Conservative rebels win bid to let MPs take control of EU exit plans if Theresa May loses vote
Prime minister suffers humiliating double defeat in Commons
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Theresa May has suffered two humiliating defeats in parliament as MPs flex their muscles ahead of a Commons showdown over her deal.
In extraordinary scenes, the government was found to be in contempt of parliament over its refusal to publish key Brexit papers after opposition MPs won a narrow victory to force their hand.
Tory rebels then inflicted a further defeat on the prime minister, by backing an amendment that would give MPs control over Brexit if Ms May's deal is voted down next week.
It comes as the prime minister began a five-day Commons debate on her Brexit blueprint, which culminates in crunch votes that could threaten her leadership and her government.
See below for live updates
Andrea Leadsom says the government considers the "spirit and intention" of the promise made in November has been fulfilled. Huge shouts from MPs at this comment.
She "completely rejects" any suggestion Mr Cox has treated parliament with "anything but respect". As the previous tweet says, Ms Leadsom is clearly conflating contempt with acting in a contemptuous manner. Contempt is a specific charge.
She says: "I appeal to members of this House that they refer this to the committee, in line with parliamentary procedures."
It looks like the government is planning to stand firm.
Jumping out of the debate for a moment - Independent political editor Joe Watts has been to the lobby briefing with No10.
HMRC is contacting 145,000 UK export businesses to make sure they have the right kind of registration documents as they step up 'no deal' preparations.
The decision was announced at cabinet this morning, at which ministers also discussed the decision not to publish the full legal advice relating to Theresa May's Brexit plan.
The PM's spokesman said the government would make available a sum in the "low millions" to ensure all of the business that would need an EORI number if no deal comes through, are contacted individually and get one.
"It's entirely in keeping with taking the appropriate steps at the appropriate moment," he said. The appropriate moment at this point, being one in which the PM's deal looks increasingly under threat.
The front bench is preparing for a late night tonight, with the contempt motion debate about to begin, potentially continuing until 7pm.
Then the business motion relating to the broader debate on May's deal could potentially take another two hours, not to mention Dominic Grieve's amendment to it which is designed to allow the Commons to stop a no-deal withdrawal.
That's all before before the actual debate on the withdrawal agreement - potentially lasting a further eight hours.
The PM told Cabinet that the publication of the document setting out the legal position on Monday and the Attorney General's appearance in the Commons "are by themselves extraordinary steps for any government to take".
Theresa May's official spokesman said the government's amendment to the contempt motion would allow the privileges committee to look at the issue and "consider the national interest arguments for not releasing the legal advice alongside the government's duty to parliament".
On the article 50 case, her spokesman said "this is not a final judgment" and "it does nothing in any event to change the clear position of the government that article 50 is not going to be revoked".
Solicitor General Robert Buckland said the government had "nothing to hide" amid a row over the publication of the full legal guidance given to ministers about the Brexit deal.
He told BBC Radio 4's World At One: "There's nothing to hide because the government has already published its legal position in full yesterday, the attorney general answered questions for two-and-a-half hours.
"I don't know what could be more full and frank in all honesty - there is nothing here now, other than a rather tawdry sideshow that is stopping us from getting on with debating the real issues about Brexit."
He added: "If the attorney general had come to parliament with the 10 commandments yesterday, that wouldn't have been enough: this is all a smokescreen and a diversion from actually what we should be talking about, which is what the public want to hear."
Back in the Commons, Nigel Dodds, of the DUP, praises the attorney general for telling "the unvarnished truth" in his "devastating commentary" yesterday.
Apparently Mr Cox said the deal was "unattractive, unsatisfactory, undesirable" in his speech. Parliament voted for this advice to be published - and the government cannot refuse to do so just because it wishes otherwise, Mr Dodds says.
The government "must respect the will of parliament and cannot just set it aside", he says.
Former attorney general - and Tory Brexit rebel - Dominic Grieve says it is "manifestly clear" that the government has not complied properly with the terms of the motion.
He says the attorney general is not to blame, he is acting on behalf of his client - eg the cabinet.
However he said the method would apply not just to the Attorney General's advice, but to every piece of legal counsel given to the government during the EU negotiations.
He told MPs: "Some of it may undoubtedly contain confidential material which if put in the public domain could well jeopardise the national interest."
The chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee said this was like the government being made to "disclose the name of agents working for MI5 and MI6", adding the system was "open to abuse".
As the debate over the legal advice continues in the Commons, the debacle over another debate - a televised one between Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May - has entered a new phase. This afternoon the Labour's leaders team has issued an ultimatum to the prime minister's team for a head-to-head debate.
A party spokesman said: "When Number 10 told the media she wanted a head-to-head debate on her botched Brexit deal, Jeremy Corbyn immediately agreed. Jeremy Corbyn then swiftly accepted ITV's proposal for a straightforward head-to-head debate with Theresa May. But the Prime Minister has rejected it.
"Since then, the Prime Minister's team and their preferred broadcaster, the BBC, have put together a confused format which would limit head-to-head debating time, with a built-in advantage for the Government.
"The BBC's latest proposal is a mish-mash, with a lop-sided panel of other politicians and public figures, not a straightforward head-to-head debate. The BBC could - as ITV and Sky have proposed to do - fairly represent other viewpoints and parties in other programmes on its network.
"The public has a right to a genuine head-to-head debate on the Prime Minister's worst-of-all-worlds deal.
"Either Theresa May should accept ITV's straightforward proposal or - if she prefers the BBC - ask the corporation for a genuine head-to-head debate. Jeremy Corbyn is ready to take part in either.
"If the Prime Minister turns down the opportunity of a genuine head-to-head debate, it will be clear she is once again dodging a TV debate with the leader of the opposition on the future of our country."
His remarks come after Number 10 accused Mr Corbyn of "running scared" over the debate on Sunday. You can read more below.
Tory Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg told the Commons he would support the government, although he did not agree with the dismissal of "ancient procedures" like the humble address being used to hold it to account.
He said: "I think it's right that a committee looks at this issue in broad terms because it may be right that the House wishes to take a self-denying ordinance on the extent of humble addresses.
"It may be right we would like to say specifically they would be deemed disorderly and therefore not brought forward if they related to matters concerning the security services."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments