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: European commission confirms it is considering extension - live news
Brexit: Bercow refuses to allow 'meaningful vote' on deal today - live news
(about 2 hours later)
• Downing Street has insisted that MPs must be given “a straight-up-and-down amid speculation that the speaker, John Bercow, will not permit it to take place.The government also said that any attempt by MPs to add a customs union to the government’s Brexit deal would be “procedural tricks” intended to frustrate departure.The expectation is that Bercow will not permit such a vote given that the deal was debated by MPs on Saturday, and a backbench amendment attached, putting off final approval until the legislation surrounding the plan is agreed.
Bercow is warming up a bit now, telling Jenkin: “When he was getting decisions in his favour he was grumbling. He is grumbling now because he is getting the judgements that he doesn’t like.”
• The unconventional “form” of Boris Johnson’s extension request is irrelevant to the EU, the European commission has confirmed, as Germany’s finance minister said “it goes without saying” that a further Brexit delay would be granted.Peter Altmaier, a key ally of the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said he believed either a technical extension to allow extra-time for legislation to pass, or a longer period to accommodate a general election or second referendum would be offered.
A translation from the BBC’s Andrew Sinclair:
• Scotland’s most senior judge, Lord Carloway, has rejected a call by the UK government to end a case examining if Boris Johnson broke a promise that he would not try to sabotage the request for a Brexit extension.After losing a Commons vote on Saturday on delaying his deal, Johnson sent an unsigned copy of the letter required by the Benn act but also sent another, personal letter to Brussels that asked EU leaders not to agree to an extension. The judge said he would continue with the case until it was clear that Downing Street had complied with the act in full.
Speaker response to @bernardjenkin “I don’t recall you complaining when I used to let eurosceptic mps ask urgent questions “
• Northern Ireland’s unionist parties have recalled the Stormont assembly today in a last-minute attempt to stop the decriminalisation of abortion from coming into effect.The region’s restrictive abortion laws are set to change at midnight on Monday after the Commons voted last July to bring reproductive rights in Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK.
Bercow continues to defend himself under questioning, saying that one of the reason for the rules he has invoked was to prevent “conflicting” rulings on similar issues coming soon after the other “in short order”
This is Ben Quinn picking up the blog now from Frances Perraudin.
“And what could be shorter order than the next sitting day after the last judgement was made.. and that was the rationale for the perfectly reasonable judgement that I have made,” says the speaker.
Northern Ireland’s unionist parties have recalled the Stormont assembly today in a last-minute attempt to stop the decriminalisation of abortion from coming into effect, my colleague Daniel Avelar reports.
Bernard Jenkin, the Brexit supporting Tory MP, is on his feet insisting that the motion which the government wanted to be voted on today was very different from the one which MPs considered on Saturday.
The region’s restrictive abortion laws are set to change at midnight on Monday after the Commons voted last July to bring reproductive rights in Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK.
To ‘ooohs’ he adds that the Public administration committee, which he chairs, will be holding hearing on the role of the speaker.
This will be the first time in nearly three years that the parliament in Belfast has met, since legislators from the Democratic Unionist party (DUP) and Sinn Féin nationalists failed to reach a power-sharing agreement after the devolved government collapsed in January 2017.
Bercow replies that that it is absolutely right for the committee to do what it wanted to to and he was “entirely untroubled” by it.
The recall follows a petition promoted by anti-abortion campaigners and signed by 31 members of the legislative assembly (MLAs), aiming to put abortion rights back in the hands of local politicians.
Bercow breaks off into a (not unconvincing) Tony Benn impression to repeat the Labour MP’s lament that politics should be about issues, not personalities, as he comes under further questioning about his ruling.
MLAs would need to form an executive before the midnight deadline to block the abortion reform, but that is highly unlikely as nationalist parties said their members would not attend today’s session.
The veteran Eurosceptic and Brexit, Bill Cash, has been on his feet urging Bercow to reconsider his decision in the light of the “law of the land” with regards to Britain’s scheduled Brexit date.
Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, defended the recall, saying it would allow MLAs to “debate the issue” of abortion in Northern Ireland, while a Sinn Féin spokesperson called it a “pointless political stunt”.
Bercow says he is stating the obvious: “When you make a judgement on these matters that is controversial, some people are going to be pleased and some are going to be displeased.”
As well as the decriminalisation of abortion, same-sex marriage is also due to become legal on Tuesday after a separate Westminster vote in July.
“I have simply sought to discharge my obligations and to do what I believe to be right, and that is what the speaker has to do.”
Here’s the full report from the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent Rory Carroll.
Meanwhile standing at bar of the House are former ministers Gauke, Hammond, Boles. They dont look too unhappy at Speaker ruling.
DUP to return to Stormont to protest against abortion rights
The House of Commons Speaker, John Bercow, has ruled that he will not permit MPs to have a “meaningful vote” on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal today.
The Guardian’s Scotland editor, Severin Carrell, is in court in Edinburgh where Lord Carloway has rejected a call by the UK government to halt proceedings because the prime minister has met his legal requirements under the Benn act. (See my earlier post.)
“My ruling is that the motion will not be debated today as it would be repetitive and disorderly to do so,” he told MPs.
The judge said he would continue with the case until it was clear that Downing Street had complied with the act in full – ie sought and, if it is offered, accepted a Brexit extension from the EU. A date for the next hearing is yet to be fixed.
Bercow says he hopes that the ruling and explanation are helpful to the house, before allowing the Tory MP Peter Bone to come in with a point of order.
David Johnston QC for @GOVUK says @BorisJohnson has met the legal requirements of #BennAct so the case needs to be dropped “It’s time to call a halt to these proceedings”. #courtofsession
To laughter, Bone tells him that no one knew that the prime minister was going to send a letter or not to the EU seeking a Brexit extension. Surely this something that changed the circumstances in which the vote would take place.
That was fast: Johnston says throw it all out and sits down. Lord Carloway says the court will give its decision “shortly” https://t.co/csxyw1WAld
Bercow says that the question of whether a minister of the crown “would obey the law” would be a material consideration on his part was not one that he took into account.
BREAKING Lord Carloway continues #BennAct case - wants to check @BorisJohnson obeys the law in full
Bercow says it is clear that the motions before the house are “in substance the same” and that the matter was decided as recently as 48 hours ago.
Labour MP Lisa Nandy has said that she would support the withdrawal agreement bill (the WAB) at second reading. Speaking on the BBC’s Politics Live, she said MPs should be able to debate the substance of the bill and the terms on which we leave the EU before approving the deal (as per the Letwin amendment) and to do it the other way around (passing the meaningful vote before debating the WAB) was “holding the country to ransom” with the threat of no deal.
Bercow is on his feet and says he has been reflecting. There are two issues, one of substance and the other of circumstances, to consider, he adds.
She said she would support the bill at second reading but that the big question was what comes next.
First, he has to consider if the motion tabled by the government for today is the same in substance as that which was decided during Saturday’s sitting.
Labour's Lisa Nandy says she will 'certainly support the (Brexit) Bill at second reading' - but hints she will also back a customs union #PoliticsLive
This looks like the last question in defence questions.
She tweeted this this morning:
So which way will Bercow go? Here’s Ian Dunt, the editor of Politics.co.uk on what’ll happen if the Speaker (against expectations) gives a green light to a meaningful vote:
How’s your morning going? pic.twitter.com/S6VjwRXtEO
If he says it can, then all hell will break loose. We'll be right back where we were on Saturday, in a straight yes-or-no vote on the deal, without MPs seeing the legislation implementing it.
The Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, is appearing at the Lords EU select committee, where he is talking about “scrutiny of Brexit negotiations”.
And, meanwhile, a little sympathy for the notoriously shy (ahem) Mr Bercow …
“I think the deal is a win, not just for the UK, but for the EU as well, who want to see the UK leave in a smooth and orderly way. And it was obviously frustrating, I think, for many of us on Saturday that we were not able to have the meaningful vote,” he said.
I feel for the Speaker he hates these moments when the world watches him
Barclay said MPs had already voted on a range of amendments through the indicative vote process and rejected them. He said the Letwin amendment represented a “moving of the goalposts” from the opposition claiming they were concerned about the prospect of no-deal Brexit to them saying the concern was now about wanting more time.
It’s felt like a bit of a phoney war thus far today but we’re minutes away from (potentially) a key moment, when we should learn if the Commons Speaker, John Bercow, will allow MPs to have a “meaningful vote” on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal. The word is that Bercow will be on his feet at about 3.35pm London time.
He keeps describing the withdrawal agreement as “the winding down arrangements” and stressing that there will be a lots of issues for MPs to debate when it comes to the “future arrangements”.
Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, and junior ministers have been taking questions and that is due to start winding up shortly.
The Guardian’s Scotland editor, Severin Carrell, is in court in Edinburgh where Scotland’s most senior judge, Lord Carloway, and two other judges will hear allegations that the prime minister broke a promise he made to the court that he would not try to sabotage the request for an extension.
The expectation is that Bercow will not permit such a vote given that the deal was debated by MPs on Saturday, and a backbench amendment attached, putting off final approval until the legislation surrounding the plan is agreed.
Latest #BennAct hearing about to start #courtofsession: Aidan O’Neill will ask for case to be continued but Lord Carloway et al invited to consider contempt of court vs @BorisJohnson for frustrating #BennAct #Brexit
Downing Street has also, meanwhile, said it would pull the vote if any amendments are selected that would “render the vote pointless”.
The UK government’s lawyers pledged in writing and in court this month that the prime minister would honour the provisions of the Benn act, seeking an extension to article 50 if he failed to get a Brexit deal passed by 19 October.
“There is no point having a meaningless vote – the government would pull the motion. We will go ahead with the introduction of the WAB with second reading tomorrow,” the PM’s official spokesman said.
After losing a Commons vote on Saturday on delaying his deal, Johnson sent an unsigned copy of the letter required by the act but also sent another, personal letter to Brussels that asked EU leaders not to agree to an extension.
An update from MEPs, via the Guardian’s Brussels correspondent, Jennifer Rankin.
Lawyers for three anti-Brexit campaigners are expected to argue that these steps are a clear breach of the government’s promises to the court. If the three judges find Johnson is in contempt, he could theoretically face a fine or even jail.
MEPs on Brexit Steering Group confirm that European parliament will not vote on withdrawal agreement until UK parliament has backed the deal.
Here’s Severin’s curtain raiser article. He’ll also be tweeting from court.
The Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran has just told the BBC she would be “minded” to vote on a customs union amendment if it is in the right form, but added quickly that her party was still intent on pushing for a second referendum.
Boris Johnson could be held in contempt of court over Brexit letter
MPs need more time to scrutinise the government’s deal, however, she added.
The Guardian’s deputy political editor, Rowena Mason, has this from the morning’s lobby briefing.
As well as writing to Boris Johnson, the first ministers for Wales and Scotland have also send one to the president of the European council, Donald Tusk, urging him to support an extension to Brexit that would allow MPs to scrutinise the deal – and perhaps even hold a second referendum.
No 10 confirmed that the government will pull the meaningful vote if anyone tries to amend it with a “Letwin 2”-style change. This is all pretty hypothetical as John Bercow, the Speaker, seems likely to rule it out of order this afternoon.
The BBC’s Nick Eardley tweets:
Why is the government so keen on a meaningful vote when it also needs to pass a withdrawal agreement bill? The theory is that if it passed, then Boris Johnson would try to rescind his request to the EU for an article 50 extension, arguing MPs have given their consent for a deal. This morning, No 10 refused to comment on whether this ruse could be tried.
Letter from Scottish and Welsh First Ministers to Donald Tusk asking for him to support Brexit extension to allow scrutiny and time for 2nd referendum pic.twitter.com/QruinTlVBa
The European commission has confirmed that – despite the prime minister’s unconventional approach to requesting a further Brexit delay – Brussels is considering the terms of a further prolongation of the UK’s membership.
We heard earlier that Lisa Nandy had emerged as one of the Labour MPs who would support the withdrawal agreement bill (WAB) at second reading, but it seems fairly certain that it will be opposed by her party. The Guardian’s deputy political editor, Rowena Mason, tweets:
A European commission spokeswoman said:
Not picking up any sense that Labour will abstain on second reading of WAB - all signs they are going to vote against, no way they can be seen even tacitly to accept a Johnson Brexit
President Tusk is now consulting leaders of the EU27 on this and it is first and foremost for the UK to explain the next steps. We from our side, of course, follow all the events in London this week very closely.
To recap, the second reading of the withdrawal agreement bill is likely to be held tomorrow if it is introduced later today.
What I can also add, the ratification process has been launched on the EU side. Michel Barnier debriefed EU ambassadors of the EU27 yesterday and he will debrief the European parliament’s Brexit steering group this afternoon in Strasbourg. And as I mentioned, he will also debrief the college of commissioners.
The second reading will be the first occasion that members of parliament can vote on the proposed legislation.
The request to extend article 50 was made by the UK’s permanent representative to the EU. President Tusk acknowledged receipt of the request on Saturday and stated that he’s now consulting with the EU27. So this form does not change anything.
News out of Brussels, though probably not of the type that will be welcomed by Brexit supporters hoping that they might have seen the last of Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator for the past number of years. He’s not going away, reports Politico.
Lobby journalists are reporting that No 10 will pull the meaningful vote motion this afternoon if the Speaker allows amendments to it that render it “meaningless”. “There is no point in having a meaningless vote,” said the PM’s spokesman.
Michel Barnier will lead a "U.K. Task Force" in the next European Commission, effectively continuing his work as EU Brexit negotiator into the next phase of talks on a future trading arrangement, report @maiadelabaume and @jacopobarigazzi. https://t.co/6RNY8z6A31
Strong suggestion from No10 that a customs union amendment would kill PM’s deal in the EU as well as UK’s eyes. In effect then, it’s a wrecking action. PMOS: “If the legislation steps too far away from what was agreed, that does bring ratification into question”.
The first ministers for Wales and Scotland, Mark Drakeford and Nicola Sturgeon, have written to the prime minister urging the UK government to secure an extension from the European council that respects devolution and “allows our legislatures to carry out their proper constitutional and democratic functions”.
No10 also confirm Govt will pull the MV motion this afternoon if Speaker allows it to go ahead and he selects any amendments to it. PMOS: “There is no point in having a meaningless vote”.
Part of their letter states:
No10 Brexit latest: "The meaningful vote will go ahead if the Speaker allows it and if not and amendments are selected which wd render the vote pointless, there's no point having a meaningless vote. The Govt wd pull the motion."
This bill will be among the most important piece of legislation ever considered by the UK parliament, the Scottish parliament and national assembly for Wales with far-reaching implications for the whole of the United Kingdom and our future well-being.
Another MP who previously backed a customs union is saying he would not support such an amendment this time.
Both our governments believe the deal you have negotiated with the EU will be even more damaging to Wales, Scotland and the United Kingdom than the previous unacceptable agreement made by your predecessor.
No. This argument is for future relationship discussions, not a tool to be used to try and derail the deal being agreed (and Parliament can't unilaterally amend WA anyway). What matters is the WAB contains the mechanisms for Parliamentary oversight on FR the PM promised on Sat https://t.co/hkc3wM4bE4
We therefore wish to state in the clearest possible terms that we and our legislatures need time to analyse and consider the draft bill.
My colleague Kate Lyons has this round-up of today’s papers. Some are angry at what they see as Labour’s attempts to – as the Daily Mail puts it – “cancel Brexit by sabotaging withdrawal legislation”.
We share the view which lay behind the amendment passed by a clear majority of the House of Commons that the time between now and 31 October provides insufficient opportunity to undertake this essential scrutiny
'How dare they!': what the papers say about the battle over Johnson's Brexit deal
Scottish judges have delayed a final ruling on whether Boris Johnson is in contempt of court to ensure he agrees to an extension to Brexit.
The FT’s Sebastian Payne has a little bit more on how the afternoon could unfold.
Lord Carloway, the country’s most senior judge, said they needed to be sure the prime minister did not try to block or sabotage the application he was forced to make on Saturday night for an extension to Brexit until 31 January.
How the next 48 hours in Brexit *might* play out:Monday 3:30pm: Speaker Bercow announces whether government can hold MV4/5 on the deal. He's expected to say no, as it would be a repeat of Saturday. But if he did, paves the way for a straight up/down vote on Boris' deal.
The court’s decision, issued after a short hearing at the court of session in Edinburgh, means Johnson faces being held in contempt if judges rule he has failed to honour pledges made to court not to frustrate the extension process.
Monday afternoon: The Withdrawal Agreement Bill (aka the WAB) will be introduced the Commons. It's the crucial huge piece of legislation that implements Brexit in domestic law. Plenty for Eurosceptics and Remainers alike to dig into (h/t @PaulBrandITV)
Johnson sent an unsigned letter seeking the extension after the Commons voted narrowly in favour of postponing a vote on the government’s revised deal to leave the UK.
Monday 3:40pm: Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the Commons, will deliver a business statement for the WAB and lay the ground work for a second reading on Tuesday. Not sure what terms will be set out here, which may restrict length of debate etc.
The legislation, the European Union (Withdrawal) (No 2) Act, known as the Benn act, also requires the prime minister to accept an extension if it is offered by Brussels and the 27 other EU member states.
The most critical moment for the government this week is passing that business motion for the WAB. The odds are in its favour. But if it fails then delivering Brexit before an extension and a general election just ain't happening.
Buzzfeed’s Alex Wickham has been doing the maths on which MPs could back an amendment for a customs union.
Does a customs union have the numbers? Last time it lost by 3. Lot of abstentions obviouslyMorgan, Buckland voted for it — they're in cabinet so won't this timeChalk, Mitchell, Brine, Benyon, Green, Costa, Masterton, Prentis, Pawsey voted for it — would they really this time? pic.twitter.com/35d3HYtjSt
Damian Green, a Tory MP and former member of Theresa May’s cabinet, has said that he would not vote for such an amendment.
I won’t, partly because now we have a deal which should get through the Commons the time to discuss the CU is during the next stage of negotiations on the Trade Deal. https://t.co/T7hC9z2tr3
This is from the BBC’s political editor, Laura Kuenssberg. We should find out around 2.30pm if Bercow is likely to allow the “meaningful vote” this afternoon.
We should know sometime around 2.30ish if Bercow will let govt have the straight vote it craves on the Brexit deal today - it seems unlikely because govt didn't pull the vote on Saturday they walked away from it (negatived anyone?)
So theoretically Commons DID give a view on the issue, so can't be asked to give a different one today - let's see - govt is desperate to have a vote on the whole shebang asap to show momentum, before getting into days of scrutiny where MPs will try to make changes to the deal
That's not just because they are worried about losing more votes, this govt has barely won any! But because if MP s make any major changes to the legislation, then it might mean PM would have to go back to EU + ask for a different deal - you can imagine how much No 10 wants that
And, it of course eats up time, making it harder and harder and harder as the hours tick by for govt to be able to stick to Oct 31st deadline - still not impossible but looking increasingly unlikely
The government has confirmed that its Brexit bill, which enshrines the prime minister’s deal with the EU into UK law, will be published later today.
A press release from the Department for exiting the European Union reads:
This deal abolishes the backstop in the old deal. The Government put forward a reasonable compromise, based on the key principles of consent for the people of Northern Ireland, and the UK leaving the EU Customs Union whole and entire, which was agreed at European Council last week. The EU (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill puts those internationally agreed obligations into domestic law.
This week MPs will have the chance to pass this bill, to respect the result of the referendum and to leave with a deal on October 31 in an orderly and friendly way. MPs voted overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50 in 2017 to start the process of leaving the EU and supporting this bill is the final stage to make that happen. This will allow the country to move on and for the Government to return its focus to delivering on the people’s domestic priorities: investing in the NHS, tackling serious and violent crime, and levelling up funding on schools.
The Brexit secretary, Steve Barclay, is quoted:
MPs and Peers will today have in front of them a bill that will get Brexit done by October 31, protect jobs and the integrity of the UK, and enable us to move onto the people’s priorities like health, education and crime.
Hugo Dixon, an anti-Brexit campaigner, has written this piece of analysis, accusing Boris Johnson of “peddling untruths and spraying around promises”.
In Johnson's desperation to sell his deal, he is peddling untruths and spraying around promises. Here's our analysis of the latest 1/
PM says his deal means no tariffs on goods going from GB to Northern Ireland. Not true. Article 5 of new protocol makes clear there are tariffs if goods are "at risk" of entering EU from NI - and the EU has a veto on deciding whether goods are at risk. 2/
Johnson says NI arrangements will be "temporary". False. He nixed Article 1.4 from Theresa May's protocol that said the backstop was temporary. The new frontstop only ends if a majority of NI Assembly votes against it - and there's little chance of that. 3/
PM says NI arrangements will be "superseded" by an FTA with the EU. False again. His deal drops Article 2, para 1 from May's protocol which said UK and EU would use "best endeavours" to agree a deal which "supersedes" protocol. 4/
Now for the promises.. Johnson gave "absolute reassurance" he'd negotiate a "zero-tariff" FTA with the EU. But he can't give such a guarantee as trade deals require the agreement of both parties. 5/
PM made commitment that workers rights would "never be inferior" to the EU, as well as to "very highest" environmental standards. How can anybody believe that when he's nixed legally-binding commitment to that from the previous divorce deal (Article 6 and Annexes 2 & 4)? 6/
The SNP’s Joanna Cherry QC, who was involved in recent legal action aimed at forcing Boris Johnson to comply with the Benn act, has said she supports extending Brexit negotiations until the end of 2020 if needed for a second referendum.
Appearing on the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland, she was asked if she would back an extension until the end of next year. “Yes, I would,” she replied. “Because the current deal that’s been negotiated by Boris Johnson is immensely damaging to the British economy and particularly for Scotland.”
She pointed out that her party backed a second Brexit referendum at its autumn conference last year. “We need to get a government in place to deliver the referendum and I don’t see Boris Johnson’s government doing that,” she said. “The SNP has been very clear that Boris Johnson should be removed from office once an extension is obtained.”
