Brexit news: John Bercow rules Theresa May cannot bring her deal back for third time unless something has changed
Follow live updates from 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.John Bercow has dramatically ruled that Theresa May cannot hold another vote on her Brexit deal unless the proposed agreement has changed "substantially".
In a major blow to the prime minister, the Commons speaker invoked a centuries-old rule that says the same motion cannot be voted on more than once in the same parliamentary sitting.
Ms May was reported to be planning a third "meaningful vote" on her deal this week, although Downing Street said it would only happen if there was a "realistic prospect" of success.
If no vote happens in the coming days, she is now expected to ask European leaders for a lengthy extension to the two-year negotiation process, delaying Brexit for months or even years beyond March 29.
To follow events as they unfolded, see our live coverage below
This is crucial. Responding to Hilary Benn, chair of the Commons Brexit committee, John Bercow appears to suggest that he would consider any "substantial" change to the Brexit deal to involve renegotiation with the EU. A simple change in the wording of the motion would not be enough to warrant another vote, he says.
It means the government would probably not be able to hold another vote on its deal simply if it had won the DUP's support, or if attorney general Geoffrey Cox revised his legal advice. Instead, the deal itself would have to be fundamentally different. Hugely important.
What does this all mean?
John Bercow's ruling today is highly significant. It means the government's plan of trying to force its deal through by holding a third and even fourth Commons vote in the next two weeks appears to have been scuppered.
Theresa May now has few options left. She can either try to seek a significant change to the deal, which is now all but impossible in the short term, or she will have to ask for a lengthy extension to Brexit in order to allow her to do so.
The prime minister's deal now appears to be dead - or at least on life support until May, when the new parliamentary year starts. That is the point at which a fresh vote on the agreement could be held.
Ms May will travel to Brussels on Thursday to ask for a delay to Brexit. She had hoped to do so having won a last-minute Commons vote on her deal, which would have allowed her to seek only a three-month extension. But with no deal in place, the prime minister will likely have to request a much longer delay, with nine months reported to be the length being considered.
The BBC is reporting that Robert Buckland, the solicitor general, has floated the possibility of the parliamentary year being ended early so that Theresa May can hold another vote on her Brexit deal...
Justice minister Rory Stewart tweeted this minutes after John Bercow's ruling this afternoon...
We're still awaiting No10's response to John Bercow's statement this afternoon, which caught the government by surprise.
All we've had so far is this comment from Theresa May's official spokesman:
"The speaker did not warn us of the contents of the statement or indeed the fact that he was making one."
John Bercow and Andrea Leadsom continued their long-running and very public spat in the Commons chamber this afternoon.
Mr Bercow, the Commons speaker, criticised Ms Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, for looking at her phone while other MPs were speaking.
He said:
"I hope the government would feel that respect for procedure does matter.
"I note that as [SNP shadow Commons leader MP Pete Wishart] asks his question and I respond, the leader of the House is playing with her electronic device, and so is the deputy chief whip.
"It would seem to me to be helpful if people showed respect for each other in these circumstances and, if they're in the chamber, listened to what other people have to say, but if they choose not to do so then so be it.
"I try to show good manners and I hope others will do so as well.
Mr Leadsom hit back in response to a suggestion that a "Speaker's Conference" should be convened to bring the Commons together. She said:
"I just want to be very clear, I am indeed a reforming Leader of the House of the Commons, and for me, treating colleagues with courtesy and respect is at the forefront of that reform.
"And any Speaker's Conference would have to have that at its heart, and I simply would not be confident that that would be the case."
Solicitor general Robert Buckland said the ruling by Speaker John Bercow would have "huge reverberations" for the Brexit process.
"We are in a major constitutional crisis here," he told BBC News.
"There are ways around this - a prorogation of parliament and a new session. We are talking about hours to March 29. Frankly we could have done without this.
"Now we have this ruling to deal with, it is clearly going to require a lot of very fast but very deep thought in the hours ahead."
This is an important intervention as Mr Buckland is senior government figure - and a legal expert.
Speculation is absolutely rife across the House, about what Mr Bercow's ruling means.
Tory MP Zac Goldsmith thinks a general election is coming.
MPs are now moving onto an urgent question about extending article 50.
Brexit minister Kwasi Kwarteng is speaking for the government. He is a junior minister from the department, and it is reasonably unusual that the secretary of state is not answering.
He says the government will seek an extension from the EU, as per Commons votes last week. The European Council summit takes place at the end of the week and they are expected to discuss it then. He says they will need a clear reason for the extension.
Next week the government will bring forward a statutory instrument to change the date of Brexit, which will need to be approved by both houses, he says.
Tory MP Justine Greening, asking the question, says the government must set out the steps forward and to ensure there is no no-deal Brexit.
She also takes aim at Brexit secretary Steve Barclay, who voted against the government motion to extend article 50 last week. She says it is no longer "appropriate or credible" for him to lead the negotiations, even if she does respect his differing view.
Kwasi Kwarteng says he did the same thing as Mr Barclay - it was a free vote. He says the most important thing was to overturn the amendment by Hilary Benn which would have 'bound the hands' of parliament.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments