Hardline Tory Brexiters split as MPs overwhelmingly back move to allow vote to extend article 50 – Politics live

This from the Press Association’s Ian Jones.

And here is Yvette Cooper on the decision of some Brexiters to oppose her motion.

This is from Labour’s Ben Bradshaw.

These are from the Telegraph’s Steven Swinford.

Bercow has just announced the tellers. The tellers for the noes are Peter Bone and Sir Christopher Chope – confirming that it is hardcore Brexiters who have forced the division.

Caroline Spelman formally withdraws her amendment.

Alberto Costa moves his, and it goes through on the nod.

And Yvette Cooper moves her amendment. John Bercow, the speaker, takes the vote by acclamation, but some MPs object. So he calls a division.

The government is not voting against this amendment, so it will go through easily. But presumably some Brexiters are voting against to make a point.

The SNP amendment has been defeated by 324 votes to 288 – a majority of 36.

This is from my colleague Peter Walker.

Chris Leslie, who left Labour last week to join the Independent Group, has criticised Labour for not supporting the second referendum amendment backed by his new grouping. (See 11.53am.) It was not called, and so won’t be put to a vote, but his point is that if Labour had supported it, it might have been. He said:

Labour’s failure to support the cross-party amendment tabled by the Independent Group – that would have helped pave the way for a public vote – ensured the opportunity was missed. Instead the Labour leadership are stuck repeating their already-rejected approach, sending confused signals about what their Brexit policy actually is.

Turning back to Chris Williamson, this is from HuffPost’s Arj Singh.

Turning back to Chris Williamson, these are from Channel 4 News’ Michael Crick.

In the Commons Matthew Pennycook, the shadow Brexit minister, is winding up for Labour. He says it has “long been obvious” to many Labour MPs that the UK will have to extend article 50. Yet, until yesterday, Theresa May refused to accept that, he says.

Despite the French president’s stern words today about extending article 50, MEPs who follow Brexit dealings closely argue that they ultimately won’t count for much because Berlin will have the final say.

“In the end the Germans will take the initiative to ensure a negotiated Brexit,” said the Greek MEP Giorgos Kyrtsos, who sits on the conservative European People’s party working group that is following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. He told the Guardian:

Germany is well aware that a hard exit will mean loss of exports and already it’s growth rate is falling ... like Brussels it doesn’t think it can afford a hard Brexit either economically or psychologically.

These are from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

Turning back to Brexit, Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s lead Brexit spokesman, says if article 50 is extended, it should only be for a couple of months. The EU has had enough of Brexit, he suggests.

Here is his Facebook post in full.

If the UK parliament rejects her deal, Theresa May would like to extend the negotiating period. In my firm opinion, if this happens, this can never be longer than a couple of months so that a cross-party majority can be found. But certainly not 21 months! The Union has been taken hostage by the Brexit already for too long. The UK has had almost two years to make up its mind, now it is time to decide: A deal, no deal or stay. For the Union it is high time that we can spend our energy on more positive projects and the in depth reforms Europe desperately needs.

This is from the Yorkshire Post’s Liz Bates, who broke the story about Chris Williamson telling a meeting that Labour had been “too apologetic” in response to complaints about antisemitism.

Stephen Pollard, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, also thinks the suspension of Chris Williamson is an indirect consequence of the Independent Group defections last week, or at least that of Luciana Berger.

The New Statesman’s Stephen Bush has written a good blogpost on the suspension of Chris Williamson. Here is an extract.

The official line is that Williamson’s suspension is a decision taken in the light of a pattern of behaviour by the Derby North MP. But no one could, with a straight face, claim that Williamson’s behaviour is a recent discovery. The truth is that Williamson has been repeatedly indulged by the Labour leadership due to his political proximity to Corbyn, and it will have been a very difficult blow for Corbyn personally to remove the whip from him. What matters is that the scale of anger among Labour MPs and activists, coupled with the risk of further defections to the Independent Group, forced the leadership’s hand ...

It also is an indication of the scale of the change wrought on Labour politics by the emergence of TIG. Had seven MPs not left the Labour party on Monday last week to form a breakaway group, then Williamson would still be a Labour MP now.

Sky’s Tom Rayner has just doorstepped Chris Williamson outside the Red Lion pub at Westminster. Williamson told Rayner that the complaint was now being handled within the party’s disciplinary process and that he would be “working to clear my name”.

When it was put to him that John Mann had called him an enabler of antisemitism within the Labour party, Williamson said:

I’ve made my comment. I don’t think there’s anything more I can say now.

Asked if he thought he would be readmitted to the party, or if he had been reassured by Jeremy Corbyn’s office that he would be allowed back in, Williamson terminated the interview by saying that he had to go back into the pub to return his glass.

My colleague Owen Jones, who, unlike some of the Labour MPs welcoming the decision to suspend Chris Williamson, is on the Corbynite wing of the party, is also saying the party has done the right thing.

And Labour MPs are speaking out in favour of the move too. Here are tweets from three of them.

Tim Roache, the general secretary of the GMB union, has also welcomed the decision to suspend Chris Williamson.

The Labour MP Richard Burden has welcomed the party’s decision to suspend Chris Williamson for saying Labour had been “too apologetic,” about complaints of antisemitism.

A Labour party spokesperson said:

Chris Williamson is suspended from the party, and therefore the whip, pending investigation.

Williamson had been issued with a “notice of investigation for a pattern of behaviour”, but a decision was later taken by the party’s general secretary, Jennie Formby, to suspend him.

In the debate Stephen Gethins, the SNP’s Europe spokesman, says Theresa May refuses to sack cabinet ministers who disagree with her publicly. Yet the government has sacked Alberto Costa for tabling an amendment that it now support, he says. “That’s an extraordinary state of affairs,” he says.

Dame Caroline Spelman says she will not be pressing her amendment (see 2.18pm) to a vote tonight.

Downing Street has insisted that Alberto Costa was not been sacked as a parliamentary private secretary. “He resigned from the government,” the Number 10 spokesman said. The spokesman went on:

You will be aware that there is a longstanding convention that members of the government payroll, including PPSs, don’t table amendments to government bills. Clearly this is an issue that he feels very strongly about, and so he has chosen to resign.

The government will not oppose Yvette Cooper’s amendment confirming the commitment to hold a vote on extending article 50 if the deal has not been passed by mid-March, Theresa May’s spokesman has said – but only because they think it doesn’t add anything new.

Asked about Cooper’s amendment, the spokesman said:

We would consider that amendment not to be necessary because it simply confirms the words the PM delivered from the dispatch box yesterday. On that basis it’s unlikely we’d oppose something which simply confirmed the prime minister’s own words.

Dame Caroline Spelman, the Conservative former cabinet minister, is speaking now. She says she thinks the government and Labour frontbenches are “within touching distance” of an agreement.

The SNP’s Joanna Cherry asks Starmer if he agrees with Martin Wolf in the Financial Times today (paywall), when he said: “If democracy means anything, it is the right to change a country’s mind.”

Starmer says he does agree. And he points out that David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, used to say the same himself.

And that’s it. Starmer has finished.

Labour’s Gareth Snell (one of the most leave-sympathetic MPs in the party) asks what sort of deal Starmer would like to see on the ballot paper that would persuade him to vote for it, not remain. Or is Labour’s policy remain at any cost?

Starmer says Labour is pressing an amendment tonight that proposes a Brexit deal.

Here is the Guardian story about Emmanuel Macron’s comment earlier, saying France will block a Brexit delay unless there is a “new choice” by Britain.

This is from Politico Europe’s Tom McTague.

Here is the text of the Jeremy Corbyn letter to all MPs about Labour’s amendment (pdf).

Sir Oliver Letwin asks Starmer for an assurance that Labour is willing to be flexible.

Starmer says Labour is playing its part in the cross-party talks. But he says he is “cautious” about the likelihood of there being an agreement within the next 14 days.

Back in the Commons Ken Clarke, the Conservative former chancellor, intervenes and asks Starmer if he noticed that, when Lidington was going through Labour’s five Brexit demands, he did not seem to disagree with any of them. Clarke says this shows why the two main parties need to cooperate on Brexit.

Starmer says he will not comment on what has been said in private talks.

The campaign which represents EU nationals in the UK, the3million, says what Theresa May said about the Costa amendment in the Commons yesterday (see 3.21pm) was wrong.

Starmer says, in this job, he spends a lot of time looking at borders.

He says the border in Ireland is not just about goods crossing from one country to another. It is not just a technical exercise. It is something that has guaranteed peace, he says.

Dominic Grieve, the Tory pro-European, says the UK has obligations under an international treaty (the Good Friday agreement) relating to the Irish border.

Starmer welcomes what Grieve said.

Starmer says that when MPs vote again on the deal, it will be the same deal as the one they previously rejected.

Referring to Theresa May’s announcement about a work stream looking at alternative arrangements for the border in Ireland, he says this will not make people change their minds. Any country would want to streamline their customs arrangements, he says.

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is speaking now.

He starts by reading out, to laughter from MPs, what happened at the home affairs committee when Sajid Javid, the home secretary, revealed that he did not know what Theresa May had said about the Costa amendment. (See 11.19am.)

Starmer welcomes the government’s decision to back the amendment. But he demands to know why Alberto Costa was sacked for tabling it since it is now government policy.

ITV’s Robert Peston thinks Lidington’s answer to Liz Kendall (see 3.04pm) was significant.

Nick Boles, a Conservative opposed to a no-deal Brexit, asks for an assurance that MPs will get to vote on the length of the article 50 extension, if the length agreed by the government with the EU is different from the length originally proposed in the motion passed by parliament.

Lidington says MPs will get the chance to have their say, because the next steps vote due to take place under the EU Withdrawal Act means they will get a further vote.

Sir Oliver Letwin intervenes to say he thinks Lidington’s answer was helpful, and he says he hopes that settles the matter.

Anne Main, a Conservative, says the EU would only grant an extension for a reason. What would the reason be, if MPs had again voted down the deal?

Lidington says he is being asked to go “deeper into the realms” of the hypothetical.

Lidington turns to the amendments.

Referring to the Cooper amendment, he summarises what Theresa May said yesterday.

It replicates, almost word for word, what the Cooper amendment says.

He says these are commitments made by the prime minister, “and the government will stick to them”.

Sir Oliver Letwin, the Tory MP who backed the original Cooper amendment, thanks Lidington for what he said – not that he doubted the word of the PM, he adds. He says he thinks there is no need for the Cooper amendment to be put to a vote now.

Yvette Cooper asks if the government would vote for any legislation to change the exit day brought forward as a result of the vote promised by the prime minister. And she asks about the length of an extension.

Lidington says the government would want a short extension, but that it would have to be negotiated with the EU. He says, if the government was bringing forward legislation following a vote in parliament, it would support that legislation.

Labour’s Liz Kendall asks what would happen if the EU only offered the UK a long extension.

Lidington says the default position is for the UK to leave.

He says he does not believes that the other governments of the EU have either an economic or strategic interest in seeing a chaotic Brexit.

He says the vote promised by the PM yesterday would be in addition to the next steps vote promised anyway under section 13 of the EU Withdrawal Act. So MPs would get the chance to urge particular courses of action, he says.

Anna Soubry, the former Tory MP who now sits as an Independent Group MP, says the no-deal document (pdf) published yesterday was an accurate summary of the information presented to cabinet about what would happen under no deal. She says she knows, because she saw the original papers.

Antoinette Sandbach, the Tory pro-European, says some small businesses may have been misled by claims from Brexiters that, if the UK were to leave the EU without a deal, it would be able to continue trading on tariff-free terms for up to 10 years, under article 24 of the WTO’s general agreement on tariffs and trade.

Lidington agrees. He says Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, has said those claims are wrong, and this point was repeated in the no-deal document published by the government yesterday.

This is what the document (pdf) said:

One argument that has been put forward in relation to our future economic relationship with the EU is that the UK can simply rely on the provisions under Article XXIV of the general agreement on tariffs and trade (Gatt) to have tariff-free trade with the EU for a 10-year period. This is a misunderstanding of what the rules are. As the secretary of state for international trade [Liam Fox] told the House of Commons on 14 January this year:

“Some have suggested that it would be possible under Article XXIV of the general agreement on tariffs and trade to maintain tariff-free trade as an alternative to the negotiated agreement in a no-deal scenario. There are two immediate problems facing that suggestion. The first is that it would require the agreement of the EU and be based on the expectation of a future trade agreement or customs union to be operable in WTO law. Although it might be argued, as I am sure many in the house would, that that would be in the economic interests of the EU27, we all know from experience that the politics of the EU can take precedence over economic pragmatism. In the political atmosphere of no deal, it would be difficult to cultivate the good will necessary for that to proceed. Secondly, that suggestion would not deal with all the regulatory issues – the non-tariff barriers – that are so important to many businesses.”

Yvette Cooper, the Labour MP who has led efforts to ensure MPs get a vote on ruling out no deal, asks for an assurance that the government will be bound by any vote of parliament.

Lidington says what May said about this yesterday had been agreed by cabinet.

He says he will say more on this shortly.

Ken Clarke, the Tory pro-European, says it is important to know if the government will vote in favour of extending article 50 if its deal gets defeated. Or will it vote for no deal? That must have been discussed at cabinet, he says.

Lidington says Clarke is asking him to comment on “a hypothetical whipping decision on a hypothetical vote”. He says he hopes that will not take place, because he hopes MPs vote for May’s deal.

Politico Europe’s Charlie Cooper, who has been listening to the debate, does not accept the argument that the ERG are softening their objections to the withdrawal agreement. (See 9.18am.)

Lidington says an abrupt departure from the EU would provide a shock to the economy.

The Green MP Caroline Lucas says President Macron said an article 50 extension would have to be for a purpose. The obvious purpose is for a referendum, she says.

Lidington says, in talks with the government, the EU has always said it would want to know the reasons for an article 50 extension. So there is nothing surprising in what Macron said, he says.

Labour’s Pat McFadden asks about President Macron’s comment about not accepting the request for an article 50 extension without a clear justification. (See 1.33pm.)

Lidington claims there is no difference between that and what Theresa May has said.

Back in the debate Lidington says it would be a mistake for MPs to think that EU leaders spend all their time thinking about Brexit. There are other issues they want to address, he says.

The DUP has put out a statement saying that it will back the Costa amendment. Nigel Dodds, the DUP leader at Westminster, said:

Part two of the draft withdrawal agreement on citizens’ rights is one of the elements which should be supported right across the House of Commons. It is right therefore that this aspect should be agreed with the European Union whatever the outcome of negotiations are.

It is the sensible thing to do and it is the right thing to do. The amendment has already received significant cross-party support from both leave and remain supporters alike. It is one that I would hope will be passed by the House of Commons and that the European Union would respond positively to this move and ensure that fears around citizens’ rights can be laid to rest once and for all at the earliest possible opportunity.

You can read the full text of the Costa amendment, and all other amendments, here, on the order paper (pdf).

This is from the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn.

Amendment C is the Spelman one and amendment F is the Cooper one. (See 2.18pm.)

But the Cooper amendment is essentially just a summary of what Theresa May promised yesterday about MPs getting a possible vote on extending article 50, and so it is hard to see why ministers would not back it.

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, has put out a statement condemning the treatment of Alberto Costa. She said:

The sacking of Alberto Costa for supporting citizens’ rights prolongs the anxiety and uncertainty that over 5 million people have faced for two-and-a-half years.

Alberto Costa’s amendment was a sensible measure trying to protect the rights of EU citizens in the UK and our own British citizens in the EU.

These people are our friends and our neighbours and they don’t deserve to be treated as a political football kicked between the Home Office and No 10.

The SNP’s Tommy Sheppard asks what the government’s policy will be if there are votes on accepting a no-deal Brexit, or extending article 50.

Lidington says he is being asked to comment on a hypothetical situation. He is focused on getting a deal, he says.

Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, asks about the PM’s commitment to let MPs vote on extending article 50 if there is no deal by 14 March. Would MPs be able to table amendments changing the length of the article 50 extension?

Lidington says it is up to the Speaker to decide what amendments are called. But he says, if there were no deal, section 13 of the EU Withdrawal Act would still apply (the clause that says MPs should get a vote on what happens next, on an amendable motion).

David Lidington, the Cabinet Office minister, is opening the debate for the government.

The Lib Dem MP Tom Brake asks Lidington to confirm that the government’s view of the Costa amendment is. The home secretary said he approved of it, Brake says, but Alberto Costa was sacked for tabling it.

Lidington says he will address this in due course.

This is from Reuters.

The European Union is ready to respond to any UK request for an extension to the Brexit timetable, and problems such as the European parliament elections can be overcome if there is the political will, Romania’s minister for European affairs said. George Ciamba told Reuters on Wednesday that Romania, as the current holder of the EU’s rotating presidency, was still making plans for a disorderly Brexit but was more optimistic after Theresa May paved the way for a delay beyond the planned Brexit date of 29 March.

These are from HuffPost’s Paul Waugh. He thinks Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman may have redefined the nature of the commitment given by Labour on Monday about backing a second referendum.

But Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, is saying she would agree to an article 50 extension, according to Deutsche Welle’s Maximilian Hofman.

“Senior ministers believe that the European Union will insist on a Brexit delay of up to two years if Britain fails to agree a deal in the next few weeks”, Joe Murphy and Nicholas Cecil report in the Evening Standard. “Several sources have told the Standard they do not think the sort of “short, limited extension” of article 50 suggested by Theresa May in the Commons yesterday would be permitted by Brussels.”

The fate of a backbench amendment seeking to guarantee EU citizens’ rights is up in the air after the home secretary backed it and then the MP who tabled it was sacked from the government, Lisa O’Carroll reports. Sajid Javid said the government would support the amendment laid by the Tory MP Alberto Costa to ringfence EU citizens’ future rights under a no-deal Brexit, hours after Theresa May dismissed it as unworkable. But less than an hour after Javid made his comments, Costa was sacked from his post as parliamentary private secretary to the Scottish secretary, David Mundell.

Here is Lisa’s full story.

Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, devoted his two questions at PMQs to Brexit. He started by urging May to rule out a no-deal Brexit and he accused her of “blackmailing” the country with the prospect of what might happen if her deal is not agreed.

Theresa May said that there were only two ways to remove the threat of no deal. She would not revoke article 50, she said. So the only way to remove the threat of no deal was to vote for her deal, she said.

Blackford said there was another option; article 50 could be extended to allow for a second referendum, he said. He said May was fooling no one.

Parliament will not be bullied into a very bad choice of accepting her very bad deal or no deal at all.

May said another referendum would not solve the problem.

Peter Bone, the Tory Brexiter, says yet again the media had verbatim reports from cabinet yesterday. Wouldn’t it just be easier to televise these meetings?

May says Bone has talked about being promoted to cabinet. Perhaps the two issues are linked, and he wants to be on TV the whole time.

And that’s it. PMQs is over.

Earlier during PMQs May said Corbyn should suspend Chris Williamson over his comment about Labour being too apologetic about antisemitism allegations.,

Williamson himself has just issued this apology on Twitter.

The SNP’s Angela Crawley asks why carers are being penalised under universal credit.

May says she will get the relevant minister to write to Crawley about this.

John Whittingdale, the Tory former cabinet minster, says it is five years since the annexation of Crimea by Russia. Will the government increase sanctions to force it to withdraw.

May says the government has condemned and continues to condemn the annexation of Crimea.

Labour’s Stephen Hepburn asks about the availability of a cystic fibrosis drug.

May says the NHS has to get value for money. It has made a generous offer to the drug company, Vertex. Talks are still underway with the company.

Justine Greening, the Tory former education secretary, asks May if she supports the restoration of maintenance grants for students.

May says this is being considered by the review of student funding currently underway.

Labour’s Bambos Charalambous asks about crime in his Enfield Southgate constituency. His constituents do not feel safe. Will May increase police funding?

May says Met funding is going up. She says Charalambous should take this up with the Labour mayor of London.

Corbyn asks about the food bank in Hastings. Demand there has gone up by 80%. A significant proportion of referrals relate to benefit changes. Last week the Resolution Foundation said child poverty was on course to reach record limits. Will May end the two-child limit and the benefit cap, and restore Sure Start centres.

May says welfare should be fair for claimants, but also for taxpayers. Absolute child poverty is at a record low. A child growing up in a home where parents work is less likely to be in poverty. Will May accept that work is the best route out of poverty.

Corbyn says it clearly is not working, because people doing two or three jobs have to access food banks. May used to talk about the just about managing. But they are not managing. Child poverty is up, pensioner poverty is up, homelessness is up, manufacturing is in recession, and austerity is not over. People in low income are getting poorer while the rich getting richer. And the government’s handling of Brexit is making things worse. Are any of these burning injustices a priority for the prime minister?

May says manufacturing is not in recession. And Corbyn is wrong about the lowest earners; they have seen the highest rise for 20 years because of the national living wage. Income tax has been cut, and fuel duty frozen. She says Labour voted against these tax cuts. It is working people who always pay the price of Labour.

Corbyn says the richest have seen their incomes grow, while the poorest are getting poorer. Will May commit to ending the benefit freeze?

May say the top 1% pay 28% of income tax. That is higher than under Labour. Income inequality is lower than under Labour. And the lowest earners have had their fastest pay rise for 20 years under the national minimum wage.

Corbyn says the Tories opposed the principle of the minimum wage. Will the PM intervene to make sure staff working in government departments get the London living wage. This month Amber Rudd admitted universal credit is driving people to food banks. Or does May think rising poverty is a price worth paying.

May says changes are being made to universal credit. For example, the taper rate has been cut. The seven-day wait has been cut. And there is an overlap for people on housing benefit. While the government was making those changes, Labour opposed them.

Jeremy Corbyn says he hopes the tensions over Kashmir can be eased, and that no lives will be lost.

The Bank of England says growth this year will be the lowest for a decade. Is that because of May’s policies?

May says a report say UK growth will be higher than Germany’s. Borrowing is down, she says.

Corbyn says May may not have had time to look at the Bank of England’s forecasts. It says there is a one in four chance of a recession. Manufacturers have cut jobs. Is May’s shambolic Brexit to blame, or her lack of an industrial strategy.

May says there has been consistent growth, quarter by quarter. Under Labour there would be capital flight and £1,000bn borrowing.

Julian Knight, a Conservative, asks May to agree that Birmingham council should sort out the bin strike. It shows what would happen under a hard-left government.

May says this is a matter for Labour-controlled Birmingham to sort out. It shows what a hard-left Labour government would be like.

Labour’s Virendra Sharma asks when May will “call time” on the Brexit “farce” and hold a referendum.

May says she answered 82 questions on Brexit in the Commons yesterday. She repeats the promises she made yesterday about a possible vote on extending article 50.

Theresa May starts by saying she is deeply concerned by the rising tensions between India and Pakistan. The government is monitoring developments closely, and hopes tensions can be deescalated.

This is from my colleague Heather Stewart on the Costa amendment. (See 11.19am.)

Sajid Javid, the home secretary, has been giving evidence to the Commons home affairs, and he came rather unstuck when he was asked if the government would be backing the Alberto Costa amendment today. Costa, a Conservative MP, has tabled an amendment saying the citizens’ rights part of the withdrawal agreement should be implemented even if there is no deal. PoliticsHome’s Nicholas Mairs has the clip

I will post a summary of the amendments that have been tabled shortly.