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/live/2019/sep/26/boris-johnsons-brexit-rhetoric-condemned-as-mps-tell-of-death-threats-politics-live

The article has changed 15 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Brexit: Labour's Paula Sherriff accuses Boris Johnson of inciting hatred against MPs – live news Brexit: Boris Johnson addresses Tory backbenchers as critics accuse him of 'inciting hatred towards MPs' – live news
(32 minutes later)
Jo Cox’s sister, Kim Leadbeater, has joined her husband (see 7.45am) in expressing alarm about the language used by Boris Johnson in the Commons night. Leadbeater told Sky News: The Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, will travel to Brussels on Friday for a meeting with Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Downing Street has said. But the PM’s spokesman has also said that although progress has been made in negotiations with Brussels, “there are significant obstacles remaining to concluding a deal”.
From my colleague Matthew Weaver
Here's a word cloud of Boris Johnson's opening statement to Parliament last night pic.twitter.com/uQjZUWQeYM
From the Spectator’s James Forsyth
At 1922 meeting just now, Boris Johnson told Tory MPs that ‘they [Labour] are trying to drive us off the word surrender because they know it is cutting through’. Clear he is not going to stop using the phrase
The European commission has joined those reprimanding Boris Johnson for the language he used in the Commons last night about his opponent. This is what the commission’s spokeswoman, Mina Andreeva, said on the subject.
We would remind everybody that respect is a fundamental value in all democracies. It is the responsibility of each and every politician to uphold our values. History has shown us what happens when they are not respected.
.@EU_Commission on tone of House of Commons' debate: "Respect is the key word. Respect is a fundamental value of all our democracies. It's the responsibility of each and every politician to uphold our values. History has shown us what happens when they're not respected"#Brexit pic.twitter.com/PwsjO1fJcF
Boris Johnson is addressing the backbench Conservative 1922 Committee. These are from some of the journalists doorstepping the meeting.
Loud desk banging and door banging as @BorisJohnson enters 1922 cttee meeting
Cheers as the Prime Minister arrives at the ‘22
Dominic Cummings arrives in Parliament as the PM gets ready to face the 1922 committee
Boris Johnson has arrived at a meeting of the 1922 committee of Tory MPs. Cheering as the prime minister arrived but one person inside says “half the room is silent”
In the Commons, in response to an urgent question, Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, has admitted that the government has made further breaches of the court ruling banning arms sales to Saudia Arabia that could be used in Yemen, my colleague Dan Sabbagh reports.
Liz Truss admits to the Commons that govt made further breaches of the court ruling banning arms sales to Saudi that could be used in Yemen. And minister admits *more breaches may be found*. Another example of the govt failing to adhere to the law...
Jo Cox’s sister, Kim Leadbeater, has joined Cox’s husband (see 7.45am) in expressing alarm about the language used by Boris Johnson in the Commons last night. Leadbeater told Sky News:
I watched parliament TV for four hours last night and I was mesmerised and dumbstruck by the scenes that I saw before me.I watched parliament TV for four hours last night and I was mesmerised and dumbstruck by the scenes that I saw before me.
I think the prime minister needs to think very carefully about the language he uses.I think the prime minister needs to think very carefully about the language he uses.
I think everybody has to think really carefully about the language they use.I think everybody has to think really carefully about the language they use.
Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, has defended Boris Johnson’s decision to use terms like surrender and betrayal in the Brexit context. Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, has defended Boris Johnson’s decision to use terms such as surrender and betrayal in the Brexit context.
When Boris Johnson uses words like surrender and betrayal, he is right.That’s why he should not surrender to the Withdrawal Agreement and betray 17.4 million people.When Boris Johnson uses words like surrender and betrayal, he is right.That’s why he should not surrender to the Withdrawal Agreement and betray 17.4 million people.
The argument against such language is that it is inflammatory because it frames Brexit, an issue that is supposed to be about a trading relationships with friendly countries, in terms of warfare, with the EU depicted as an enemy power.The argument against such language is that it is inflammatory because it frames Brexit, an issue that is supposed to be about a trading relationships with friendly countries, in terms of warfare, with the EU depicted as an enemy power.
The Tory MP Simon Hoare has called for a change of tone from Boris Johnson. Hoare, who voted remain in 2016, told the Commons:The Tory MP Simon Hoare has called for a change of tone from Boris Johnson. Hoare, who voted remain in 2016, told the Commons:
There needs to a change in the mood music emanating from No 10 because as a Tory party we obey the rule of law and the fact that is in question in this place should bring shame on all of us.There needs to a change in the mood music emanating from No 10 because as a Tory party we obey the rule of law and the fact that is in question in this place should bring shame on all of us.
Good morning. I’m Andrew Sparrow, picking up from Matthew Weaver.Good morning. I’m Andrew Sparrow, picking up from Matthew Weaver.
One consequence of Boris Johnson’s extraordinary provocative and divisive performance in the Commons last night is that it has made it much, much harder to see how any opposition MPs could vote with him for a Brexit deal in the next few weeks. It is hard to know whether he is even at all serious about trying to get an agreement through the Commons.One consequence of Boris Johnson’s extraordinary provocative and divisive performance in the Commons last night is that it has made it much, much harder to see how any opposition MPs could vote with him for a Brexit deal in the next few weeks. It is hard to know whether he is even at all serious about trying to get an agreement through the Commons.
This has just been confirmed in the chamber by Labour’s Lisa Nandy, one of the opposition MPs who has been trying to drum up support for a cross-party deal. Condemning Johnson’s “horrendous, divisive language”, she said:This has just been confirmed in the chamber by Labour’s Lisa Nandy, one of the opposition MPs who has been trying to drum up support for a cross-party deal. Condemning Johnson’s “horrendous, divisive language”, she said:
For those of us who do want to work cross-party to achieve a deal, this is making it much, much more difficult.For those of us who do want to work cross-party to achieve a deal, this is making it much, much more difficult.
The Labour MP Paula Sherriff has accused the prime minister of inciting hatred against MPs.The Labour MP Paula Sherriff has accused the prime minister of inciting hatred against MPs.
Speaking to the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme she said she was horrified by Boris Johnson’s dismissal of her concerns about threats to MPs as “humbug”. Sherriff said:Speaking to the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme she said she was horrified by Boris Johnson’s dismissal of her concerns about threats to MPs as “humbug”. Sherriff said:
We talk about it in the tearooms. People are really frightened and for him to treat it almost like a joke, was absolutely horrific and demeans the office of prime minister.We talk about it in the tearooms. People are really frightened and for him to treat it almost like a joke, was absolutely horrific and demeans the office of prime minister.
I believe the prime minister is inciting hatred towards MPs. I understand the importance of saying that, but I know that feeling is shared by many of us.I believe the prime minister is inciting hatred towards MPs. I understand the importance of saying that, but I know that feeling is shared by many of us.
She said one MP had contacted her since last night saying the rhetoric used meant she would not stand at the next election. But Sherriff said she herself was determined to continue as an MP. She said: “I will not let these bullies win and I include the prime minister in that.”She said one MP had contacted her since last night saying the rhetoric used meant she would not stand at the next election. But Sherriff said she herself was determined to continue as an MP. She said: “I will not let these bullies win and I include the prime minister in that.”
She said she feared that another MP could be killed and insisted she was “not scaremongering”.She said she feared that another MP could be killed and insisted she was “not scaremongering”.
She also called on MPs from all sides of the house to tone down their rhetoric: “We all need to reflect on our language and our behaviour. The bad behaviour is not exclusive to Conservative MPs.”She also called on MPs from all sides of the house to tone down their rhetoric: “We all need to reflect on our language and our behaviour. The bad behaviour is not exclusive to Conservative MPs.”
But she singled out the Treasury minister Simon Clarke for accusing her of making a “toxic” intervention in her angry question to the prime minister.But she singled out the Treasury minister Simon Clarke for accusing her of making a “toxic” intervention in her angry question to the prime minister.
This is the face of the Labour Party today. Utterly toxic. https://t.co/YidW5GppfEThis is the face of the Labour Party today. Utterly toxic. https://t.co/YidW5GppfE
Sherriff described Clarke’s tweet as abhorrent. “It makes me sick,” she said.Sherriff described Clarke’s tweet as abhorrent. “It makes me sick,” she said.
She said she had had threats of rape, murder and mutilation earlier this year.She said she had had threats of rape, murder and mutilation earlier this year.
The abuse comes every day, thankfully the death threats don’t. Last night the overwhelming majority of the communications I received were supportive, including from many Conservative supporters. But equally I received some horrific abuse last night much of it misogynistic. We urgently need to dial down the rhetoric.The abuse comes every day, thankfully the death threats don’t. Last night the overwhelming majority of the communications I received were supportive, including from many Conservative supporters. But equally I received some horrific abuse last night much of it misogynistic. We urgently need to dial down the rhetoric.
Labour MPs remain furious about Johnson’s comments about Jo Cox, but many are now citing her memory to try to mend divisions.Labour MPs remain furious about Johnson’s comments about Jo Cox, but many are now citing her memory to try to mend divisions.
I’ve been thinking very deeply about Jo Cox in the last couple of days, not least because I spent time with her sister yesterday. Jo was a future party leader and potential Prime Minister. She could have healed a divided nation and we would have been proud of her.I’ve been thinking very deeply about Jo Cox in the last couple of days, not least because I spent time with her sister yesterday. Jo was a future party leader and potential Prime Minister. She could have healed a divided nation and we would have been proud of her.
We all have a responsibility to weigh our words but only one side talked of “surrender” and “capitulation” last night egged on by Tory press who call judges and remainers mutineers and saboteurs. All time low& insult to Jo Cox #moreincommon visionInbox full of emails like this pic.twitter.com/zos679RpwHWe all have a responsibility to weigh our words but only one side talked of “surrender” and “capitulation” last night egged on by Tory press who call judges and remainers mutineers and saboteurs. All time low& insult to Jo Cox #moreincommon visionInbox full of emails like this pic.twitter.com/zos679RpwH
I wish it hadn’t needed saying, but Jo’s murder didn’t happen in a vacuum but in a context, a context similar to today. @MrBrendanCox is spot on this morning and we should all heed his advice. https://t.co/WSIFosC90sI wish it hadn’t needed saying, but Jo’s murder didn’t happen in a vacuum but in a context, a context similar to today. @MrBrendanCox is spot on this morning and we should all heed his advice. https://t.co/WSIFosC90s
In 2017 I made 1st speech in this Parliamentary session. In ‘proposing the loyal address’ I said, ‘The country expects our debates to be robust but there is room for consensus too. We should reflect on Jo Cox’s words about there being more that unites us than divides us’ #naiveIn 2017 I made 1st speech in this Parliamentary session. In ‘proposing the loyal address’ I said, ‘The country expects our debates to be robust but there is room for consensus too. We should reflect on Jo Cox’s words about there being more that unites us than divides us’ #naive
Duddridge refuses to be drawn on what circumstances the government would seek an extension to the 31 October Brexit deadline. He again repeats that the government will obey the law.Duddridge refuses to be drawn on what circumstances the government would seek an extension to the 31 October Brexit deadline. He again repeats that the government will obey the law.
Brexit minister James Duddridge repeatedly saying the government will obey the law, but which one - the one which requires the PM to seek an extension or the one which says Britain leaves the EU on October 31?Brexit minister James Duddridge repeatedly saying the government will obey the law, but which one - the one which requires the PM to seek an extension or the one which says Britain leaves the EU on October 31?
Hilary Benn says the government’s claims about obeying the law and not seeking an extension are not compatible. How can those things be reconciled, Benn asks.
Duddridge says the PM really doesn’t want an extension. The government is breaking every sinew to get a deal. The government will obey the law, he says again.
The Brexit minister James Duddridge insists the government “will obey the law”.
But asked how the prime minister can avoid asking for an extension under the Benn Act – or European Union (Withdrawal) (No 2) Act 2019 – he says: “That is a hypothetical question I don’t want to be drawn into ...”
Duddridge says the government will use “every bit of wriggle room” to get a deal.
Four urgent questions have been granted today covering: the Benn Act, Hong Kong, arms exports to Saudi Arabia and the prime minister’s language and role.
Four urgent questions:1. @IanMurrayMP - EU (Withdrawal) (No.2) Act2. @CatherineWest1 - Hong Kong3. @ChrisLawSNP - award of arms export licenses to Saudi Arabia4. @jessphillips - the Prime Minister's language & roleFollowed by one statement on international climate action pic.twitter.com/yj3W49uEG8
The Speaker, John Bercow, has appealed to MPs to stop using toxic language.
Opening today’s session in the Commons, Bercow says:
There is a widespread sense across the house, and beyond, that yesterday the house did itself no credit. There was an atmosphere in the chamber worse than any I’ve known in my 22 years in the house. On both sides passions were inflamed, angry words were uttered. The culture was toxic.
He says he has been approached by two senior MPs from either side of the house for a formal consideration of political conduct.
Pending consideration of that, he has granted a urgent question about the language used across the house. Bercow says it is not a partisan issue. It is about something bigger than party affiliation, he says.
Bercow says: “Please lower the decibel level and treat each other as opponents rather than enemies.”
UPDATE: Here is the Labour MP Harriet Harman welcoming Bercow’s comments. Harman and Ken Clarke have been calling for a Speaker’s conference on threats to MP. They are the mother and father of the house respectively (ie, the longest-serving female and male MPs).
Speaker just announced that he’s looking at cross-party proposal from “2 senior members of the House” re threats against MPs. That is proposal from me & Ken Clarke for a Speaker’s Conference. https://t.co/Pu2P9KTdWa
The former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith has claimed it is parliament’s refusal to deliver Brexit that is fuelling anger in the country.
Speaking to Sky News, he said opposition MPs were equally to blame for intemperate language in the Commons.
I think this is the pot calling the kettle black. Last night I watched when Labour MPs lined up, they were shouting that he was a liar, he was a cheat. It wasn’t about Boris Johnson, it was about the issue. The issue which they want to dance away from which is causing this is that when you promise the British people you will act on the result of the vote that they were given in 2016 and parliament goes on saying no, this is the fuel that feeds the anger and therefore it has to be resolved.
Siân Berry, the co-leader of the Green party, and a member of the London assembly’s oversight committee condemned Cleverly’s suggestion that Johnson would ignore any summons over the Arcuri questions.
Speaking to the Guardian she said: “I don’t think anyone can really predict which laws the prime minister is going to obey. He has left himself basically in contempt of parliament. But we would expect him to comply with the law.
“Seeing the prime minister last night suggesting that he won’t behave in a way that is appropriate is really disturbing. The prime minister’s one job is to effectively uphold the law and the fact that we have got one who is not doing that on a regular basis is very very disturbing. And that people are prepared to justify that is even more disturbing.”
Berry challenged Cleverly’s assertion that ministers could ignore the assembly. She pointed out that it did have the legal power to compel the prime minister to appear.
We very rarely use our powers of summons. On the Garden Bridge we informally invited Boris Johnson, first in a letter, and then we sent a proper summons because we needed to hear from him.
We had to get advice on whether we could do that to a former mayor, but we could, so we did. And we would again.
Earlier this week the London assembly wrote to Johnson giving him 14 days to respond to the allegations about Jennifer Arcuri.
The letter from Len Duvall chair of the assembly’s oversight committee, said:
I read with concern the allegations set out in the Sunday Times yesterday that, when you held the office of mayor of London, you failed to declare a potential conflict of interest in relation to the awarding of public funds to Jennifer Arcuri.
As you will know, the London assembly is responsible for holding to account the office of the mayor of London.
Accordingly, I now write to ask that you provide, within 14 days of receipt of this letter:
– Details and a timeline of all contact with Jennifer Arcuri during your period of office as mayor of London, including personal, social and professional.
– And an explanation of how that alleged personal relationship was disclosed and taken into account in any and all dealings with the GLA and other parts of the GLA family.
James Cleverly suggested Johnson would ignore any request by the London assembly to appear before it to answer questions about his conduct as mayor of London over the tech businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri.
The assembly has given him 14 days to explain why sponsorship and favours were granted to Arcuri, a close friend of Johnson, without any declaration of interest being made.
Members of the assembly have suggested they could also summons Johnson to answer questions about Arcuri, as they did over the failed Garden Bridge project.
Asked whether Johnson would appear before the London assembly, the Tory chairman told Today: “The London assembly’s job is to scrutinise the mayor of London. When I was on the London assembly it was quite common for government ministers to refuse to appear.”
When it was put to him that the assembly had the legal power to summons members of the government, Cleverly said: “That is not my understanding.”
The Tory party chairman, James Cleverly, has defended the prime minister’s language in the Commons.
Speaking on Today he said he couldn’t see how the “highly charged” atmosphere in the house would calm down until Brexit was resolved.
Cleverly tried to claim the prime minister had not used the language of “betrayal” before being corrected.
He also claimed language on all sides had been intemperate and violent.
When Johnson accused the Labour MP Paula Sherriff of talking “humbug”, Cleverly claimed Johnson was responding to accusations that were untrue.
The rhetoric could be de-escalated if both sides calmed down and compromised, Cleverly said.
Asked whether Johnson would seek an extension to avoid a no-deal Brexit as set out in the Benn Act, Cleverly insisted that Johnson would obey the law. We will obey the law, Cleverly said, but he refused to say whether the PM would abide by the Benn Act. We will leave by 31 October, Cleverly said.
Luciana Berger, who joined the Liberal Democrats after leaving Labour, will give up her Liverpool constituency to fight for a London seat once held by Margaret Thatcher, PA reports.
The campaigner against antisemitism will contest the seat of Finchley and Golders Green in north London, a constituency with a sizeable Jewish community, at the next election.
The Lib Dems came third in 2017, 21,000 off the Conservative victor, Mike Freer, in a seat formerly held by ex-prime minister Mrs Thatcher for more than 30 years, albeit under a slightly different make-up.
Berger quit the Labour party in February, walking out with six other colleagues, and went on to form Change UK.
The constituency voted 70% to remain and Berger will be hoping her party’s recently approved policy of revoking article 50 if it wins a majority at the next election will make her a serious contender.
Her Jewish background could also play a factor in attracting voters who rejected Labour over concerns of growing antisemitism in the party.
Golders Green is home to one of the largest Jewish communities in the capital, with kosher bakeries and a visible Hasidic presence on its high streets and in the adjacent Temple Fortune.