Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow, Kevin Rawlinson and Martin Farrer

As it happened – MPs vote for Brady's Brexit amendment to renegotiate backstop

Summary

It’s been quite a day in Brexitland and it’s now time to wind down the blog for the night.

These are the main developments today:

It promises to be another dramatic fortnight in Westminster and beyond. Thanks for reading. A new blog is up and running here:

Updated

Charles Grant, a long-term Brussels hand who heads the Centre for European Reform, has a sobering message for Brexiters tonight. He warns that the EU will indeed refuse to reopen talks on the backstop and highlights the gulf between what is on offer in Brussels and the kind of concessions the Brexiters now think they can win.

And a timely reminder of how the mood around Brexit talks have changed a bit in the past two years. I’ve not heard much talk about the EU being crushed recently.

An interesting snippet from the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn who reports that Theresa May’s capitulation to Tory hardliners was “total” and even includes their requests that she shakeup her Brexit negotiating team. He reports that she will welcome on board Julian Braithwaite, the UK’s permanent representative to the UN and WTO in Geneva, and Crawford Falconer, the chief trade negotiation adviser at the Department for International Trade. They are described as “two seasoned negotiators”, which does make you wonder why they weren’t in the team to begin with.

There a more gossipy morsel on Twitter from the Times reporter Sam Coates who quotes a government source as saying they hope May is collecting air miles because “she won’t bring back much else” from Brussels.

Pound falls after Commons vote

Those of you who have been following all day will know that the pound dropped sharply in value after MPs passed the Brady amendment giving more time for May to recast her deal with Brussels.

After rising in value for a couple of weeks, it was trading at about $1.32 earlier in the day. But sterling has fallen to $1.3083 in the wake of the vote because investors reckon the chances of a no deal Brexit are now higher.

And while we’re on finance, futures trading for the FTSE100 shows it will be up 0.48% when trading starts in the UK morning. That’s probably because a falling pound is good news for the huge number of multinationals on the index that report profits in US dollars.

Our economics editor Larry Elliott has filed this story where you can read more about the foreign exchange movements.

Good morning/afternoon/evening wherever you might be following us. I’m Martin Farrer and I’m taking over the blogging reins from Kevin Rawlinson.

And following on from Kevin’s last post here are a few more front pages. We’ll start with the Sun, which declares “Backstop from the brink” in its splash headline. It says Theresa May now has the “wind in her sails” to go back to Brussels and demand changes to the Irish backstop. It was a double triumph, the paper says, because she also managed to defeat Yvette Cooper’s amendment to delay Brexit.

Sun front page, Wednesday 30 January
Sun front page, Wednesday 30 January Photograph: Supplied

The Metro has the puns working well with “Over to EU” as its headline. It says MPs have thrown the PM a “lifeline” by giving her another two weeks to renegotiate her Brexit deal.

Here’s a look at the front pages of tomorrow’s papers.

The Guardian, the Financial Times and the Daily Mirror have similar takes on the Brexit news; noting that, while Parliament may want Theresa May to renegotiate the withdrawal agreement, Brussels has said it will not be accommodating.

The Times focuses on May’s success in uniting her party, though – like the three above – it notes the EU’s reticence to play along.

The Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail and the Daily Express have fewer reservations.

The Remain-supporting Conservative MP, Anna Soubry, has told the same programme she finds her “party drifting to the right”, adding:

We have had pitiful leadership both in my party and in the Labour party. People are not putting their country first and foremost, and I can quite assure you that people like me are absolutely putting the country and our constituents’ interests first.

Loyalty to your party in these circumstances should be absolutely way down the list, and it is for me. Then, as I observe my party and the way it is going, I despair. I despair at what is happening to our country.

Liz Truss, the chief secretary to the Treasury, has told BBC Newsnight it has been a “positive day” that has shown there is a majority for the prime minister’s deal, as long as some changes are made to the backstop.

That to me is a significant way forward. It means we can go back to the EU with a united view of what we want here in the UK.

She said Theresa May now has the mandate from the Commons to go back to Brussels and ask for something new, and that the ball is now in the court of the 27 member states.

The EU have to be flexible as well, they have asked us what would it take for the House of Commons to support this, we have shown that. But we are going to need to see some flexibility over the next few days.

The EU has insisted – both before the vote and after – that it does not consider the withdrawal agreement up for renegotiation.

Updated

Following the same line as the rest of the European Union, the Irish government has reiterated its position that the terms of the UK’s exit are not up for renewed discussion. In a statement released after tonight’s votes, it said:

The EU position on the withdrawal agreement, including the backstop, is set out in the conclusions of the December meeting of the European Council. It has not changed. The withdrawal agreement is not open for re-negotiation.

The agreement is a carefully negotiated compromise, which balances the UK position on customs and the single market with avoiding a hard border and protecting the integrity of the EU customs union and single market.

The best way to ensure an orderly withdrawal is to ratify this agreement.

The statement also said changes could be made to the political declaration, the portion which sets out the framework for the future relationship between the UK and the EU, if the former was willing to change its red lines.

But the Irish government added it would continue with its contingency planning for all eventualities, including for a no-deal scenario.

Ireland’s deputy premier, Simon Coveney, tweeted:

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, places the blame for that squarely at Parliament’s door and believes the decision should be taken out of the hands of MPs.

Parliament has contradicted itself tonight. MPs were right to vote to reject a no-deal Brexit. But they also voted to send Theresa May back to Brussels to renegotiate the withdrawal deal, which the EU has already said they will not do – this is delaying the inevitable. In reality this makes the possibility of a no-deal Brexit more likely.

This shows, once again, that it’s time to take this out of politicians’ hands, and give the public the final say on Brexit – with the option to stay in the EU.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the People’s Vote campaign agrees. Alison McGovern, a Labour MP and a supporter of the group, has said:

Today, it became clear that Parliament will continue to be gridlocked and the only way forward now is a public vote.

The effect of this Brady amendment is open up another round of fantasy Brexit. It means the government will go back to Brussels yet again, telling the EU to rip up the withdrawal agreement and allow a transition period without a backstop. The EU says this can’t happen.

But, even if there was a last-minute concession by the EU on the backstop, with all the risks to peace in Ireland that would entail, this amendment ignores the fact that most MPs who voted against the prime minister’s deal have concerns that go way beyond the backstop.

Updated

It has not escaped people’s notice that, until recently, Theresa May was saying the backstop had to form part of the withdrawal agreement. One of those people is the Welsh first minister, Mark Drakeford, who has described the prime minister’s claim she can renegotiate the deal in the light of tonight’s votes as “staggering”.

With no new ideas and red lines firmly still in place, the UK government is simply running down the clock in a vain hope that their deal will pass. Today has lost us more crucial time and the UK government must take decisive action and act on the majority will of parliament to rule out no deal.

While May assured MPs she could go to Brussels armed with a mandate to reopen talks on the withdrawal agreement, the EU has already insisted no such negotiations will take place.

Updated

Labour Yvette Cooper and the Conservative Nick Boles have put out this statement about the defeat of the Cooper amendment.

Tonight MPs have voted to stop no-deal Brexit. We did not get enough support to ensure there could be a binding vote to avert no deal or require an extension of article 50 if needed. We remain deeply concerned that there is no safeguard in place to prevent a cliff edge in March 2019 if the prime minister does not get a deal agreed in time.

The prime minister promised a new meaningful vote on 13 Feb and a new amendable motion in the event that this motion is defeated or the government does not secure a new deal. But we are running out of time. She will need to reflect the Commons opposition to no deal. We will consider what amendments will be needed if at that point no progress has been made. We remain committed to ensuring that we don’t reach the cliff edge on 29 March without a deal.

  • Yvette Cooper suggests she might try again in February to get MPs to vote to rule out a no-deal Brexit.

That’s all from me for tonight.

My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is taking over now.

Labour and Tory MPs who rebelled in tonight's votes

Here are the lists of Labour and Conservative MPs who rebelled in tonight’s votes. I’ve taken them from the Press Association wires.

Labour amendment

There were two Labour rebels who voted against: Sir Kevin Barron (Rother Valley) and Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse).

Grieve amendment

There were 14 Labour rebels who voted against. They were: Ian Austin (Dudley North), Kevin Barron (Rother Valley), Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley), Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire), Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse), Caroline Flint (Don Valley), Roger Godsiff (Birmingham, Hall Green), Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), John Mann (Bassetlaw), Dennis Skinner (Bolsover), Laura Smith (Crewe and Nantwich), Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central), and Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton).

And there were 14 Conservative rebels who voted in favour. They were: Heidi Allen (South Cambridgeshire), Guto Bebb (Aberconwy), Nick Boles (Grantham and Stamford), Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe), Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon), Justine Greening (Putney), Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield), Sam Gyimah (East Surrey), Phillip Lee (Bracknell), Oliver Letwin (West Dorset), Antoinette Sandbach (Eddisbury), Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex), Anna Soubry (Broxtowe), Edward Vaizey (Wantage), and Sarah Wollaston (Totnes).

Cooper amendment

There were 14 Labour rebels who voted against: They were: Ian Austin (Dudley North), Kevin Barron (Rother Valley), Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley), Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire), Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse), Caroline Flint (Don Valley), Roger Godsiff (Birmingham, Hall Green), Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), John Mann (Bassetlaw), Dennis Skinner (Bolsover), Laura Smith (Crewe and Nantwich), Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central), and Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton).

And there were 17 Conservative rebels who voted in favour. They were: Heidi Allen (South Cambridgeshire), Guto Bebb (Aberconwy), Nick Boles (Grantham and Stamford), Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe), Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon), George Freeman (Mid Norfolk), Justine Greening (Putney), Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield), Sam Gyimah (East Surrey), Phillip Lee (Bracknell), Oliver Letwin (West Dorset), Antoinette Sandbach (Eddisbury), Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex), Anna Soubry (Broxtowe), John Stevenson (Carlisle), Edward Vaizey (Wantage), and Sarah Wollaston (Totnes).

Spelman amendment

There were 17 Conservative rebels who voted in favour. They were: Heidi Allen (South Cambridgeshire), Guto Bebb (Aberconwy), Nick Boles (Grantham and Stamford), Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe), Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon), Justine Greening (Putney), Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield), Sam Gyimah (East Surrey), Phillip Lee (Bracknell), Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford), Oliver Letwin (West Dorset), Mark Pawsey (Rugby), Antoinette Sandbach (Eddisbury), Anna Soubry (Broxtowe), Caroline Spelman (Meriden), Edward Vaizey (Wantage), and Sarah Wollaston (Totnes).

And there were three Labour rebels who voted against: Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), and Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton).

Brady amendment

There were seven Labour rebels who voted in favour. They were: Ian Austin (Dudley North), Kevin Barron (Rother Valley), Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse), Roger Godsiff (Birmingham, Hall Green), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), John Mann (Bassetlaw), and Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton).

There were eight Conservative rebels who voted against. They were: Heidi Allen (South Cambridgeshire), Guto Bebb (Aberconwy), Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe), Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield), Phillip Lee (Bracknell), Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot), Anna Soubry (Broxtowe), and Sarah Wollaston (Totnes).

Updated

Brendan Boyle, a Democratic congressman of Irish heritage from Pennsylvania, has posed the killer question after tonight’s debate.

'Another deeply frustrating day for British business,' says CBI

Business groups have been reacting to tonight’s votes. While they view the non-binding vote against a no-deal Brexit as a bonus, and are moderately relieved that there is now at least a Commons majority for something, overall they are still fairly gloomy.

Here are the key quotes.

From Carolyn Fairbairn, director general of the CBI:

This is another deeply frustrating day for British business. The never-ending parliamentary process limps on while the economic impact of no-deal planning accelerates.

The Brady amendment feels like a throw-of-the-dice. It won’t be worth the paper it is written on if it cannot be negotiated with the EU. Any renegotiation must happen quickly – succeed or fail fast.

From Adam Marshall, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce:

Another day lost while the clock is ticking. Government and parliament are still going round in circles when businesses and the public urgently need answers.

The real-world result of Westminster’s interminable wrangling is market uncertainty, stockpiling, and the diversion of staff, money and investment. For every big-ticket business announcing high-profile Brexit-related decisions, there are many more quietly making the changes they need in order to safeguard their operations in the event of a disorderly Brexit. The net result of this displacement activity and uncertainty is slow but very real damage to the UK economy.

From Stephen Martin, director general of the Institute of Directors:

While it is something that MPs have managed to form a majority in any vote, the path ahead is still far from clear. The prime minister clearly faces a difficult task in winning a compromise on the backstop. However, if the choice is between trying to change the deal and leaving without one, business will have to hope the EU can be flexible and consider whether any legal changes at all could further clarify that the backstop is not a permanent fixture.

From Mike Cherry, national chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses

By passing the Spelman-Dromey amendment, parliament has formally echoed the voice of small businesses that a no deal exit in 59 days’ time is not an option. The amendment does not have any force in law, so a no-deal Brexit on 29 March isn’t off the table yet. This vote cannot simply be a symbolic one, we need government and parliament redouble efforts to prevent it.

Small businesses are not ready, and the country is not ready for this scenario. Tonight has seen a small but significant step that shows parliament falling into line with the UK small business community, which is a small relief. However, we cannot lose sight of the reality that we are still no closer to securing a pro-business deal before 29 March.

From Huw Evans, director general of the Association of British Insurers:

While further delay does nothing to relieve the uncertainty hanging over the country, it is at least encouraging to see parliament saying it won’t support a no-deal outcome. It is vital that we not only have an orderly withdrawal but that we are set up to succeed in agreeing a mutually beneficial future relationship with our EU partners.

Updated

The EU27 are very good at message discipline. Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, has just issued a statement through his office that reads very like the one from Donald Tusk. (See 8.55am. A spokesperson for Varadkar said:

The EU position on the withdrawal agreement, including the backstop, is set out in the conclusions of the December meeting of the European council. It has not changed.

The withdrawal agreement is not open for re-negotiation.

The agreement is a carefully negotiated compromise, which balances the UK position on customs and the single market with avoiding a hard border and protecting the integrity of the EU customs union and single market.

The best way to ensure an orderly withdrawal is to ratify this agreement.

We have consistently said that we want the closest possible future relationship between the EU and the UK. A change in the UK red lines could lead to a change in the political declaration on the framework for the future relationship, and a better overall outcome.

We will continue our preparations for all outcomes, including for a no-deal scenario.

Updated

This is from Scotland’s first minister, Nicola Sturgeon.

And she tweeted this earlier too, in response to a tweet from my colleague Jessica Elgot.

14 Labour MPs who voted against Cooper amendment

Here is the list of 14 Labour MPs who voted against the Yvette Cooper amendment.

They were: Ian Austin (Dudley North), Kevin Barron (Rother Valley), Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley), Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire), Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse), Caroline Flint (Don Valley), Roger Godsiff (Birmingham, Hall Green), Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), John Mann (Bassetlaw), Dennis Skinner (Bolsover), Laura Smith (Crewe and Nantwich), Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central), and Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton).

You can read the full results of all the divisions on the Commons website here. All the results of the first six votes tonight are there now.

Updated

On Sky News Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, has just been asked about the Donald Tusk statement. (See 8.55am.) He says the two sides are in a negotiation, and it is not surprising that the EU is at this point resisting compromise.

Backstop 'not open for renegotiation', says EU

A spokesman for Donald Tusk, the European council president, has put out this response to the vote. Here is the key line.

The backstop is part of the withdrawal agreement and the withdrawal agreement is not open for re-negotiation.

And here is the full text.

Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader at Westminster, says neither the prime minister nor the leader of the opposition are doing their job properly.

Updated

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, says it is “utterly reckless” to say that MPs have voted to drive a coach and horses through the Good Friday agreement tonight.

Updated

Cable says MPs have voted for contradictory propositions

Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader, says MPs have given May contradictory instructions. They have voted against no deal, but they have voted for a negotiating position that will deliver no deal. He says May should return to the Commons tomorrow to make a statement explaining what the “alternative arrangements” to the backstop envisaged in the Brady amendment are.

Tories have 'ripped apart' Good Friday agreement, says SNP's Ian Blackford

Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, says the Conservatives have tonight “ripped apart” the Good Friday agreement, a treaty that delivered peace to Northern Ireland. That is because the backstop was needed under the Good Friday agreement, he says.

Updated

Corbyn says he will meet May to discuss Brexit after MPs voted against no deal

Corbyn says MPs have voted to reject a no-deal Brexit. He says Labour is willing to meet May, to explain how it wants a Brexit that protects jobs and living standards and workers’ rights.

  • Corbyn says he will now meet May to discuss Brexit.

Updated

May says majority of MPs now back deal with changes to backstop

Theresa May is speaking now, on a point of order.

She says now a majority of MPs have said they would support a deal, with changes to the backstop.

With changes to the backstop, plus assurances on workers’ rights, it is now clear there is a route to passing a deal, she says.

She says there is “limited appetite” for such a change in the EU. Negotiating it will not be easy. But MPs have now made it clear what it wants.

And she says Greg Clark, the business secretary, will intensify talks this week on how to strengthen assurances on workers’ rights. And Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, will continue talks on how the Commons can be consulted more as Brexit goes ahead.

May says she wants to ensure the UK does not leave the EU without a deal. She offers to meet the MPs behind anti no-deal amendments to discuss how they might back her deal.

And she restates her offer to meet Jeremy Corbyn.

Updated

MPs back call for deal to be passed if backstop removed by majority of 16

The Brady amendment has passed by 317 votes to 301 - a majority of 16.

Here are the Tory MPs who voted for the Yvette Cooper amendment.

And here are the Labour MPs who voted against it.

Sky’s Faisal Islam thinks the currency markets are right (see 8.31pm) to think the chances of a no-deal Brexit have gone up. He has got a good summary of where we are.

The pound fell against the dollar on the foreign exchanges after the Yvette Cooper amendment was defeated. It dropped by a cent against the US currency to trade at just under $1.31 after climbing almost to the $1.32 level earlier in the day.

Full text of Brady amendment

MPs are now voting on the Graham Brady amendment.

Brady is the chair of the Conservative backbench 1922 Committee. Here is the text:

At end, add “and requires the Northern Ireland backstop to be replaced with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border; supports leaving the European Union with a deal and would therefore support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change.”

Updated

May defeated as MPs vote to reject no-deal Brexit in principle by majority of eight

Theresa May has lost the first vote of the night, with MPs voting to reject a no-deal Brexit in principle, by 318 votes to 310 – a majority of eight.

Updated

From the Daily Mail’s Daniel Martin

The New Statesman’s Stephen Bush may have a point ...

Full text of Spelman amendment

Caroline Spelman is the Conservative former environment secretary. She is the lead name on the motion, but in reality it is a joint amendment, tabled by Spelman and Labour’s Jack Dromey.

Here is the full text.

At end, add “and rejects the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement and a framework for the future relationship.”

Spelman and Dromey are both Midlands MPs and, when they announced their amendment, they explained that they were particularly worried about a no-deal Brexit because thousands of their constituents either work at the Jaguar Land Rover factories or for their suppliers.

A vote for the amendment would be a defeat for Theresa May and a vote against a no-deal Brexit.

But whether this would be an effective vote against a no-deal Brexit is another matter. This motion would not be legally binding (as Number 10 has been keen to remind journalists this week) and, on its own, it would not change anything.

Caroline Spelman
Caroline Spelman. Photograph: Martin Godwin/The Guardian

Updated

MPs vote on Spelman amendment

MPs are now voting on the Caroline Spelman amendment.

Reeves amendment defeated by majority of 32

The Reeves amendment has been defeated by 322 votes to 290 - a majority of 32.

The pound has fallen in the light of tonight’s votes.

Anti-Brexit campaigners in the rain outside the Houses of Parliament.
Anti-Brexit campaigners in the rain outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Alastair Grant/AP

From Sky’s Beth Rigby

This is from Steve Richards, the veteran political journalist.

From Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt

Full text of Reeves amendment

Rachel Reeves is the Labour MP who chairs the Commons business committee. Her amendment is another intended to prevent a no-deal Brexit. It says:

At end, add “and, in the event that the House of Commons has not passed a resolution approving the negotiated withdrawal agreement and the framework for the future relationship for the purposes of section 13(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 by 26 February 2019, requires the prime minister to seek an extension to the period of two years specified in article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union.”.

Rachel Reeves
Rachel Reeves Photograph: Tolga Akmen/AFP/Getty Images

MPs vote on Rachel Reeves amendment

MPs are now voting on the Rachel Reeves amendment.

Cooper amendment defeated by majority of 23

MPs have rejected the Cooper amendment, which was intended to enable the Commons to vote to block a no-deal Brexit, by 321 votes to 298 – a majority of 23.

Updated

From the Sunday Times’ Tim Shipman

This is from Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt.

This is from BuzzFeed’s Alex Wickham.

The Yvette Cooper amendment would allow time for a bill, also tabled by Cooper, to be debated. The bill would oblige the prime minister to seek an article 50 extension if she has not passed a Brexit deal by 26 February.

I won’t post the full text, because it is quite long and very technical, but you can read it on the order paper (pdf), on page 12.

Here is a briefing note from the House of Commons library (pdf) explaining what the bill would do in detail.

Yvette Cooper speaking in the Commons earlier today.
Yvette Cooper speaking in the Commons earlier today. Photograph: Jessica Taylor/AP

MPs vote on Cooper amendment

MPs are now voting on the Yvette Cooper amendment.

Grieve amendment defeated by majority of 20

The Grieve amendment has been defeated by 321 votes to 301 – a majority of 20.

That suggests the Yvette Cooper amendment may be in trouble, because there is quite a lot of overlap between what Grieve was trying to achieve and what Cooper is trying to achieve.

Updated

Labour are supporting the Grieve amendment.

Full text of Grieve amendment

Dominic Grieve is the Conservative former attorney general and pro-European who engineered Theresa May’s first big Brexit defeat in the Commons, with an amendment limiting ministers’ powers under the EU withdrawal bill in December 2017. It was described as a “meaningful vote” amendment, although that was not a very accurate way of describing what it actually achieved.

This amendment would ensure that, on six days in February and March, MPs definitely get the time to debate and vote on Brexit amendments. Grieve thinks this would ensure that, if MPs wanted to vote to rule out a no-deal Brexit, they would be able to.

Here is the full text.

At end, add “and orders that on 12 and 26 February and 5, 12, 19 and 26 March 2019—(a) standing order No. 14(1) which provides that government business shall have precedence at every sitting save as provided in that order) shall not apply;

(b) a motion in the name of the chairman of ways and means “That this House has considered the United Kingdom’s departure from, and future relationship with, the European Union” shall stand as the first item of business;

(c) Standing order No. 24B (amendments to motions to consider specified matters) shall not apply to such motions;

(d) proceedings on the motion may continue for up to six and a half hours after its commencement, though opposed, and shall not be interrupted at the moment of interruption; and standing order No. 41A (deferred divisions) will not apply;

and (e) at the conclusion of those proceedings, the speaker shall put the questions necessary to dispose of proceedings on the motion, which shall include the questions on any amendments selected by the speaker, which may then be moved.”.

Dominic Grieve.
Dominic Grieve. Photograph: Imageplotter/Rex/Shutterstock

Updated

MPs vote on Grieve amendment

MPs are now voting on the Dominic Grieve amendment.

SNP amendment defeated by majority of 288

The SNP amendment has been defeated by 327 votes to 39 - a majority of 288

From the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn

This is from my colleague Daniel Boffey in Brussels.

Pro-Brexit campaigners outside the Houses of Parliament.
Pro-Brexit campaigners outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Hannah McKay/Reuters

Full text of SNP amendment

Here is the full text of the SNP amendment.

Line 1, leave out from “House” to end and add “notes that the Scottish parliament, national assembly for Wales and House of Commons all voted overwhelmingly to reject the prime minister’s deal; calls for the government to seek an extension of the period specified under article 50(3) of the treaty on European Union; agrees a no-deal outcome should be ruled out; and recognises that if the UK is an equal partnership of nations, the 62% vote to remain at the EU referendum on 23 June 2016 in Scotland should be respected and that the people of Scotland should not be taken out of the EU against their will.”

Updated

MPs vote on SNP amendment

MPs are now voting on the SNP amendment.

Labour amendment defeated by majority of 31

The Labour amendment was been defeated, by 327 votes to 296 - a majority of 31.

The Telegraph’s Stephen Swinford has posted this.

He’s missed the story, though. Fish and chip pie? When did that become a thing? Or is that what we will all be eating after Brexit, when cod supplies - mostly imported - dry up?

Full text of Labour amendment

Here is the full text of the Labour amendment.

Line 1, leave out from “House” to end and add “requires ministers to secure sufficient time for the UK parliament to consider and vote on options to prevent the UK leaving the EU without a ratified withdrawal agreement and political declaration, and that those options should include:

(i) Negotiating changes to the draft withdrawal agreement and political declaration so as to secure a permanent customs union with the EU, a strong relationship with the single market underpinned by shared institutions and obligations, and dynamic alignment on rights and standards, in order to command a majority in the House of Commons;

(ii) Legislating to hold a public vote on a deal or a proposition that has commanded the support of the majority of the House of Commons.”.

MPs vote on Labour amendment

MPs are now voting on the Labour amendment.

In the Commons the independent MP from Northern Ireland, Sylvia Hermon, told she was losing patience. Could Barclay tell her what the “alternative arrangements” for the backstop mentioned in the Brady amendments are?

Barclay said that that would be part of the negotiation.

That provoked loud jeering from opposition MPs.

(Incidentally, on the subject of Hermon, Ken Clarke made the important and accurate point earlier in the debate that she was the only MP in the chamber from Northern Ireland who actually represent the views of the majority in Northern Ireland. Hermon voted remain, as did 56% of Northern Ireland. The DUP voted leave. Sinn Féin is pro-remain, but the party’s MPs don’t take their seats.)

Updated

Macron says withdrawal agreement 'not re-negotiable'

The French president, Emmanuel Macron, is the first leader to respond to developments in Westminster, warning the prime minister that the Brexit divorce deal worked out between the EU and the British government cannot be renegotiated.

Speaking in Cyprus, Macron said the withdrawal agreement, including the Irish backstop, “is the best accord possible. It is not re-negotiable.”

With the prime minister insisting on a renegotiation, Macron said Britain leaving the EU on 29 March without a deal is a situation that “no one wants, but we should all prepare for”.

Emanuel Macron
Emanuel Macron Photograph: Petros Karadjias/AP

Updated

European Research Group confirms it will back Brady amendment

Steve Baker, the deputy chairman of the European Research Group, which represents around 50-plus Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, has put out this statement following the ERG meeting earlier. He said:

We have collectively agreed to support Brady on the basis of the prime minister’s promises, especially as regards reopening the withdrawal agreement, and that the backstop is only the worst problem.

I hope we can now make rapid progress towards the Malthouse compromise.

A vote for the Brady amendment is a vote to see if the PM can land a deal that will work. If not then we are not committed.

Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, is now winding up the debate.

As my colleague Peter Walker points out, Barclay is muddling his metaphors.

Barclay accuses Labour MPs of wanting to stop Brexit.

He says there are only two ways to avoid a no-deal Brexit; pass a deal, or cancel Brexit and ignore the referendum result.

From Sky’s Beth Rigby

Starmer says one of the tragedies of recent years is that we have had a prime minister unwilling to listen to parliament.

But the PM is now out of time. Parliament must take back control, he says.

Starmer says UK in 'one of the greatest national crises our country has faced in generation'

Starmer says the term “crisis” is over-used. But we are in one, he says.

Before there are any cries of ‘Brexit delay’, let us be clear – we are only at this stage with 59 days to go because the government has run down the clock.

The word crisis is over-used in this house, in our media and our national debate.

But we should be in no doubt that this is one of the greatest national crises our country has faced in a generation. In the absence of leadership from the government and this prime minister, parliament must now act.

He says MPs cannot say they will avoid a no-deal Brexit without taking the actions necessary to ensure that that is the case.

He says extending article 50 is now inevitable. There is not enough time to pass all the Brexit legislation needed by 29 March, he says.

Updated

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is winding up for Labour now.

He says Theresa May should have announced a plan B in her statement to MPs after her deal was voted down.

Instead, she is now backing an amendment that undermines her own deal. That would be acceptable if the EU had indicated that they would back the new plan. But they won’t, he says. He says May is raising expectations that she cannot fulfil.

It’s one thing for backbenchers to lay an amendment at odds with the prime minister’s deal. It’s quite another for the prime minister to support it – unless of course she’d already got an indication from the EU that they could and would negotiate the necessary changes. But she hasn’t.

And so the danger is obvious, that the prime minister today may build a temporary sense of unity on her own benches, but in reality she’s raising expectations that she can never fulfil.

He says May is saying you never know if you don’t try.

That’s true, he says.

But in September last year May tried to get concessions from the EU - and she failed.

He says May refused to say what she would do if she failed to get a deal. She says MPs cannot afford to take that risk. That is why Labour is backing the amendment to prevent no deal.

A no-deal Brexit would not prevent a hard border in Ireland. It would create one, he says.

Updated

The European Research Group meeting has broken up. This is from PoliticsHome’s Kevin Schofield.

The SNP’s Joanna Cherry tells MPs about Daniel Boffey’s story in the Guardian. She says it shows the Brady amendment is pointless, because the EU will reject it immediately.

What kind of PM spends months and years negotiating a deal, and then backs an amendment that drives a coach and horses through it?

Updated

And the New Statesman’s Stephen Bush has an interesting theory.

A lovely quote from ITV’s Carl Dinnen ...

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, said the Brady amendment took “fantasy into a new art form”, because the EU had already rejected it.

Nick Boles, the Conservative MP who first put forward the plan that morphed into the Yvette Cooper amendment and bill, said he was backing the proposal because, if the UK were to leave the EU without a deal, faith in government would sour for a generation. He said he could not have that on his conscience.

This is from the Economist’s John Peet.

Updated

Here is more on the European Research Group meeting that is taking place now.

From my colleague Jessica Elgot:

From the FT’s Jim Pickard

From the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg


Ross Hawkins

Updated

The Hansard transcript from the opening of the debate, covering the Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn speeches, is now on the Hansard website.

As the afternoon goes on, more speeches will be added. Usually they go up about three hours after they were delivered.

Labour’s Lisa Nandy starts by saying the rowdy behaviour in the chamber at the start of the debate (she is referring in particular to the barracking of Jeremy Corbyn) contrasted very unfavourably with the real concern that people outside the Commons have about Brexit.

Updated

Ed Vaizey, the Conservative former minister, says he backed the PM’s deal in the vote earlier this month – without being offered an honour. And it is because he supports the PM’s deal that he won’t vote for the Brady amendment, he says. But he says he will vote for the Spelman, Grieve and Cooper amendments. He says he supports the idea of parliament taking back control.

Updated

I have beefed up some of the earlier posts with direct quotes from speeches in the debate, taken from the Press Association. But to get the updates to appear, you may need to refresh the page. There are particularly long updates for the Tory pro-European Ken Clarke (see 3.16pm) and SNP’s Ian Blackford (at 4.05pm.) They got short-changed earlier, because I was writing up a summary of the opening.

Updated

Sir Oliver Letwin, the Conservative former Cabinet Office minister, says he is a very easy man to please. He has got to the point where, whatever the deal is, he will vote for it.

But tonight it about ensuring that there is a deal, he says. He says if the Conservative party leave the EU without a deal, it will not be forgiven for a long time.

The party will not be able to argue that it is someone else’s fault, he says.

Letwin ends by addressing the point that the Cooper amendment is unconstitutional. He says that that is not true. The house can change its rules however it likes, he says.

Updated

Labour’s Pat McFadden says Theresa May came to the Commons this afternoon and asked MPs to drive a coach and horses through an agreement she spent two years negotiating. After her plan was defeated, she could have reached across the house, he says. But instead she is trying to win the support of Tory Brexiters.

Updated

Damian Green, the Tory former first secretary of state and an ally of Theresa May, says there is nothing wrong with May changing her stance on the backstop. Given the scale of the defeat earlier this month, it would be odd if she did not change her mind. He says he will be backing the Brady amendment.

He says he agrees with Tory colleagues who think a no-deal Brexit would be a disaster. But he does not feel the need to vote for one of those amendments tonight, because there will be a chance to vote on this later.

Sir Oliver Letwin, a fellow Tory and a supporter of the Yvette Cooper amendment, asks Green if he will be willing to vote for it in two weeks’ time. Green says he will do what he can to prevent a no-deal Brexit, but he wants to wait and see what the situation is then.

Updated

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, says people claim the EU will never agree to renegotiate the backstop. But Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, recently admitted that, if there were a no-deal Brexit, measures would have to be taken to avoid controls at the border in Ireland, he says.

He also urges MPs to read the recent Policy Exchanger paper (pdf) from Lord Bew, the former chair of the committee on standards in public life. In it Bew argues that the “UK government has allowed the Irish government to weaponise the 1998 Good Friday agreement in a way that prevents compromise on the backstop.”

Updated

Dominic Raab, the Tory former Brexit secretary, says Yvette Cooper says her amendment is designed to avoid a blindfold Brexit. But it could lead to that, because it would not resolve what sort of Brexit the UK had to choose.

And Raab says he is worried about the fact that the Cooper bill could be amended. An amendment could be used to block Brexit.

Nick Boles, the Conservative, intervenes. The Cooper bill is based on one that he originally proposed, and so effectively it is a joint proposal. He says both he and Cooper would oppose any attempt to use the bill in that way.

Raab, who voted against Theresa May’s deal earlier this month, says he will vote for the Brady amendment. He says it will allow May to return to Brussels in a stronger position as she seeks a renegotiation.

Updated

And this is from the Daily Mirror’s Pippa Crerar:

Updated

This is from Sky’s Beth Rigby:

Updated

Sir Graham Brady, the Conservative chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, said his amendment, if passed, would allow Theresa May to go back to Brussels in a strengthened position.

Rachel Reeves, the Labour chair of the business committee, is proposing her amendment, which says that if May has not reached a deal by 26 February, she should have to seek an article 50 extension. She says it gives the prime minister a whole month to find a deal, and then does not specify a particular time limit for the article 50 extension.

Updated

Earlier, I said that if the Brady amendment fails, it will probably be because of Tory pro-Europeans. Here is a tweet from one of them, Sarah Wollaston, explaining why she won’t back it.

Updated

These are from my colleague Jessica Elgot on what might happen later.

And these are from the Spectator’s James Forsyth.

From the BBC’s Ross Hawkins

Sir Vince Cable, the Lib Dem leader, told the Commons his party backed a second referendum. He accepted that it could be divisive, but he said that he thought the divisions that would be created if Brexit were to go ahead would be worse. And he said he thought MPs might have more appetite for a second referendum amendment in the next few weeks.

The Lib Dems tabled a “people’s vote” amendment, but it has not been called.

Turning away from the debate for a moment, the Press Association is saying that blood donation sessions in Channel ports have been suspended before and after Brexit amid fears the local transport system could grind to a halt. NHS Blood and Transport (NHSBT) said that sessions in Dover and Folkestone had been cancelled in the two weeks before 29 March and the six weeks afterwards, PA reports. Fears have been raised in recent months other the impact on Kent of a no-deal Brexit, with the government preparing for heavy queues at ports and the Channel tunnel if customs checks have to be re-introduced. Mike Stredder, director of blood donation for NHSBT, confirmed that six sessions had been cancelled, out of around 2,700 countrywide in the same period, with “no effect on blood stocks or on our ability to supply hospitals”. He said:

We have taken the decision to cancel donation sessions in Dover and Folkestone for a two-week period before and for six weeks after Britain’s exit from the EU.

This is because in the event of issues at Calais and other freight ports, Operation Stack may be put in place by Highways England and the Kent police.

This could lead to significant traffic in Kent and may prevent donation teams from reaching venues in the area or a donation leaving.

Updated

Dame Caroline Spelman, who has tabled an amendment rejecting leaving the EU without a deal, says she is not a natural rebel. But she says she does not think her amendment is a rebel one, because it reflects the majority will of the house.

Updated

The EU is preparing to issue an immediate rebuff to Theresa May by publishing a statement rejecting any renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement in the event of the so-called Brady amendment being passed by parliament, my colleague Daniel Boffey reports. He has followed up and expanded on the Bloomberg line mentioned earlier. (See 4.30pm.) Here is his story in full.

Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, says the country is in crisis. His amendment, which is based on a recommendation from his committee, calls for MPs to be offered a series of indicative votes, to establish what Brexit plan has most support. Quoting Harold Wilson, he says this is a life-raft into which Theresa May may one day want to climb.

(Wilson used that expression about how a referendum on the EEC in the 1970s, an idea championed by Benn’s father Tony, could prove a life-raft for the Labour party.)

Updated

Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, told the Irish parliament this afternoon that he would speak to Theresa May after tonight’s votes to see “what the next steps are”.

He also said Ireland would go from running a budget surplus to a deficit if there was a no-deal Brexit. “A no-deal Brexit will cause the economy to slow down sharply but not producing a return to recession.”

He also said, in response to a question about a proposed nursing strike and calls for nurses to get a pay rise:

We could find ourselves in 10 or 12 weeks’ time needing to find a lot of money to save people’s jobs.

Grieve also says it is clear that the EU will not give the UK what it wants on the backstop, but he accepts that if you don’t ask, then you won’t get.

I do fear that what we’re being asked to do this evening in supporting amendment N is a piece of displacement activity, something which I’m afraid this House has specialised in over the last two-and-a-half years.

Firstly it’s quite clear the EU will not negotiate on it, although I do accept that if you don’t ask you don’t get.

Secondly even if we were to get the backstop removed ... there is a lack of trust about future intention which makes the 29th March completely irrelevant, because the truth is disputes will arise immediately afterwards about the nature of our state and how we relate to those around us.

Updated

Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney general, is speaking now, proposing his own amendment. He says Brexit has led to some of the most “wearisome and unpleasant” experiences in his time as an MP. But he says he takes some satisfaction from the fact that today’s debate is only happening because last summer he pushed for a “meaningful vote” - an assurance that, when MPs voted on the PM’s deal, it would not be a straight yes/no vote, because MPs would get a chance to table amendments. At the time some Brexiters said this plan would split the party, he says. But now he is pleased to see some of them taking advantage of this process.

Updated

This is from Ian Wishart, Bloomberg’s Brexit reporter. He says the European commission and the EU27 have already prepared a statement that they will issue tonight if the Brady amendment passes saying they will not renegotiate the withdrawal agreement.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, has released this statement about the government’s position. He said:

We welcome the government’s recognition that the backstop must be dealt with. From day one when the draft withdrawal agreement was published, we rejected the backstop and argued for legally binding change within the withdrawal agreement. The decision to seek the reopening of the text is a sensible step forward by the prime minister.

The rejection of this withdrawal agreement by parliament, sent a clear message to Downing Street and Brussels, that a minor tweak, a letter of assurance or a few words of comfort were not going to deliver the consensus required.

We want to find a solution which can win the support of parliament and the EU. That is why we have endorsed the ‘Malthouse’ alternative as a possible route forward.

The backstop would have placed a border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. A new border east-west is no more acceptable to unionists than a new border north-south would be acceptable to nationalists and republicans.

Now is the time for the EU to stop ignoring the voice of unionists.

The EU negotiators must recognise that undermining the economic and constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom is neither reasonable nor acceptable. There are other ways to guarantee no hard border on the island of Ireland and its time for a more constructive approach by Brussels.

Updated

The Labour MP Yvette Cooper is speaking now. She says she is worried that delay and “chasing unicorns” could lead to the UK leaving the EU with no deal. She is very worried about what businesses in her constituency have said about this prospect, she says.

Now I’ve always believed that the prime minister would not let [a no deal Brexit] happen, I always believed that she would flinch when it came to the crunch, that she is not the sort of person who would want to make other people suffer because of her delays and mistakes.

But my worry is that when I look into her eyes now, I am worried that that has changed because she is trapped. Because every time the prime minister has had the chance to pull back and to reach out, she’s done the opposite.

Every time she’s had the chance to think about the country she instead has turned to the party and every time when she has had the chance to build bridges, she’s turned instead to the hardliners who simply want to set those bridges on fire.

She says neither her amendment, nor her bill, block Brexit, nor should they. They just allow MPs to ensure there is more time.

Mark Harper, a Conservative, asks Cooper to confirm that her bill could be amended to say article 50 should be revoked.

Cooper says that is certainly not her intention.

Updated

Iain Duncan Smith, the Tory Brexiter, says he voted against the deal earlier this month, but that he will now vote for the Brady amendment. He says he welcomes the assurances she has given, particularly on wanting to get legally-binding changes to the withdrawal agreement. And he says he hopes that, with a mandate, Theresa May will be able to go back to Brussels and get a good deal. Even though they have disagreed, he has a great deal of respect for her, he says.

I do believe it is necessary for us now to send the prime minister back with a fair wind and a sense that this House has agreed that they want her to go and renegotiate and to take that change and that desire to deliver Brexit on time on [the] 29th, with her over there to Brussels, and achieve what I hope and believe with strength and with determination she will be able to achieve in those negotiations.

I wish her well and I therefore am voting tonight to support that amendment because I think it will be for me the greatest expression of my goodwill for a prime minister, that, not withstanding sometimes our disagreements, I have the greatest respect for.

Updated

John Bercow, the Speaker, has now applied a 10-minute limit on speeches, but he says that will soon be reduced.

Updated

Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, is still speaking now. He has been on his feet for a while.

Here is some Twitter comment on what he has been saying.

UPDATE: Here is the Press Association account of the speech.

Scotland must have the right to determine its own future and choose to be an independent nation within the EU, according to Ian Blackford.

The SNP’s Westminster leader repeated his frustration and criticism of the Westminster government’s Brexit strategy and insisted Scots are “sick and tired” of being told what to do by Theresa May.

Speaking as MPs considered how to approach Brexit plan B, Blackford told the Commons: “Let me be very clear - Scotland must no longer be left at the mercy of events.

“Whatever happens here, the SNP will not be dropping its policy of independence.

“And whatever turmoil and hardship this Tory government tries to drag our nation through, Scotland will and must have the right to determine its own future - to choose to be an independent nation within the European Union.

“I can see members shaking their heads because they’re running scared - like the prime minister, they fear they would lose an independence referendum.

“Well, the Scottish people are sick and tired of being told what the prime minister wants them to do.

“Scotland’s needs are much more important than what the prime minister wants.

“Scotland needs the power to take its own decisions.

“That’s the only way we can stop the Tories dragging us off the cliff edge and into disaster.”

Updated

Brexit debate opening - summary and analysis

Theresa May emerged from the opening of that debate in a better position than anyone would have guessed last night. On the basis of what we learned from the interventions, she seems to be rallying the support of Brexiters in the Commons behind the Graham Brady amendment she is now backing. This does involve her voting against a deal that she herself spent a year or so negotiating, but she justified this U-turn with about as much sangfroid as you could expect in the circumstances. The charge against May, on Brexit, has always been that she has been more interested in party management than anything else, and today is textbook example. It now feels as if the Brady amendment could even pass, although there remains a strong chance that Tory pro-Europeans could sink it. May was also helped by the fact that her performance shone in comparison to Jeremy Corbyn’s. His reluctance to take interventions, especially a probably unhelpful one from Labour’s Angela Smith, angered MPs, and for quite a while he lost the chamber. But that will quickly be forgotten. Ultimately, it is her policy that is on trial, not his.

Here are the main points.

  • May appears to have won the support of Brexiter MPs in the Commons for the Graham Brady amendment, which the government is now backing. She managed this with two concessions in her speech. First, she explicitly committed herself to trying to get a “significant and legally binding change to the withdrawal agreement”. She said:

What I’m talking about is not a further exchange of letters but a significant and legally binding change to the withdrawal agreement. Negotiating such a change will not be easy; it will involve re-opening the withdrawal agreement – a move for which I know there is limited appetite among our European partners. But I believe that with a mandate from this house and supported by [Geoffrey Cox, David Lidington and Stephen Barclay] I can secure such a change in advance of our departure from the EU.

And, second, she would take the so-called “Malthouse compromise” seriously. She said these were “serious proposals” and that she would engage with them “seriously and positively”. Nicky Morgan, a Conservative pro-European and one of the MPs behind the plan welcomed what she said, but May’s comment was mostly aimed at Brexiters, because the “Malthouse compromise” is much more of a leaver plan than a remainer plan. (See 12.39pm.) The interventions during May’s speech implied that she has secured the support of key Brexiter blocs in the Commons. The DUP’s Nigel Dodds welcomed what she said, and the DUP have confirmed they will vote for the amendment. And Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory Brexiter and chair of the European Research Group, thanked her for her “very clear assurances” – even though at a meeting only yesterday most ERG members said they were opposed to the Brady plan.

  • May confirmed that MPs will get a vote on Brexit, on an amendable motion, on Thursday 14 February if a deal has not been agreed by then. This is designed to assure Tories worried about a no-deal Brexit, who have been tempted to vote for the Yvette Cooper amendment, that they can vote it down, safe in the knowledge that they will have another chance to vote for something similar. (See 2.05pm.) She has probably won over many or most of the MPs in this category. Last week there were claims that up to 40 ministers might resign to vote for the Cooper amendment, but at the moment there is no evidence any of them will resign.
  • But May also repeatedly sidestepped questions from Cooper about whether she would be willing to consider an article 50 extension. (See 2.18pm.)
  • May conceded that MPs who voted for the Brady amendment would not necessarily be bound to vote for any Brexit deal she subsequently negotiated. She said this in response to a question from the Tory Brexiter Peter Bone. (See 2.42pm.) This is an important admission, and one that will get picked up in Brussels. The Brady amendment is drafted in such a way that it commits MPs to saying that, if the backstop is replaced, they will “support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change”. May would be able to go to the EU and say, “Give me X, and I can promise you a majority of Y in the Commons.” But now she can’t - because the Tory Brexiters are saying they might vote down a deal anyway, despite voting for Brady.
  • She defended her decision to vote today against the backstop deal she negotiated with the EU, saying it showed she was listening to MPs. When Labour’s Peter Kyle challenged her on this point, she said:

Time and time again members on the opposition benches have stood up and asked me to listen to this house. Now I come to this house having listened to the house and they say you shouldn’t have done it.

  • She said she had “profound doubts” about the amendments from Dominic Grieve and Yvette Cooper, both of which she said would “exploit a mechanism to usurp the proper role of the executive” by allowing backbenchers to take control of the Commons timetable.
  • Corbyn confirmed that Labour would back the Cooper amendment, provided any extension of article 50 it led to only lasted three months.

Updated

Corbyn has finished. Ken Clarke, the Tory pro-European and former chancellor, goes next. He always gets called in this slot as father of the house (the longest serving MP).

UPDATE: This is what the Press Association has filed on Clarke’s speech.

The Tory father of the house, Ken Clarke, described Brexit as an almost “unique political crisis” with MPs facing a constitutional crisis about the credibility of government and parliament in its ability to resolve such matters.

He said: “I think we ought to be aware that the public at the moment are looking upon our political system with something rather near to contempt.”

He added: “I did take some encouragement from the prime minister who did seem to be accepting that the government should give opportunities for the house to debate matters which it regards as key matters of policy and the government has got to pay regard under our constitution to the views actually expressed by this house.”

He went on: “Today’s debate and the votes we are having today are only taking place because the government actually resisted the whole idea of coming back here with any alternative to the deal that they were telling us was done and fixed and the only way of going forward and that has worried me all the way through. Now I did take the prime minister today to be taking a totally different approach.”

Clarke said he still believed the “best interests of the UK lie in remaining members of the EU”.

Updated

Corbyn says Labour will back amendments that acknowledge that the government has failed to show leadership and failed to let MPs come up with a solution to Brexit.

Frank Field, the former Labour MP who now sits as an independent, intervenes. He says people watching the debate may not realise that the noise levels are related to the refusal of the person speaking to take interventions, and that this is a way of testing arguments.

Updated

Michael Gove, the environment secretary, intervenes. He asks Corbyn why he is refusing to take an intervention from the Labour MP Angela Smith.

Corbyn does not answer. But perhaps it has something to do with Smith’s views on a second referendum. On her Twitter feed this is her pinned tweet.

Corbyn says, in the absence of any leadership from the PM, MPs are offering alternative solutions.

He says some MPs are backing a Norway-plus idea. He says that would involve staying in the customs union. That has been Labour’s solution. It is pragmatic, and it would deliver frictionless trade, he says.

But May has “only doubled-down on her own defeated deal”, he says.

Updated

Corbyn says May has given no clarity about what alternative arrangements to the backstop she will be asking for.

He says we are witnessing the “long, slow decline of the government”.

They are running down the clock, he says, to get MPs to vote for May’s deal.

The obstacle to a solution is the prime minister. She is refusing to accept the will of the house, which has decisively rejected her deal.

Updated

Corbyn says, if MPs vote for any of the other amendments intended to prevent a no-deal Brexit, May should be bound by them.

Corbyn says any extension of article 50 under Cooper bill should only be for three months

Jeremy Corbyn asks how many more baubles May will hand out to try to get her deal through.

She says the CBI and the TUC have both urged the government to reject the idea of a no-deal Brexit.

All opposition parties in the Commons are opposed to no deal too, he says. He says Philip Hammond, the chancellor, presumably opposes one too, because he has said it would be irresponsible.

Corbyn says Labour will back the Cooper amendment. But it only favours a three-month extension of article 50, he says.

  • Corbyn says Labour will back the Cooper amendment, provided article 50 only got extended for three months.

Cooper says her amendment and her bill are not intended to set a particular length for an article 50 extension. They are just intended to ensure one can happen. She says she accepts the need to not prolong any extension.

Updated

For the last five minutes or so we have got bogged down in, mostly pointless, points of order. This debate is starting to meander ....

Corbyn says it is “inevitable” that the UK will have to extend article 50, because the government is not “not even close” to being able to get the necessary legislation for Brexit through by 29 March.

Jeremy Corbyn is speaking now.

Theresa May intervenes. Corbyn has reaffirmed his intention to keep the UK in the customs union. She repeats the questions she asked earlier. Will Labour accept the common external tariff, the common commercial policy, the union customs code, and state aid rules?

Corbyn says the customs union would have to be negotiated. It would be designed to ensure jobs are protected, he says.

The DUP definitely is voting for the Brady amendment, the BBC says. That was implied in what Nigel Dodds said earlier, although he was not very explicit. (See 2.27pm.)

May ends her speech by saying, if MPs want Brexit, they have to vote for Brexit.

ITV’s Carl Dinnen points out that this is not actually true.

Voting for Brady amendment does not firmly commit Brexiters to voting for final deal, May admits

Peter Bone, the Tory Brexiter, asks May for an assurance that, if he backs the Brady amendment but does not like the revised agreement, he will still be able to vote against it.

May says of course MPs will be able to vote against the final deal.

This is an important intervention. The Brady amendment involves MPs committing to saying that, if the backstop is replaced, they will “support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change”. If passed, it would allow May to argue in Brussels that she has the votes to pass a deal, provided she gets this change.

But Bone has blown a hole in that argument, by effectively saying that he would not necessarily feel bound to vote for the final deal. And May conceded his point.

  • Voting for Brady amendment does not firmly commit Brexiters to voting for final deal, May admits.

May says a vote against the Brady amendment would send a message to the EU that the backstop is not the problem.

Labour’s Toby Perkins says May is not the first PM to learn the Tory party is “utterly un-unitable” on Europe.

May says Labour has its own divisions too.

May says the essence of any negotiation is to find a mutually acceptable solution.

She says some MPs think there is no point trying.

But in these negotiations the EU has on many occasions made concessions it originally resisted, she says.

She says the EU does not want a no-deal Brexit.

Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP, says Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, himself has spoken about the possibility of checks in Ireland taking place away from the border. These ideas are not fantasies, he says.

May says what is important is that MPs show the EU what they want.

Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP, says there is no point in chasing “fantasies”. The plans in the “Malthouse compromise” have already been rejected by the EU, and they are based on technologies that do not exist.

May says she does not accept this. They are serious ideas, she says.

May praises 'Malthouse compromise' as a 'serious proposal'

Nicky Morgan, the Conservative, asks about the “Malthouse compromise”.

May says that this is a “serious proposal” and that she is engaging with it “sincerely and positively”.

  • May praises “Malthouse compromise” as a “serious proposal” and says she is considering it sincerely.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory Brexiter, says he welcomes what May said about seeking legally-binding change to the withdrawal agreement, and what May said just now about the Malthouse compromise. But can he have a third assurance? When a new deal is negotiated, will there be another vote in the Commons? The government won’t ratify the agreement on the basis of a previous vote.

May says there will have to be another meaningful vote.

May says she is demanding 'significant and legally-binding change to withdrawal agreement'

May says it has become obvious from her cross-party talks that three changes to her plan are needed.

First, she needs to consult the Commons more.

Second, she needs to give more assurances about the UK not lowering employment or environmental standards. And, if the EU raises standards, the UK should consider matching them.

(She is almost quoting the John Mann amendment word for word.)

And, third, there must be changes to the backstop, she says.

She says that message has come from Tory MPs, opposition MPs and from the DUP.

That is why MPs should back the Brady amendment, she says.

For reference, here is the text of the Brady amendment.

At end, add “and requires the Northern Ireland backstop to be replaced with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border; supports leaving the European Union with a deal and would therefore support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change.”.

She says achieving this change will require a “significant and legally-binding change to the withdrawal agreement”.

This will not be easy, she says. But she says she thinks it can be achieved with “a mandate from this House”.

Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, welcomes her statement. He seems to be saying the DUP will vote with the government.

Updated

May is now addressing the Labour amendment.

She says Labour’s position is not clear. At PMQs last week she asked if Labour would accept the common external tariff, or the common commercial policy, or the union customs code, or state aid rules. She got no reply, she says.

She says Jeremy Corbyn should live up to his responsibilities as opposition leader. She criticises him for not being willing to talk to her. Corbyn speaks to Hamas, Hezbollah and the IRA without preconditions, but not her, she says.

May suggests MPs may be able to vote for article 50 extension later

May turns to the Cooper amendment. It would not rule out a no-deal Brexit, she says. It would just delay the point at which the decision needs to be taken.

Yvette Cooper intervenes. If May does not get the deal she wants, will she rule out asking for an extension of article 50.

May says she will come back to the Commons, and MPs will get a vote.

  • May suggests MPs may be able to vote for an article 50 extension later.

Cooper says MPs need clarity. In the past May promised a vote in December, but then pulled it. If MPs vote to rule out no deal, will May accept that.

May says she is making a simple point. Extending article 50 does not by itself rule out no deal. The only way to do that is for MPs to vote for a deal.

Cooper rises a third time. She says she just wants to understand what May is saying. Is she saying the UK will leave on 29 March? Because she cannot say that, and that parliament can decide what will happen next. Will she confirm she would consider extending article 50.

May says she hopes to bring a revised deal back or, if there is no deal, give MPs a vote on 14 February.

Sylvia Hermon, the independent MP from Northern Ireland, says the Brady amendment talks about “alternative arrangements” to the backstop. She says this reference is “nebulous” (using the term Jean-Claude Juncker used about the UK position, triggering a mini row.)

May turns to the Cooper and Grieve amendments.

She says she has profound doubts about them. They are “deeply misguided”, she says. They would allow the Commons to usurp the rights of the executive and, if passed, could have profound consequences.

And she says both miss the most obvious route to avoiding a no-deal Brexit, which would be for parliament to pass her deal.

Dominic Grieve, the Tory former attorney general, intervenes. He says his amendment was about process, not outcome. It is designed to give space to the Commons, so it can find where the majority lies.

May says she has been talking to MPs about what they want.

The SNP’s Pete Wishart asks what May will do when the EU says no again.

May says the first step is for MPs to agree on the way ahead.

May confirms MPs will get further vote on Brexit on 14 February if deal not agreed by then

May says she knows some MPs are concerned about the risk that they might not get a chance to vote against no deal.

She says it is her plan to have another “meaningful vote” on a deal as soon as possible.

But if that does not happen by Wednesday 13 March, she will make a statement to MPs on that day, and hold a debate on an amendable motion the following day.

This firms up the announcement made at the lobby briefing (see 12.47pm), and it should be enough to persuade some Tory MPs concerned about no deal not to vote for the Yvette Cooper amendment tonight.

May says she is sympathetic to the Spelman amendment, but it does not stress the need to pass a deal to ensure that there is no no-deal Brexit.

The Lib Dem Brexit spokesman, Tom Brake, asks May what the “alternative arrangements” she is proposing (it’s a phrase in the Brady amendment) are.

May says the original deal talked about the possibility of alternative arrangements.

Politico Europe’s Charlie Cooper made this point in a tweet yesterday. It makes the point that the Brady amendment is advocating an option already available to the UK under the withdrawal agreement.

Updated

May defends voting against her original backstop plan, saying it shows she’s listening to MPs

Labour’s Peter Kyle says, if May is voting for the Brady amendment, she is voting against her own deal.

May says time and time again opposition MPs have accused her of ignoring the House. Now she is listening to it, they are criticising her too, she says.

  • May defends her decision to vote against her original backstop plan, saying it shows she’s listening to MPs.

Theresa May's speech

Theresa May is opening the debate.

She says MPs must deliver Brexit.

But they must listen to businesses too, and protect the trading relationship with the EU.

And they need to maintain security cooperation too, she says.

She says MPs, the government, herself and the British people all want a good deal.

Today they can show the EU what it will take to get a deal through the Commons.

Updated

Bercow also clarifies the procedure.

He says if the Labour motion is passed, the SNP’s one will fall (ie, it will not be put to a vote.)

And if the Cooper amendment is passed, the Reeves one will fall.

At the end there will be a vote on the main motion, he says.

So there could be eight votes in all – meaning the result of the final division could come as late as 9pm.

Updated

Bercow announces seven amendments will be put to vote

John Bercow, the speaker, announces the amendments he is calling. Here they are, in the order in which they will be taken.

A - Labour’s

O - The SNP’s

G - Dominic Grieve’s

B - Yvette Cooper’s

J - Rachel Reeves’

I - Caroline Spelman’s

N - Graham Brady’s

You can read the full text of the amendments on the order paper here (pdf).

Updated

From the FT’s Laura Hughes

From the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar

Two opposing views.

This is from Politico Europe’s Tom McTague.

And this is from David Clark, a special adviser to the late Robin Cook when Cook was a Labour foreign secretary.

Theresa May has arrived in the Commons chamber.

This is from the Labour peer Stewart Wood.

The ministerial statement is now over, and MPs are now listening to the Labour MP Tracy Brabin present a 10-minute rule bill.

Ten-minute rule bills don’t always last 10 minutes, so we’re not far off the start of the Brexit debate.

The Institute for Government thinktank has joined those dismissing the “Malthouse compromise”. Jill Rutter, an IfG director, has written a clear blog explaining its flaws. Here is an extract.

The big question is why is this commanding support across the party?

One of the UK’s problems throughout the negotiations has been the assumption that we just need to sort out the UK line and the EU will gladly gobble it up. But they are likely to choke on the current proposition. The idea that they will now reverse because the “soft Brexit” Conservatives have signed up to an ERG plan looks farfetched. But maybe a day of party unity is such welcome relief that the supporters do not care about the merits of the plan they are backing.

It is far from clear that it helps the Prime Minister either. She will already have to explain why, by deciding to whip the party in support of the Brady amendment (whose passage this plan might help), she is promoting something other than her deal. But if these are the “alternative arrangements” she wants to promote, she might as well save her Eurostar fare.

Updated

Fiona Onasanya MP has been given a three-month jail sentence for lying to avoid a speeding ticket, automatically triggering a recall petition in her Cambridgeshire seat, my colleague Rajeev Syal reports. Onasanya was a Labour MP until she was expelled from the party following her conviction.

That is probably one less vote for Yvette Cooper tonight. Onasanya had been voting in the Commons following her expulsion from Labour, and in the vote on the government’s Brexit plan earlier this month, she voted with the opposition against.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, has told journalists that backing the Cooper amendment is a “fallback” position for Labour.

The issue is how long an extension could be and the general view is as short as possible. But it is literally just a fallback in case there is no deal agreed.

He suggested that Labour favoured a three-month extension to article 50 if there is no Brexit deal by 26 February, not the nine-month extension proposed in the Cooper bill. He said:

I think the general view is nine months would be too long. If there is to be time to negotiate a deal it would be much shorter than that.

The Cooper amendment (here, amendment b, on page 11) is not the same as the Cooper bill (pdf). The amendment just allows time for the bill to be debated on in the Commons on Tuesday 5 February (ie, a week today).

Here is Theresa May leaving Number 10 a few minute ago on her way to the Commons to open the Brexit debate.

Theresa May leaves Number 10
Theresa May leaves Number 10 Photograph: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP/Getty Images

The People’s Vote campaign has released a thorough briefing explaining why it thinks the “Malthouse compromise” won’t work. The full briefing is here, and here are the key points.

These proposals are not new – they have been roundly and repeatedly rejected by the EU. It is a recipe for the no deal Brexit that the extremists have always craved.

‘Plan A’ involves an alternative backstop proposal that was tried by the government and rejected. And ‘Plan B’ assumes the EU would agree to a transition period without a withdrawal agreement – something it has also firmly rejected.

Even if the proposals were remotely workable, they would be disastrous for our country. It would jeopardise peace in Northern Ireland, threaten jobs and key industries, alienate our allies, and serve only as a basis for the dangerous economic plans favoured by hardline Brexiters.

We cannot allow our economy, vital public services and life chances of young people to be sacrificed for a last-minute gesture towards Conservative party unity.

And this is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

These are from ITV’s Robert Peston.

May offers MPs further debate and vote on Brexit on 14 February if no deal passed by then

Theresa May told cabinet that she is ready to reopen the withdrawal agreement to seek legally-binding changes to the backstop, in the hope of winning the support of Parliament for her Brexit deal, her spokesman told journalists at the lunchtime lobby briefing. This confirms what Number 10 was saying yesterday, and Liam Fox was saying this morning.

The PA account of the briefing goes on:

May told the weekly meeting of senior ministers in Downing Street that she will open this afternoon’s Brexit debate in the Commons with a statement explaining why she is backing Sir Graham Brady’s amendment as a means to achieving this goal.

Her official spokesman said she aims to return to the Commons “as soon as possible” with a revised deal which will be subject to a “meaningful vote” by MPs. If this is rejected by MPs, she will table a further amendable motion for debate the next day.

If no new deal has been reached with the EU by February 13, May will make a statement to the House that day and table an amendable motion for debate the following day.

This final point, about MPs having the chance to have another Brexit debate and vote on Thursday 14 February, should be enough to stop Richard Harrington resigning this afternoon as business minister. (See 9.31am.)

In an interview with Emma Barnett on Radio 5 Live Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister and deputy chair of the European Research Group, which represents the most hardline Tory Brexiters, provided this explanation of how the “Malthouse compromise” would work. It is easier to follow than the chart distributed to Tory MPs last night. (See 10.07am.)

What we need to do is have a plan A and a plan B. So the plan A is to rescue the withdrawal agreement. The key feature of the withdrawal agreement that we cannot deal with is this idea of being permanently trapped as a satellite of the European Union within the backstop ....

So we rescue the withdrawal agreement by taking out the backstop, and replacing it with a better backstop which we can live with indefinitely. So it’s based on a free trade area in agrifood and goods, and it means there would be unlimited trade with no tariffs between the UK and Europe including Ireland. Lots of trade facilitiations to make sure there are no checks on the border. And we believe that that is a practical pragmatic way forward with current rules ....

Plan B is about putting a triple safety net around exiting without an agreement. So the first safety net is that we continue to offer Plan A. The second safety net is that we offer to purchase the implementation period that’s been offered, so that we would have a standstill until no later than December 2021. That’s later than some would like, but it’s earlier than potentially it could run to today. So this is the nature of compromise. We would reduce our financial offer to the minimum compatible with international law obligations.

And then the third safety net is that we would have what’s called a Gatt standstill trade arrangement negotiated with the EU, which would allow trade to continue, either if they didn’t accept us buying the implementation period, or if we at the end of the IP [Implementation Period] had not agreed a future relationship.

A simpler way of explaining it would be an attempt to have the transition period without the backstop, with an extra one year bolted on to the transition as a concession to the EU and to remainers ....

Steve Baker
Steve Baker Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA

This is from Nick Macpherson, a former permanent secretary at the Treasury.

British nationals who have retired to EU countries including Spain and France will no longer have their health care covered by the NHS in the event of no deal, the government has confirmed. My colleague Lisa O’Carroll has the full story here.

Labour backs Cooper plan to rule out no-deal Brexit, creating high risk of defeat for May

Labour has confirmed that it will back the Yvette Cooper amendment, which would create time to allow MPs to pass a bill that would oblige Theresa May to ask for an extension of article 50 if no Brexit deal has been agreed by 26 February, the party has announced. A party source said:

We’re backing the Cooper amendment to reduce the threat of the chaos of a no deal exit. The Cooper bill could give MPs a temporary window to agree a deal that can bring the country together.

We will aim to amend the Cooper bill to shorten the possible article 50 extension.

That is because the Cooper bill would oblige the PM to seek an extension of article 50 until the end of 2019. Many in the Labour leadership would prefer a three-month extension rather than a nine-month one.

With Labour now officially backing the Cooper amendment, it will have a very good chance of passing.

Here is more on the “Malthouse compromise”.

Amber Rudd, the work and pensions secretary, told the Telegraph it was met with “cautious interest” at cabinet, the Telegraph’s Anna Mikhailova reports.

The FT’s Laura Hughes says at least one minister thinks Number 10 will back it.

The Sunday Times’ Tim Shipman says, if May were to back it, Tory Brexiters in the European Research Group would back the Brady amendment.

But the Economist’s John Peet thinks it won’t work.

DUP back Tory compromise Brexit plan

But the DUP (never ones to be put off by warnings about Brexit proposals being unrealistic) have endorsed the “Malthouse compromise”. (See 10.07am and 11.58am.) This is from the DUP leader Arlene Foster.

The DUP parliamentary group met this morning and discussed the ‘Malthouse’ alternative proposals for the draft withdrawal agreement.

The DUP has given its endorsement to the plan. We believe it can unify a number of strands in the Brexit debate including the views of remainers and leavers. It also gives a feasible alternative to the backstop proposed by the European Union which would split the United Kingdom or keep the entire United Kingdom in the customs union and single market. Importantly, this proposal would also offer a route towards negotiating a future trade relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union.

If the prime minister is seeking to find a united front, both between elements in her own party and the DUP, in the negotiations which she will enter with the European Union, then this is a proposition which she should not turn her back on.

There is no better time to advance this alternative given the confusion and disarray which is now manifesting itself in Brussels. This has been displayed both by the contradictory EU statements and the panic stricken behaviour of the Irish government.

Updated

David Henig, director of the UK Trade Policy Project, has written an article for the Guardian explaining why he thinks the new Tory Brexit plan, or the Malthouse compromise as some are calling it, is a non-starter.

Here is an extract:

There is a mistaken belief that the PM will be strengthened by a unified Conservative party position. However such a position has to be realistic, and one that directly attacks the most fundamental red line of the European commission is not. It is almost as if the commission suggested the UK abandoned its commitment to end freedom of movement. On the contrary, this compromise is likely to infuriate the EU and member states, who will see in it a continued failure of the UK to grapple with the choices brought by Brexit, and a rerun of ideas already rejected.

And here is the article.

Updated

These are from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg on cabinet.

Rival pro and anti-Brexit campaigners outside the Houses of Parliament today.
Rival pro and anti-Brexit campaigners outside the Houses of Parliament today. Photograph: Matt Dunham/AP

Boris Johnson, the Brexiter former foreign secretary, has said what assurances he would like to hear from the PM later. His position is much the same as the DUP’s. (See 10.20am.)

Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, has already said May will be demanding actual changes to the text of the withdrawal agreement from the EU. (See 9.31am.) But presumably Johnson wants to hear this from May herself.

The government has scheduled a Commons statement today on HM Revenue and Customs estate transformation. As the Labour whips Twitter account says, this is obviously to push back the start of the debate by about an hour, until around 1.30pm, because there is no reason why MPs need to hear an update on this today.

It might be because May needs more time to negotiate the terms of the assurances she is going to offer in her speech (see 10.30am), or it might be because she just needs more time to write the wretched thing.

Blair says people should listen to MPs on Brexit because MPs are better informed than they are

Politicians should be ready to “stand up” to members of the public who brand them elitist because they argue for a second Brexit referendum, Tony Blair has said. Speaking at the launch of the annual Edelman Trust Barometer in London, he said people should listen to what MPs say about Brexit because MPs were likely to be better informed.

As the Press Association reports, Blair recalled an encounter with a member of the public in which he tried to explain details of the working of the EU’s single market and customs union which made him oppose Brexit, only to receive the reply: “You’re just trying to say to me that you know far more about this than I do.” Blair went on:

I was prime minister for 10 years.

I want to say to people, I follow Newcastle United, if a game is on the TV I will watch it, but I know that Rafa Benitez has forgotten more about football in one day than I will ever know.

It’s not because he is smarter than me - though he probably is smarter than me - it’s because that’s what he spends his life doing.

You send people to parliament and that’s their day job. It’s not your day job. So if they study the detail and say this is a bad idea, they are not squabbling children, they are doing what you sent them to parliament to do.

If you explain that to people they regard this as the elite fighting back. It’s absurd. We have got to have politicians who stand up and say ‘No, that is not a sensible way of looking at this’.

This is an argument contains an obvious truth, but it is not something MPs say in public these days - and even Blair would have thought twice about putting it in these terms when he was in the Commons himself. In the 1930s the Labour politician Douglas Jay famously wrote: “The gentleman in Whitehall really does know better what is good for people than the people know themselves.” But this quote became a byword for establishment hubris and ever since MPs have been extremely nervous about ever saying they are better informed than their voters.

Blair also said there was a need for a “muscular centre-ground” to provide evidence-based answers to issues such as immigration and the loss of jobs to robots on which populists thrive. But, as the Press Association reports, he shied away from saying whether this would require a new centre party, saying only: “My hope is that my party comes back to a centre-left position.”

Asked whether he was concerned about civil unrest if Brexit does not go ahead, Blair said:

If people are going to threaten violence you take a pretty strong line on that.

This ‘gilets jaunes’ politics - let them stand for election and then if they win we will take them seriously.

Why should you take them seriously because they put a brick through a shop window? We need politicians who are strong enough to stand up and say this.

Tony Blair speaking at the Edelman Trust Barometer launch this morning
Tony Blair speaking at the Edelman Trust Barometer launch this morning Photograph: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP/Getty Images

Updated

A pro-Brexit protester outside the Houses of Parliament.
A pro-Brexit protester outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Amer Ghazzal/REX/Shutterstock

If you want to read all the amendments that have been tabled for today’s Brexit motion, you can find them on the order paper here (pdf), starting on page 7. There are now 15 main amendments, as well as some amendments to amendments.

My colleague Peter Walker has written a guide to them here.

Irish government calls for 'realism' from UK, saying Brexit deal cannot be renegotiated

Ireland’s Europe minister, Helen McEntee, has alled for “realism” from the UK, saying the withdrawal agreement cannot be renegotiated. She said:

There can be no change to the backstop. It was negotiated over 18 months with the UK and by the UK. A bit of realism is needed at this stage.

Helen McEntee
Helen McEntee Photograph: Niall Carson/PA

May to open Brexit debate instead of closing it - and what that means

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

This is significant, because so far this morning we have had two groups of MPs saying that they want to hear assurances from the PM personally before they decide how to vote.

  • Richard Harrington, the pro-European business minister, presumably representing some colleagues who share his views, said he wanted assurances from May about MPs being giving another chance to vote to rule out no deal within two weeks before he would agree to vote against the Yvette Cooper amendment. (See 9.31am.)
  • And the DUP’s Sammy Wilson said his party wanted assurances from May about what her plan to replace the backstop would actually involve before it agreed to vote for the Graham Brady amendment.

By deciding to open the debate, May is ensuring that she has the chance to deliver these assurances in full, in time for MPs to consider them before the votes.

As the person opening the debate, May will speak at around 12.40pm, and she will probably address MPs for a good half an hour or more, taking interventions.

Yesterday Number 10 said she would be closing the debate. But, closing the debate, she would only have had about 10 minutes for her speech. She would not have had time to clarify any announcements or assurances she offered. And MPs would not have had time to mull them over before the votes.

Updated

On the Today programme Sammy Wilson, the DUP Brexit spokesman, said his party found the part of the Graham Brady amendment calling for the backstop to replaced “attractive”. But he said his party also wanted to hear assurances from Theresa May as to what kind of alternatives she would be seeking.

When he was asked about what Liam Fox said on the same programme about half an hour earlier about May now being committed to redrafting the withdrawal agreement text (see 9.31am), and whether that was enough of an assurance for the DUP, he said that that was an assurance, but that the DUP wanted to hear this from Theresa May herself in the Commons.

He said the party would then make a judgment about how it would vote on the Brady amendment, depending on the assurances it heard in the chamber.

For reference, here is the text of the Brady amendment.

At end, add “and requires the Northern Ireland backstop to be replaced with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border; supports leaving the European Union with a deal and would therefore support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change.”.

The DUP like the line in the amendment about the backstop being replaced. But the amendment also commits those voting for it to “support the withdrawal agreement subject to this change”. Some Brexiters have trouble with this, partly because they do not know yet what “this change” will actually entail, and partly because their reservations with the deal go beyond the backstop.

EU dismisses Tory compromise Brexit plan as unworkable

The plan from rival Conservative factions aimed at securing a breakthrough in the Brexit impasse has been greeted with immediate scepticism from EU officials, who said the proposals are not workable, my colleagues Matthew Weaver and Daniel Boffey report.

The new plan is actually two plans. Here is an explanation of it sent out to Tory MPs last night.

Note on new Brexit plan
Note on new Brexit plan Photograph: Guardian

Steve Baker, the leader Brexiter and deputy chair of the European Research Group, is calling it the Malthouse compromise, after Kit Malthouse, the leave-voting housing minister who helped to draw it up.

Updated

A question from BTL.

User avatar for treb1971

8.30am: Theresa May chairs a political cabinet. Later, at 9.30am, there will be a normal cabinet too.

@Andrew

What's the difference between the two cabinets?

Political cabinet is when cabinet meets to discuss party political matters. Under all governments they take place from time to time. The civil servants leave, party officials who normally don’t attend turn up, and the ministers discuss how to stuff the opposition and win the next election - or at least that sort of thing. At normal cabinet they just discuss the business of government. Obviously, stuffing the opposition remains a consideration at some level all the time for politicians, but regular cabinet discussions avoid party politics, and the civil servants who attend are not allowed to get involved in these issues too.

Brexit vote - Summary of early morning developments

The file listing “key Brexit votes” in the House of Commons is already bulging, but today’s debate will probably deserve a place near the very top of the list. Two weeks ago Theresa May’s Brexit plan was crushed by MPs in the biggest government defeat in the UK in the democratic era. Today’s events will show whether May is starting to build support around an alternative plan that she can take back to Brussels, whether parliament is “taking back control” (to coin a phrase) and starting to rule out a no-deal Brexit, or whether the Commons remains entirely gridlocked, and unable to agree on anyway. (In which case - God knows what happens next.)

There are have been a lot of developments this morning and overnight. Here is a summary.

  • Liam Fox, the international development secretary, told the Today programme that Theresa May is now committed to rewriting the withdrawal agreement text as part of renegotiating her deal. Yesterday Number 10 said the overall deal would have to be changed, but would not say whether this would have to involve redrafting the actual withdrawal agreement text, which is legally binding. May was also evasive on this point when challenged about it by Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, at her private meeting with Tory MPs last night. But this morning Fox said the text of the agreement would have to be redrafted. Referring to the Graham Brady amendment, that Tory MPs are being told to back, he said:

Some [MPs] worry about this phrase in the amendment, “alternative arrangements”, and they wonder, ‘Would this actually be any more than reassuring letters from the commission?’. They want to know, ‘Does the government have a commitment to legally binding text, would the government open up the withdrawal agreement to achieve this?’ And the answer to that question would be yes.

  • He claimed that, despite the EU repeatedly saying it would not reopen the withdrawal agreement, in practice it would compromise. He told Today:

We have seen the German economy weakening, we have seen the French economy weakening. I think this view - ‘We can simply weather out any disturbance that would occur from a no-deal’ - I think there is much less appetite for that. I think we still have time to reach a compromise on that.

  • Nicky Morgan, the pro-European former education secretary, has revealed that she and other remainers, including the ministers Stephen Hammond and Robert Buckland, have been having talks with Brexiters about an alternative Brexit plan, dubbed ‘plan C’ in some quarters. In essence it would involve extending the transition for another year, and having a hard Brexit afterwards, but the details are a bit more complicated. There is a summary here.

And here is my colleague Matthew Weaver’s story about it.

Speaking on the today programme about the plan, Morgan said:

The prime minister has been aware of the discussions. At some point there has to be compromise on all sides in order to get a deal over the line. That is what most of us want to see - a negotiated settlement with the EU.

People like me want to avoid a no-deal outcome, a crashing out on March 29. We have to look for ways to do that. We are all prepared to compromise on that.

But, in his interview, Liam Fox played down the prospect of the government adopting the plan. He said:

There are all sorts of ideas being put out, but parliament cannot take a decision unless it is on the order paper, and it is not on the order paper.

  • Richard Harrington, a business minister, has effectively delivered an ultimatum to the prime minister, implying he will resign if she does not promise that MPs will get a chance to vote an an amendment ruling out a no-deal Brexit within two weeks. Harrington, who has spoken out repeatedly about how dangerous a no-deal Brexit would be, has been tempted to vote for the Yvette Cooper amendment today ruling it out. On the Today programme this morning he signalled that he would be willing to vote against, in accordance with the government whip, but only provided he gets an assurance that there will be another opportunity to vote against no deal within a fortnight. He explained:

Many of us have been to see the prime minister and have told her the absolute catastrophe and disaster for jobs and the economy that no-deal would be.

What she has asked us is that we give her another two weeks. The question is in two weeks time will there be an irrevocable undertaking that her deal will be brought back, amendable by exactly the kind of amendments there are today to rule out no Brexit, or, if a deal is not brought back, there is the same platform?

If she is prepared to give that irrevocable undertaking - which means at the despatch box or a similar instrument - many of us feel ‘Well, OK for the sake of everything, we will give her two weeks’. But that is it.

Harrington also told the programme that private assurances from Number 10 that May intends to make another Brexit statement on 13 February were not enough. When asked if that meant he would resign, and vote for the Cooper amendment, if he did not get those assurances today, Harrington said that he did not know what amendments would be called, but that if he broke the whip he would expect to be sacked.

This is a good illustration of how extraordinary our politics has become. In normal circumstances to have a junior minister issuing an ultimatum to the PM on the Today programme would be unthinkable. But today this did not even register on the news bulletin.

  • Tony Lloyd, the shadow Northern Ireland secretary, said Labour’s priority today would be to avoid a no-deal Brexit. In an interview on the Today programme he would not say explicitly how Labour would vote on the Cooper amendment - the final decision will be taken at shadow cabinet - but he gave a strong hit it would back the amendment, saying:

Labour’s priority today is to make sure that no-deal is taken completely off the table, that Theresa May cannot be under any sense of ambiguity that she can use the tactic of saying ‘It is my deal or no deal’. No-deal must disappear.

Here is the agenda for the day.

8.30am: Theresa May chairs a political cabinet. Later, at 9.30am, there will be a normal cabinet too.

8.30am: Tony Blair, the former Labour prime minister, speaks at the launch of the Edelman Trust Barometer

Morning: Jeremy Corbyn chairs shadow cabinet. At this meeting Labour will confirm its position on the Yvette Cooper amendment. DUP MPs will also meet this morning to decide who they will vote on amendments in the debate.

11.30am: Philip Hammond, the chancellor, takes questions in the Commons.

After 12.40pm: Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, opens the debate. At this point John Bercow, the speaker, will formally announce which amendments he will put to a vote.

After 6.30pm: Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May wind up the debate for the opposition and the government respectively.

7pm: MPs start voting. Each division takes about 15 minutes, and the number of votes will depend on how many amendments Bercow calls.

Today I will be focusing exclusively on the debate and the votes, bringing you all the news about the latest developments, as well as the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web.

You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments BTL but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply ATL, although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
What happened with Androgenic? Unexpected on-camera moment goes viral within hours
A viral video showing Androgenic’s hat being pulled off sparked major debate online. Viewers questioned his image after seeing what appeared to be a receding hairline. The term “fraudmaxxer” trended on X, and some online rankings reportedly dropped him. While the video’s authenticity remains unverified, the incident has fueled discussion…
The Times of India
The Times of India
Nicki Minaj shares photo of ‘meaningful’ bible signed by Trump
The ‘God Bless The U.S.A.’ Bible is sold for $1,000 online
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Nutritionists Warn: The 3 Toddler Snacks Parents Waste $400+ on Yearly
Image source: Pexels.com
Kids Ain't Cheap
Kids Ain't Cheap
Thailand moves to cut sugar in popular drinks amid health drive
Major chains agree to halve default sweetness, but street vendors and cafes remain outside sugar tax rules
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Curious Kids: What is the smallest thing in the universe?
Curious Kids is a series for children in which we ask experts to answer questions from kids.
The Conversation
The Conversation
Social media can be addictive even for adults, but there are ways to cut back
Social media addiction has been compared to casinos, opioids and cigarettes
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play