Tag: Yvette Cooper

The bill, spearheaded by Labour’s Yvette Cooper and the Conservative Sir Oliver Letwin, passed late into the night, with MPs defeating a number of obstructive amendments from both Brexiters and the government. It finally passed its third reading about half an hour before midnight by just one vote – 313 ayes to 312 noes – and must now pass the House of Lords. The bill was almost scuppered during a frenzied day in parliament after MPs initially voted by a majority of just one – 312 to 311 – to let the snap bill proceed. Cooper and Letwin then had six hours to pass the bill’s second reading, committee stage and third reading through the House of Commons. Bercow said it was precedent for the Speaker to vote with the government, which had opposed the motion and the amendments. The government opposed both the Cooper-Letwin motion and Benn’s amendment. Speaking in the debate, Letwin said the government’s plan to seek an extension was an “enormously welcome development” and he did not have doubts that they would seek to avoid a no-deal Brexit, but there was still a need to pass legislation. “It is right she puts that forward, and then the house will decide.” Labour and the SNP whipped in support of the motion. MPs voted through the second stage of the bill at 7pm and after voting on a long series of amendments passed it around 11.30pm. The newly passed legislation could be debated in the Lords as soon as Friday or Monday, where it is likely to encounter attempts to frustrate its progress by Eurosceptic peers.

The effort is being led by Yvette Cooper, a senior Labour MP, and Sir Oliver Letwin, a Tory former minister, who want to get their one-line bill through the House of Commons in just one day on Wednesday. Where next for Brexit? 1 April MPs rejected all indicative votes 3 April More indicative votes Another meaningful vote Cooper (business motion) Clear result Passes Passes Rejected Commons debate Possible runoff with May’s deal Passes Lords debate MPs’ choice wins May’s deal wins Passes Government goes back to Brussels May makes plan for article 50 extension Passes 10 April Possible extension Leave after short extension Brussels approves at EU summit 12 April No-deal exit Revoke article 50 Extend article 50 23 May UK takes part in EU elections Second referendum Renegotiate with EU General election 1 April MPs rejected all indicative votes 3 April More indicative votes Another meaningfulvote Cooper (Business motion) Passes Clear result Passes Rejected Commons debate Passes Possible runoff with May’s deal Lords debate MPs’ choice wins Passes May’s deal wins May makes plan for article 50 extension Government goes back to Brussels Passes 10 April Leave after short extension Brussels approves at EU summit Possible extension 12 April No-deal exit Revoke article 50 Extend article 50 23 May UK takes part in EU elections Second referendum Renegotiate with EU General election Guardian graphic An amendment passed by MPs last week gives them the power to take control of the order paper on certain dates, which they are hoping will give parliament time to debate and pass the bill before May attends an EU summit in Brussels next Wednesday. This is the natural point at which the prime minister would have to request an extension to article 50 in order to stop the UK crashing out without a deal on April 12. Cooper said the government could decide how long an extension to propose. 3 April 2019 Parliament debates again Parliament may decide to have another set of indicative votes - possibly on the paper will be a compromise option that combines a customs union with a confirmatory public vote. 4 April 2019 Another meaningful vote? EU leaders would decide how long at a summit on this date. However, if Brexit has been further delayed, the UK would hold European elections on the Thursday. Cooper and Letwin brought forward their legislation against no deal after MPs failed to alight on a consensus for an alternative to May’s Brexit deal in indicative votes on Monday. A source close to the Independent Group said there was a real risk that a win for a customs union in the House of Commons could have scuppered the chances of a new poll and that referendum supporters had already compromised by supporting the indicative votes process, which put their preferred option at risk.

In an unprecedented night of Tory splits, four cabinet ministers, Amber Rudd, David Mundell, David Gauke and Greg Clark, defied their party’s last-minute whip and refused to vote against the government’s own motion, after it was amended to rule out any prospect of no-deal Brexit. 7.16pm MPs back the amendment by 312 votes to 308, defeating the government. 7.42pm Tory whips attempt to force MPs to vote against the amended motion they had effectively already backed. Six other cabinet ministers also splintered to back a separate proposal for a “managed no deal”, despite the prime minister’s warning that the plan was doomed. If MPs agreed a deal, she said, the government would request a “short, technical extension” to article 50, a hint that May plans a third meaningful vote next week. Now it’s effectively a bad Brexit deal or no Brexit at all, which is absolutely ghastly.” The prime minister’s warning of an extended Brexit delay followed a disastrous night in parliament for the government. Cooper moved the amendment instead and the government was defeated by four votes. May’s warning about a potentially lengthy delay to Brexit came as it emerged the DUP is back in talks with senior government figures about what it would take for them to back May’s deal at a third Commons vote. Earlier on Wednesday night, May was also forced to allow a free vote on an amendment by Tory backbenchers based on the so-called Malthouse compromise, which suggested a 21-month transition to no deal. A commission spokesman said it was “not enough to vote against no deal – you have to agree to a deal … We have agreed a deal with the prime minister and the EU is ready to sign it.”

Angela Merkel has asked Theresa May if she intends to request an extension to article 50 after reports that No 10 has drawn up contingency plans to delay leaving the EU. A government official confirmed that Merkel “fleetingly” raised the matter at a 45-minute breakfast meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh on Monday morning, in a reflection of growing concern from European Union leaders over the lack of time to implement Brexit. Asked if the topic of a possible two-month delay was raised, the official said: “It wasn’t something that the PM raised. Asked if the story was true, a government official said they did not discuss advice given by officials. The prime minister is also meeting the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, and the Irish taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, on Monday as part of her talks with EU leaders in Egypt, a senior UK government official said. Over the weekend, three cabinet minsters demanded the prime minister stop using the threat of a no-deal Brexit as a negotiating tactic. Asked if she could announce an extension to article 50, Ellwood said: “You need to wait and hear what she has to say when she gets back.” Theresa May dismisses pressure to step down as PM after Brexit Read more Pressed to clarify whether he knew a delay would be announced, Ellwood said: “That I don’t know. I’m encouraging that to happen because it is not in anybody’s interest to see no deal affecting Britain in the way that we are talking about.” Damian Hinds, the education secretary, insisted Brexit would not be delayed. “There is a very good deal on the table. And it is important to get those resolved, but yes that is what we are doing.” Later on the Today programme, Hinds said delaying the UK’s departure from the EU would only prolong the uncertainty.

From this week, freighters setting sail from UK ports with cargo for far-flung destinations such as Australia and New Zealand, a journey of about 50 days, risk arriving after Brexit day with – in the event of a no-deal Brexit – no idea of the trade rules that will be in place. 14 February: Brexit debate in the Commons. 20 February: international treaty ratification deadline. 21-22 March: article 50 extension request? This is when some EU officials think the UK might ask for more time to conclude Brexit by requesting an extension to article 50. Mid-late March: UK ratification of deal. If there has been no extension, the European parliament’s second Strasbourg meeting would be the last chance for MEPs to vote through the withdrawal agreement to get it agreed before Brexit day. 29 March: Brexit day? Without an extension, the UK will formally leave the EU on 29 March at 11pm UK time (midnight in Brussels). If the UK sought and obtained an extension to article 50 that went beyond 2 July – the first day of the new parliament – it would have to take part in those elections, EU officials have said.

Theresa May would go back to Brussels with “enormous firepower” to renegotiate her Brexit deal if the Commons backed an amendment watering down the Irish backstop provision, a senior Conservative backbencher has said before a crucial series of votes. Blow for May as Ireland stresses it will not yield on Brexit backstop Read more Graham Brady said he was hopeful of ministerial support for his amendment, which says the backstop should be replaced by “alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border”, even though Ireland has repeatedly stressed such a change cannot happen. There is speculation that the government could formally back Brady’s amendment, which is intended to bring back onboard the many Conservative and DUP MPs who voted against May’s Brexit plan when it was overwhelmingly defeated in the Commons earlier this month. The vote against May’s deal “didn’t necessarily indicate that the agreement is dead”, Brady, who chairs the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers, told Today, just that MPs had “a very, very fundamental problem” with the backstop. Brady said his amendment was intended to break the impasse: “I’m hoping that the way in which the amendment is crafted can attract that very broad support. And if we can win the vote on my amendment, then I think it gives the prime minister enormous firepower when she goes back. Brady agreed that the change must be legally binding, adding: “I don’t think anybody’s going to accept something which is just warm words.” The Cooper and Boles plan seems set to get formal support from Labour, but the government is unlikely to allow ministers a free vote. This is probably the only opportunity parliament is going to have to intervene in this process, to take control.” He added: “29 March is an entirely arbitrary date, just two years on from when we sent the letter. And the truth is the prime minister has wasted time. She delayed the vote by a whole month over Christmas and New Year, as she thought she would lose it.

Friends of the speaker who have been in touch with him in the last 48 hours told the Observer that Bercow is now “seriously reflecting” on whether to stay on – possibly until 2022. One source who knows Bercow’s thinking said that if the Conservative government was seeking to “punish” the speaker for how he conducted parliamentary business – and themselves defy centuries of convention under which speakers are granted peerages on retirement – he could well exercise his right to remain in the Commons chair until the end of this parliament, rather than leave soon after Brexit. As senior Tory and Labour MPs step up efforts over the coming days to seize control over the Brexit process from the government, Bercow’s role will be pivotal. Bercow, who infuriated May and the Tories earlier this month by departing from convention to allow MPs to take control of Commons business through permitting a controversial amendment, will be thrown back into the centre of the Brexit debate this week when a cross-party group of MPs led by Labour MP Yvette Cooper and Tory Nick Boles intend to hand parliament the power to delay Brexit – a move vehemently opposed by the government and leading Brexiters. Under the latest cross-party strategy, MPs would be able to delay Britain’s EU exit day if no Brexit deal were in place by the end of February. Voters would back remaining in EU over May's Brexit deal Read more As speaker, Bercow holds the key to the plan, as only he can rule that the strategy should be debated and voted on by MPs. Another explosive proposal being discussed by MPs would allow them to pass Brexit motions without first winning majority support. This would allow backbench MPs to propose plans blocking a no-deal Brexit. After the crushing defeat of her plan last Tuesday, and an unsuccessful Labour attempt to oust the government in a no-confidence motion, the prime minister said she was willing to talk to opposition MPs, including party leaders, in an attempt to find a way forward. Ministers agree to consider Lib Dem plans for new referendum Read more Labour deputy leader Tom Watson said yesterday the party had a duty to talk to Theresa May if she was prepared to enter into an “intelligent conversation” on Brexit.

Likely support in Commons: little more than the 202 seen on Tuesday if May secures no real changes. Quick guide Brexit and backstops: an explainer A backstop is required to ensure there is no hard border in Ireland if a comprehensive free trade deal cannot be signed before the end of 2020. As a result, the EU insists on having its own backstop - the backstop to the backstop - which would mean Northern Ireland would remain in the single market and customs union in the absence of a free trade deal, prompting fierce objections from Conservative hard Brexiters and the DUP, which props up her government. Under the plan the UK would have to join Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland in the European Free Trade Association (Efta), which would then allow it to participate in the European Economic Area (EEA). The ‘plus’ in this option refers to a temporary customs union with the EU, which would need to be negotiated to avoid a hard border ion the island of Ireland. The temporary arrangement would remain in place until the EU and UK agreed a specific trade deal. Labour, the main proponent of the idea, says it would help businesses with supply chains and solve the Irish border issue. May argues that it goes against the referendum result as it would preclude the UK signing its own trade deals. Likely support in Commons: most of Labour’s 256 MPs would back this in a whipped vote. What is a customs union and why does it matter?

Senior Conservatives have demanded that the party remove the whip from anonymous MPs who briefed violent rhetoric to Sunday papers, including one who quipped that Theresa May should “bring her own noose” to her next backbenchers’ meeting. During a statement by the prime minister in the Commons, May called for more care to be taken with the language used, even during heated debate. “There are passionate beliefs on this subject ... but whatever the subject, we should all be careful about our language.” Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister who has become one of the prime minister’s fiercest public critics, called for Tory whips to seek out who had made the anonymous remarks. He said colleagues using language about nooses and knives have “throughly disgraced” themselves. Speaking in Brussels, Duncan Smith said: “It has nothing to do with our politics, it has nothing to do with this issue.” Responding to May in the Commons, Corbyn said he hoped the debate could be conducted without similar language. Starmer called the briefings “nothing short of disgraceful” and said MPs should know better. A No 10 spokesman said that there would be “no investigation” by the whips into which MPs had briefed Sunday newspapers. “Personal vitriol has no place in our politics.” One Tory MP and public critic of May, Mark Francois, said the language was “unacceptable” but added that that he would not tell the Conservative chief whip, how to do his job. He said the language was born of frustration: “The problem is that there is a lot of frustration on the backbenches at the moment, both among leavers and remainers, at the general state of play. “We are fed up of seeing the ERG [European Research Group] bullying and undermining the PM because of their so called ‘vision’ of Brexit.” Former business minister Anna Soubry tweeted: “I am appalled that my colleague Mark Francois failed unequivocally to condemn the disgraceful and dangerous language used by a fellow Conservative MP against the PM.” She called it “shameful”.

I look forward to working with her as we strive to create a city that leaves no Londoner behind https://t.co/GkRZSWEiUG The Press Association has helpfully written up a transcript of the Richard Madeley interview with Gavin Williamson. GW: I’d like to pay tribute to the health service personnel who did an amazing job... RM: No sorry, could you answer the question? Could you answer that question, please? Do you regret telling Russia to shut up and go away’? Mr Williamson, please answer the question. Mr Williamson, you are just not answering the question. Could you please answer that question? GW: Well, I think that what everyone saw is Russia’s actions against our citizens in a city here in the United Kingdom... RM: Yes, you’re telling us what we know. We know what happened in Salisbury, we know how atrocious it was, we know how close these people came to death. The question is - I’ll try it one more time - do you regret using very casual Trump-esque language like ‘shut up and go away’?