement as it is "harmless" exit paper "before real negotiations" start. Said it shd have taken "two months to negotiate as obligations to EU citizens, the bill we owe and the Irish border were "perfectly clear" at start
2. "The withdrawal agreement in itself is harmless." - Ken Clarke"The Irish backstop is not really the reason a large number of people in this house are voting against it."
3. Ken Clarke tells MPs who are moaning about backstop that they must be "suffering from form of paranoia to think the Irish backstop is some plot to keep the British" in the EU.
Here are the main points from the opening of the debate, and other Brexit developments so far.
John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, has refused to call a backbench amendment to the Brexit motion deemed helpful to the government. Officially, the government was not supporting the Andrew Murrison amendment, which backed Theresa May’s deal “subject to the withdrawal agreement treaty being amended to specify that the backstop solution shall expire on 31 December 2021”. But if it had passed, then potentially the vote on the main motion, as amended, would have been much closer than it is now expected to be.
The Labour MP Hilary Benn has bowed to pressure from party colleagues and pulled his amendment to the motion. Benn’s amendment, which opposed May’s deal and also opposed a no-deal Brexit, may well have been passed if it had been put to a vote, and that would have also disguised the scale of the opposition to May’s deal – because that would have meant no vote on the main motion as unamended.
Bercow has called four amendments – including two other Tory backbench ones relating to the backstop. But he has not called the Lib Dem amendment, and there will be no vote on a second referendum. (See 1.09pm.)
May’s EU emissary, Olly Robbins, has been working up secret contingency plans for cross-party talks aimed at testing MPs’ backing for up to six different Brexit options were the prime minister to lose Tuesday’s vote by a significant margin, the Guardian has learned.
Opponents of Theresa May’s Brexit deal have seized on a suggestion by Germany’s foreign minister that further negotiations could be opened with the EU should MPs reject the prime minister’s agreement on Tuesday evening.
Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, has told MPs that the choice between accepting or rejecting May’s deal amounts to a choice between order or “chaos”. In his speech opening this afternoon’s debate, he said:
[May’s deal] provides for the orderly and predictable and legally certain winding down of our obligations and involvement in the legal systems of the EU.
If we do not legislate for that legal certainty as a matter of law alone, thousands of contracts, thousands of transactions, thousands of administrative proceedings, of judicial proceedings in the European Union and this country, will be plunged into legal uncertainty.
It would be the height of irresponsibility for any legislator to contemplate with equanimity such a situation.
If you were a litigant in a court, if you were dependent upon having concluded a contract on the basis of EU law and you found yourself suddenly with the rug pulled from under you, not knowing what your legal obligations would be, you would say to this house: ‘What are you playing at? What are you doing? You are not children in the playground, you are legislators.’ We are playing with people’s lives ...
Whether it can be done by 29 March or whether it can’t does not affect the decision we have to take today - which is: do we opt for order, or do we choose chaos?
Cox said an amendment from the Tory MP Edward Leigh, which will be put to a vote tonight and which would give the UK the right to abandon the withdrawal agreement if it is still in the backstop by the end of 2021 (see 1.46pm), would not be compatible with the UK’s international legal obligations. If it were passed, it could lead to the EU deciding the UK had not ratified the agreement, he said.
Cox says passing this deal would be the first step towards leaving the EU. If the Commons did not take this step, it would plunge the country into uncertainty.
And people who want to stop Brexit want MPs to vote down this deal, because they know this deal is the only path to Brexit. Vote it down, and Brexit could be stopped, he argues.
He says if MPs vote it down history will record that MPs voted against the possibility of the UK regaining independence, all because of the backstop.
And that’s it. Cox has finally finished.
Rachel Reeves, the Labour chair of the business committee, intervenes. She says Cox has been speaking for almost an hour, and almost everything he has said is aimed at addressing concerns of Tories. But, as the two votes from MPs in the Commons showed last week, what other MPs are worried about is the prospect of a no-deal Brexit. Will Cox rule that out?
Cox says the way to avoid a no-deal Brexit is to vote for this deal.
