Brexit: Labour MP suspended from Commons for stealing ceremonial mace in protest at vote delay
The latest Brexit developments at Westminster
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.A Labour MP was ejected from the House of Commons for seizing the ceremonial mace in protest at Theresa May's decision to delay a key Brexit vote.
In dramatic scenes, Lloyd Russell-Moyle swung the antique symbol of parliamentary authority from its holder after the government confirmed it would delay the vote on the prime minister's Brexit deal.
Tory MPs screamed "expel him" as Mr Russell-Moyle was promptly asked to leave the chamber by Speaker John Bercow.
The incident came after Ms May faced fury from MPs for calling off a vote on her Brexit deal, in an attempt to seek further "assurances" from the EU.
The prime minister admitted her blueprint would have been "rejected by a significant margin" on Tuesday due to major rebellion by Conservative MPs, as she confirmed plans in an eleventh-hour Commons statement.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn secured an emergency debate on the delay on Tuesday, saying "the government’s incompetence can’t be used as an excuse to threaten the country with no-deal".
It comes as the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that the UK can unilaterally revoke Article 50 and stop the Brexit process following a "democratic process".
See below to read our coverage of events as they happened
John Bercow is now addressing the Commons.
He says halting the debate on the Brexit deal after 164 MPs have already spoken "will be thought by many members of this House to be deeply discourteous".
He says there are two ways of avoiding the continuation of the debate.
Firstly, MPs could vote on a minister proposing that the debate be adjourned.
Alternatively, the government could refuse to move today's proposed business. That would mean the Commons would not be able to express a view on whether the debate should be allowed to continue.
Bercow says any "courteous, respectful and mature environment" must require MPs being allowed to have a say on whether the vote should continue - something he says would be the "right and obvious course to take".
He finishes by saying:
"Let us see whether those who have assured this House and the public over and over and over again that this supremely important vote is going to place tomorrow without fail wish to rise to the occasion."
Wow.
The SNP's Kirsty Blackman accuses Theresa May of a "stunning display of pathetic cowardice".
She says:
"This government is focused on saving the prime minister's job and her party instead of doing what is right for these countries. She is abdicating her responsibility."
Theresa May is asked when the "meaningful vote" will be held. She says:
"Members will know that there is, in legislation, the issue of the January 21 date."
That seems to suggest the vote is being delayed until the new year...
Tory backbencher Sarah Wollaston, who supports a fresh referendum on Brexit, tweets...
DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds tells Theresa May that her proposed deal is "unacceptable to this House".
He says:
"Please, prime minister, really do start listening and come back with changes to the withdrawal agreement, or it will be voted down."
May promises she will seek "further reassurances". That's quite different to changes to the legally-binding withdrawal agreement...
Hilary Benn, chair of the Commons Brexit committee, asks whether any of the EU leaders she spoke to over the weekend said they were willing to renegotiate the backstop.
In fairly typical fashion, the prime minister completely avoids the question.
David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, asks if May will seek to amend the legally-binding withdrawal agreement to ensure the UK can decide when to exit the backstop.
May says the issue of how the backstop could end "is already addressed" in the withdrawal agreement. She says the problem is that many MPs are concerned about whether they can trust the assurances in the agreement "and that is why it is important to go back and get those further reassurances".
That seems to be confirmation that she will seek additional reassurances - possibly in the form of a political statement - but not changes to the withdrawal agreement itself. It's unlikely to be enough for many Brexiteers.
Tory backbencher Anna Soubry says the prime minister should have sought to find a "compromise and a consensus" before she laid out her red lines and began negotiations with the EU.
She says a fresh referendum is the only way to end the "impasse' in Parliament.
This is interesting. Theresa May claimed the "meaningful vote" would need to be held by 21 January - but Commons experts disagree. They say that, in theory, the vote could be held as late as 28 March - the date before Brexit.
Downing Street has confirmed it will not allow MPs to vote on whether or not to end the debate on the Brexit deal. They simply won't begin the planned debate today and tomorrow.
Earlier, Commons speaker John Bercow said it was only "right" for MPs to be allowed a say on whether or not the debate should continue.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments