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: MPs start debating bill that could block no deal as government reels from vote defeat – live news
Brexit: MPs give bill to stop no-deal second reading by majority of 29 – live news
(about 2 hours later)
Jane Dodds, the new Lib Dem MP for Brecon and Radnorshire, delivered her maiden speech in the debate, saying she was proud to use her first vote in the Commons last night to allow this debate to go ahead.
The division lists for the second reading vote on the Benn bill are here.
Alistair Burt, the former Tory Foreign office minister, was the second speaker in the debate. He is a joint sponsor of the bill. He started by saying that, to his surprise, he was speaking as an independent today, having had the whip withdrawn last night after he voted against the government.
Boris Johnson is addressing the Conservative 1922 Committee, according to the Spectator’s James Forsyth.
He said he was firmly against a no-deal Brexit. As a Scot, he said he was appalled by polling evidence showing that Conservatives would rather go ahead with Brexit, even if it resulted in Scottish independence. And he said he was worried about the impact of a no-deal Brexit on Ireland. Within the EU, Ireland and Britain became best friends, despite their troubled past. But now Brexit is hurting that relationship, he said.
The usual desk banging reception for the Tory leader at the ‘22. But Boris Johnson will need to reassure a slew of Tory MPs nervous after last night’s expulsions
He said when he first became an MP there were “giants” like Denis Healey and Willie Whitehall in the Commons. They had served in the war, and they were committed to the cause of Europe because they had seen their friends die.
Dame Caroline Spelman, the former environment secretary, was the new Tory rebel, the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn reports.
And he said he was worried about what is happening to the Conservative party. In the last week, it has lost Ruth Davidson as Scottish leader, George Young, who resigned as a government whip in the Lords, and Philip Hammond, who had the whip removed last night.
The Tory rebellion is growing: Govt defeated on 2nd reading of Benn bill to delay Brexit by one more than last night; 329-300. Caroline Spelman is the new rebel.
What are people going to think about what we have left and what we have lost.
The amendments are available on the Commons website here (pdf).
Benn ended his speech by saying a no-deal Brexit would not resolve the crisis.
I will highlight some of the main ones soon.
At the point the UK would still have to decide what relationship it wanted with the EU, he said.
MPs are now debating amendments to the bill.
Back in the debate Hilary Benn is explaining what his bill would do.
Sir Mike Penning, a Tory Brexiter, has just complained that printed copies of the amendments are not available yet in the vote office.
He says the 19 October 2019 deadline is deliberate. It is the day after the October EU summit. So it allows time for the PM to negotiate a deal at that summit, but it means that if no deal has been agreed at that summit, the PM either has to get MPs to approve no deal or request an article 50 extension.
Lindsay Hoyle, the deputy speaker, says they will appear soon, and well before voting at 7pm.
He says there have been claims that the bill would allow the EU to determine what Brexit the UK must accept. But that is not correct, he says. He says if the EU were to offer an extension other than one until 31 January 2020 (the extension proposed in the bill), the PM could decide whether or not to accept.
MPs have voted to give the bill to stop a no-deal Brexit on 31 October a second reading by 329 votes to 300 – a majority of 29.
Benn is referring to this subsection of the bill.
That majority is two bigger than last night (when the SO24 motion was passed by 328 votes to 301).
This part of the Brexit extension bill is v. significant. It states the EU can choose the length of the extension - without a limit - and the Prime Minister must agree to it: pic.twitter.com/nZMn4rkSza
This is from the Daily Mirror’s Jason Beattie.
This tweet is misleading because it ignores subsection 3(3), which says the PM does not have to accept the new extension proposed by the EU if MPs have voted to reject it.
I'd forgotten that Dominic Cummings told the Economist in 2016 there was a "strong democratic case" for putting any Brexit deal back to the peoplehttps://t.co/eOiQk0HTXJ
The Commons library briefing has a fuller explanation.
This is what Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s de facto chief of staff, said about a second referendum in an Economist interview in January 2016 (before the referendum on leaving the EU). At the time, Cummings was campaign director for Vote Leave. Asked if he thought the government would hold a second referendum, on the terms of Brexit, in the event of a vote to leave, Cummings replied.
Turning back to the issue of Labour’s position on an early election (see 2.48pm), my colleague Peter Walker says John McDonnell has been setting out his views in a briefing for journalists.
I think that is a distinct possibility, yes. It’s obviously not something that we can force. We’re a campaign group. But I think it is perfectly possible that leadership candidates to replace David Cameron will say that they think there are good grounds for a new government team to offer the public a voice on what the deal looks like. And we obviously wouldn’t oppose that, if that’s what senior politicians want to offer. I think there’s a strong democratic case for it.
John McDonnell has just explained Labour election yes-or-no plan to reporters: take it a day at a time, and don’t back one till it’s 100% sure no deal can’t happen on 31/10. So, could be before then or after.
There’s also the issue of the profound loss of trust that the establishment has suffered over the past 20-30 years. All parties have told lies about this subject, whether it’s John Major and David Cameron or Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and Nick Clegg. People have repeatedly promised referendums then not held referendums. So given that, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if leadership candidates to replace Cameron said: we need a mechanism so people can have confidence in what we say.
McDonnell says Labour are in daily contact with other opposition parties, with more talks tomorrow. Says the central point is they cannot trust the “slippery” Johnson government to do what they promise - has to be watertight.
MPs are now voting on the Benn bill. The result will be announced in about 15 minutes.
There have been various messages emanating from Labour on this. McDonnell’s view seems more on the Keir Starmer end of things.
Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, is winding up the second reading debate on the Benn bill for the government.
A Tory puts it to Benn that all his bill does is actually delay the moment at which the UK has to decide what to do about Brexit.
He claims the bill would undermine the government’s negotiation with the EU. And he insists progress is being made. Originally the EU said the withdrawal agreement could not be rewritten, he says. But now they are saying they are open to effective alternatives to the backstop.
Benn concedes there is some truth in this, but says if you are offered a choice between jumping off a cliff, and waiting for three months before jumping off a cliff, it makes sense to wait.
Margot James, who was a Conservative MP until she lost the whip last night after voting against the government, has added her voice to those criticising Dominic Cummings, the PM’s de facto chief of staff. (See 3.17pm.) At PMQs she asked Boris Johnson about him, saying he should remember Margaret Thatcher’s words: “Advisers advise, ministers decide.” After PMQs she told PA Media she had received “a lot of very supportive texts from people in No 10” after asking her question. She continued:
There is a short summary of what the Benn bill says here.
The levels of comments stretches far and wide and it’s high time [Cumming’s] wings were clipped.
And here is a Commons library briefing explaining the bill in more detail.
Asked what she thought of Cummings, James said:
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, is not making the opening speech in the second reading debate on the bill bearing his name. For the next four hours Benn is effectively in charge of the Commons order paper, as a result of the SO24 motion passed last night.
Very dangerous, very dangerous indeed. He is ruthless, he couldn’t care less whether we got a deal or whether we didn’t and he rules with a rod of iron.
The bill, European Union (withdrawal) (No 6) bill, is not on the parliamentary website yet. But Benn posted a copy of the text on Twitter on Monday.
I don’t approve of the way he treats people, apropos that poor special adviser who did nothing wrong whatsoever.
The veteran Conservative MP Roger Gale said the strategy pursued by Boris Johnson and his advisor Dominic Cummings “is in danger of tearing the party apart” and said the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservatives may have to act.
I mean, I could go on but you know my opinion of the man.
“I think to have an unelected, foul-mouthed oaf at the heart of Downing Street is dangerous and unacceptable,” he told ITV news.
Boris Johnson will open the debate holding an early election in the Commons this evening, Downing Street said. The prime minister’s spokesman said:
The time has come for Mr Johnson to get a handle on this and have Mr Cummings frogmarched out of Downing Street, because if he doesn’t the damage is going to continue.
The prime minister, while not wanting an election, believes that if his negotiating position has been destroyed then that should be tested at an election and the public should be able to decide on the next steps forward.
The manner, in which I know because I have had from the horse’s mouth, some of my colleagues who went to discuss courteously with Mr Johnson their situation yesterday were treated by Mr Cummings was quite appalling. That has to stop, if it doesn’t then maybe the 1922 Committee can do something about it but we cannot go on like this.
The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, has said Labour and other opposition parties have yet to decide when they might support Boris Johnson’s call for an election, saying this would only happen when they were certain that no-deal Brexit on 31 October had been blocked.
In the Commons John Bercow, the Speaker, is taking points of order ahead of the debate on the Benn bill.
The parties were taking legal advice, and would decide day by day, he told reporters, saying it meant Labour could still back an election on Johnson’s preferred date of 15 October, once a backbench bill seeking to block no deal had become law, but also possibly not till the Brexit date had been delayed.
Sir Bill Cash, the Tory Brexiter, asked if the bill required Queen’s consent. Cash said he was inspired to ask the question partly by this blog by Robert Craig, a public law lecturer, who suggested Queen’s consent would be required. He argued that this would be a problem.
The key, McDonnell said, was that they could not trust Johnson, calling him “beyond all the norms of political and constitutional practice in this country”. He said:
But Bercow told Cash he had considered this matter and decided Queen’s consent was not required.
We want to get the legislation secure, with royal assent, but we’re also not going to be tricked or conned, so we’re looking at every way in which, having secured the legislation, that he can’t wriggle out of abusing by the law.
Here is a question from below the line.
At the moment there’s nothing that Johnson has done in recent weeks that gives us the confidence that he’s going to abide by the law.
Andrew, the short-term is all that anyone has time for now (ie winning the vote to block no deal unless parliament agrees to it) but what's the most probable outcome given that Johnson's is now a minority government please?
McDonnell’s stance seems closer to that advocated by Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, than Jeremy Corbyn’s team. Starmer was due to meet other opposition parties on Thursday morning, McDonnell said, saying the SNP’s stated preference for an earlier election was “not a settled position by any means” among other parties.
Are the Tories still the biggest party even though 21 Tory MPs have now had the whip withdrawn (temporarily or permanently)?
He said:
If they're not the biggest party, who's got the right (eg the Speaker?) to insist on Johnson admitting that fact to the Queen?
We haven’t got a preference. Our preference is to stop a no-deal Brexit. So any mechanism that’s available to us, we’re exploring.
The Conservative party is still the biggest party in the House of Commons. The Commons authorities have updated the figures in the light of the Tory decision to remove the whip from 21 MPs last night. Here are the figures.
From Sky’s Lewis Goodall
What this shows is that there are now more independent MPs in the Commons than there are SNP MPs. If they were to organise as a group, and appoint a leader (Philip Hammond?), he would get to ask two questions every week at PMQs instead of Ian Blackford.
My understanding is that the strong view of Starmer, McDonnell and virtually all factions of PLP is that there shouldn’t be an election before November.Am told Starmer told PLP: “we need to implement the bIll too- which necessarily means going beyond October.”
More than 100,000 people have applied to register to vote in the past 48 hours, with young people making up the bulk of the surge, my colleague Ben Quinn reports.
More than 100,000 apply to register to vote in UK in 48 hours
Simon Coveney, Ireland’s deputy prime minister, confirmed that he has seen zero plans for an alternative to the backstop solution for the Irish border. He told the Guardian:
We’ve seen nothing in writing, it’s as simple as that.
He said all they have heard are some “conceptual ideas largely”.
He said he did not recognise claims by Dominic Raab last week that the EU had come round and he learned in Helsinki at a summit of foreign ministers that they were “willing to contemplate opening up the withdrawal agreement in a way that wasn’t there before”.
“I was in Helsinki and I listened to Dominic Raab, and I talked to all of the same people,” and did not hear that, he said. He said it was important for the British to “understand there is a difference between a willingness to look at proposals that do the same job as the backstop” and a renegotiation.
