tv Victoria Derbyshire BBC News March 13, 2019 9:30am-11:01am GMT
is nothing else that will be negotiated. full coverage coming up inafew negotiated. full coverage coming up in a few moments live with victoria derbyshire. hello, it's wednesday, it's 9:30, i'm victoria derbyshire. where do we go from here? theresa may's brexit deal has been roundly defeated for a second time in parliament the ayes to the right, 242. the noes to the left, 391. so the noes have it, the noes have it. unlock! could we be heading for no—deal, a re—negotiation of the deal, another referendum, even a general election. anything is possible. theresa may is beefing her cabinet now, amid signs she has not given up on bringing her deal back for another vote.
european negotiators say it's up to the uk to decide what happens next. again, the house of commons says what it doesn't want. now, this impasse can only be solved in the uk. i hear you're very upset, is that true? later today, mps get to vote to decide if leaving the uk without a deal on march 29th should be ruled out. it isa it is a free vote so people can do what they think is the best thing for the country. i know what i think, that leaving without a deal would be very bad for our country, very bad for our security. the prime minister may be running out of options, and so is the country, and there s just 16 days to go until we are due to leave. hello.
welcome to the programme. we're live until 11 this morning. we very much want to hear about what do you think about where we are in the uk after the events of the last 12, 24 the uk after the events of the last 12, 2a hours. use the hashtag victoria live. do send us an e—mail. we will talk to many of you this morning. you've already been getting in touch with your thoughts. david says... exit with no—deal, leave theresa may in charge of more mayhem until the next election has to be called. then once the dust has settled, we move on from there. vinnie writes: hopefully, we are getting closer to a second referendum. the leave campaign has now been shown up for being based on lies and promises that could never be kept. this from benjey: stop brexit now and remain in the eu because, quite frankly, i could live without blue passports
and sovereignty. and redpricey says: the whole of parliament have failed and are not fit for duty. may should stand down and a general election called. those who failed us will lose their seats. so, how do you react to where we are now and what you want to happen next? do let me know. 16 days until brexit, and no—one knows what happens next. this morning, your reaction to the fact that it's just over two weeks until the uk is supposed to leave the eu and, yet, we have no idea what's going to happen. who do you think is reponsible for where we are today? and what do you want to see happen next? chris philp, conservative mp and vice chair of the conservative party for policy, here representing the government this morning. is this country still going to get brexit? i hope so, 17.4 million people voted for it, both parties at the last election, labour and
conservatives, stood on a manifesto committing us to deliver brexit and we got 80% of the vote between us and 570 out of 650 mps so i think we have a duty to deliver brexit. but you said, i hope so. yes, because as you said, i hope so. yes, because as you said, i hope so. yes, because as you said quite rightly, we are in an extremely uncertain situation, the government deal was voted down by a large majority again last night so we are in uncharted territory, there is no hiding from that. is the uk leaving the eu on march the 29? we will have a vote on that today when parliament will be asked in a free vote whether we should be willing to leave with no—deal and personally, i think i will vote for that, for the proposition that we could leave with no deal on march 29th because i think taking that off the table com pletely think taking that off the table completely compromises our position and essentially dishonours the referendum result. but i hope if parliament were to pass that, i think it is unlikely, but if it does, i hope there will be further negotiations in the course of the next 70 days. meaning what, there
could be a third vote? again, it is very ha rd to could be a third vote? again, it is very hard to predict, but if parliament did vote for a no—deal or to countenance the possibility of a no—deal brexit on march 29th, which i will support later, i am voting against the motion which counts as a negative, soaked up the greatjust to be clear, you want no—deal still on the table? yes, i do, on march 29th. i think there is a prospect, not a certainty, but the prospect of further talks and further consideration of a revised deal. i voted for the deal yesterday because i think that was the best way of getting us out. the deal was far from perfect, we know the imperfections, but at least it got us imperfections, but at least it got us out so i am disappointed it got is defeated and i think those who voted against it thinking we would definitely have brexit with no deal was a miscalculation but it happened and we must proceed. why is mrs may saying her conservative mps can vote however they want tonight? because
this issue is a deeply divisive one. but it is government policy to keep no—deal on the table. it is government policy brexit —— no—deal is better than a bad deal. yesterday was not a bad deal. the country is deeply divided comic you have just read out messages. my postbag for the mp from croydon south is divided 50-50, the mp from croydon south is divided 50—50, half say, let's have a second referendum and staying and the other half say, let's walk out with no deal. the country is divided and parliament is divided as well. and giving people a free vote and voting according to their consciences is not a bad thing. people always say a politician —— politicians, we wish you used your own judgment, politician —— politicians, we wish you used your ownjudgment, and that is exactly what every conservative mp will do today. mrs may said in the commons last night, i'm conscious of my duties as the prime minister of great britain and northern ireland and have the potential damage to the union that leaving without a deal could do, does that suggest she might vote to
ta ke does that suggest she might vote to take no—deal 0range mic at the table? because that would be extraordinary. you would have to ask her how she will vote. i have not spoken to her since the vote last night. i don't know. but i do know the snp in particular will use any excuse the snp in particular will use any excuse and take any opportunity to have a second independence referendum and break apart our country, they will seize on any muscle they can and that is deeply irresponsible, they should think about the national interest, not their narrow independence agenda. who is in control of brexit now? the government had a plan but it got defeated. it is not the government, he was? i would not say that, there is not a clear parliamentary majority and any government depends ona majority and any government depends on a parliamentary majority and right now, we don't have a parliamentary majority for a clear course of action. i hope in the coming days, it emerges. course of action. i hope in the coming days, it emergesm course of action. i hope in the coming days, it emerges. if a majority of mps devote to take no—deal off the table, it is likely a majority of mps will ask for an
extension to delay brexit —— do vote. how long should that extension be? there is an intelligent compromise tabled by steve boca —— steve baker you are speaking to you ina steve baker you are speaking to you in a moment, delaying exit day by a couple of months and having a transition period where we remain members of the single market and customs union but we are not members of the eu and can negotiate our future relationship. it is going into a transition period like the deal yesterday and giving us a year and three quarters to negotiate our future arrangements. that is a sensible compromise and i will definitely vote for it and i urge all conservatives and the dup and any member of parliament that has ever country because my interests at heart to vote for that amendment if it is selected. which i hope it should be. there probably will not bea should be. there probably will not be a majority in favour of that either so why doesn't the government to give mps a series of vote so you can work out what there is a
majority in that building for? by tabling these various amendments committed a's motion is amendable and also tomorrow about the delay, so and also tomorrow about the delay, so 650 members of parliament can table amendments proposing alternatives and they can be tested in the way you describe. the solution is very pragmatic, they call it malthouse b, a two—month extension of membership followed by a one and year transition period which makes a lot of sense and gives us which makes a lot of sense and gives us time to negotiate our future relationship while getting us out in a couple of months‘ time so i will definitely vote for that and any mp with our country ‘s interests at heart she did the same. thank you very much. the vice chair of the conservative party when it comes to policy, chris philp. thank you for your messages, i thought mps were representatives of the people, says victoria, our nation voted leave so how should vote either for a deal or
no—deal to fairly represent their constituents. instead, they have their own agenda. debra voted to leave the eu but has realised the fraud that went on, she says, the nhs being £350 billion better off if we left. and as soon as we left, they had a blatant audacity to back down from this claim. i believe your average person, we would be better off staying in the eu and the only people who would benefit from leaving would be the rich getting richer. we should just stay as we are, in the eu. could you please, says this, shake the dust from your shoes and behave with honour? the behaviour has diminished to such an extent, ironically due to the control of the eu, that this country is collapsing. leave with courtesy and determination. robert says, call the whole thing off, it is upsetting the whole thing off, it is upsetting the country to a degree i have never seen before and we would be much more powerful within the eu. let‘s talk to conservative mp steve baker,
he is chair of the european research group and a former brexit minister and a protester in the background is shouting, we are not going to brexit! i have told him i will give him an interview after this and if your staff remains him, perhaps he. shouting. if —— is that what he wa nts ? shouting. if —— is that what he wants? we have already agreed to do it and if one of your team would tell him that, i expect he. shouting. you seem to be in a good mood when you have just lost brexit. we have not lost brexit. my mood is neutral and stoical but when you are being shouted at live on air by a protester, you have to try and find good humour with which to respond. fair enough. the position in legislation is we leave the european union on march 29th with or without a deal, that is the position in international and uk law, parliament voted for that, that is the position, and the prime to‘s motion
does take note of that. parliament can does take note of that. parliament ca n ex press does take note of that. parliament can express an opinion today and the government can be bound by a politically if it uses but not in law. but it canjust politically if it uses but not in law. but it can just change the law. just changing the law is a long process usually and apparently change the law... there is a statutory instrument that would not ta ke statutory instrument that would not take as long. well, i thought you wa nted take as long. well, i thought you wanted me to keep it simple. sorry, just that would not take as long as normal legislation! to extend the period of being in the european union requires the consent of the eu and to pass a statutory instrument which can be relatively quickly. that extends exit day but is not losing brexit. if you listen to different commentators, there is limited appetite to grain forwards purposely and staying in the eu and not knowing what we want to do. —— to go forwards. i would be surprised if the eu wants is to be in for a long period. how do you get brexit? we have tabled a compromise
developed with people from all wings of the conservative party, former first secretary damian green has signed it, nicky morgan, myself, iain duncan smith, jacob rees—mogg, simon hart from the centre of the party, a labourmp simon hart from the centre of the party, a labour mp has signed it this morning. there are two parts to this. before you tell us what it is, iamso this. before you tell us what it is, i am so sorry to interrupt, you already know it is not realistic because there is no majority in parliament for it. i don't accept that for one moment. the first part of the compromise is to rescue with the —— to rescue the withdrawal agreement and there was the brady amendment and we got with three exceptions conservatives to vote for that amendment and on that rest plan aisa that amendment and on that rest plan a is a compromise so it is not fair to say it is unrealistic, there was a majority for the key thing necessary to make plan a work. we now want to make plan b work and that has to safety nets, it will go through them if you like. to try and make leaving without a withdrawal
agreement acceptable to my colleagues, to try and get a majority. at the moment, people like chris are rallying to it. they really are. chris are rallying to it. they really a re. if chris are rallying to it. they really are. if i have understood correctly this compromise, you are asking for a transition agreement without a withdrawal agreement. you know the eu will not give you a transition period without a withdrawal agreement. two things, first, we are suggesting three things. we want to rescue the withdrawal agreement and offer plan a. the second point is to offer to buy the implementation period we have negotiated for the money we have negotiated for the money we have negotiated. and the third is that there is a whole range now of standstill arrangements that allow life to go on broadly unaffected, things like social security coordination, there is a web of them are merging. but one of the things we must stop doing is treating anything the european union says as gospel truth, fixed and immovable. it is absolutely true is terrible bureaucracy and it struggles to
reach decisions and is not very agile, one reason we need to read. negotiation is dynamic and if only this parliament would stand firm and have a little courage and stick to the premises we have made in the referendum, in our manifesto, and to honour the vote not just referendum, in our manifesto, and to honour the vote notjust of the 17.4 but everyone‘s vote. if we don‘t uphold this referendum decision, nobody‘s vote counts for anything so if parliament would just stand firm and you can see it in the wake the eu reacts, if they stand firm, the basics of negotiation and be willing to walk away, we would get a good deal. 0k, we will see, thank you. you are most welcome. norman smith is at downing street, where the cabinet are due to meet in the next few minutes. they are meeting right now, are they still end? a lot of them have come out not looking particularly happy bunch. the indications are that mrs may‘s plan, such as it is at the
moment, is pretty much to carry on as she has done so far, in other words, she will keep plugging away promoting her deal as the best deal and the only deal available. now, i guess a lot of people will be somewhat incredulous at that, but she takes the view that there is nothing else on offer. is there going to be another vote on mrs may‘s deal? well, a futile gesture! anyway! she has not taken out that option come at the idea of another vote on mrs may‘s deal, why? she takes the view that if the eu do agree to delay, it will come with a load of conditions which tory mps won‘t make so they might gravitate back towards her deal. it is also argued that a good number of the brexiteers did actually switch last night to back a deal so they take a lot of them, a lot of them take the view that more will come over. and the eu have made
it clear nothing else is doing. bundle that together and the hope of tea m bundle that together and the hope of team mrs may is that where they to have a third go, it is not inconceivable, they believe they might be able to get a deal three. thank you very much, norman. let‘s get the labour view. after last night‘s vote, the leader of the labour party, jeremy corbyn, renewed his calls for a general election and demanded that a no—deal brexit be ‘taken off the table‘. let‘s talk to labour mp and shadow chief secretary to the treasury peter dowd. good morning. why did jeremy corbyn not publicly back last night labour party policy and show enthusiastic support for a second referendum? because it is part of the sequences set out in september in our conference resolution, the line that we would take and we have stuck to that line. so i'm not quite sure what you mean. you didn‘t mention a second referendum at all. that is pa rt second referendum at all. that is part of the process. it is a
sequence, the bottom line is the issue of a referendum is still part of our option. it is still there. but he has got to wait for the general election option. the problem is we have this simplistic approach and analysis. the bottom line is we set out a proposal which we agreed at the party conference that we would set a sequence and we are sticking to it. if we had not stuck to that sequence, we would be accused of not sticking to the policy, so we‘re sticking to that resolution and policy fairly clearly. what is labour offering thatis clearly. what is labour offering that is realistic right now? well, it is realistic to a customs union, access to the single market to protect our jobs access to the single market to protect ourjobs and economy, and thatis protect ourjobs and economy, and that is where we want a cross—party consensus on this matter, but if somebody come at the prime minister, is not listening to that end has not been for the best part of two years, it isa been for the best part of two years, it is a very difficult situation. it is not of our making, we are trying to do what we can in very difficult circumstances, but the prime
minister has to listen, to her own side, to us, but she is not. sounds like there might be a third meaningful vote, how do you react to that? i can't see what the meaningful vote will do. the bottom line is if the prime ministerjust brings back the same deal with a couple of dots and commas in different places like she did yesterday, it is not going to go anywhere, is it? you will vote to ta ke anywhere, is it? you will vote to take no—deal off the table? yes. the legal default position is this country reeves are march 29th without a deal so the law has to be changed. yes. we would look towards may be an extension of that. that seems to be practical and pragmatic. to deal with a difficult set of circumstances. and you know the eu say there has to be credible justification for an extension, so what would be the justification? the credible justification is what michel barnier said when we went over there when we put forward a proposal is for a customs union,
single market, and that was a form of the basis of further negotiations. they are clear about that and they have said this. whilst the prime minister sticks with her red lines, there is not going to be any movement so you have to get rid of the red lines or move the red lines, and our proposal to remove the red lines. do you think they would be open to renegotiation?” think they would be open to renegotiation if those red lines that the prime minister set actually moved or got rid of. i think that is the point. is that realistic after two years of complex negotiations? detail, hours, numbers of people, you think they would reopen the position? what we have got is that is either a no—deal which they don‘t want, we don‘t want a no—deal, nobody appears to want a no—deal so what is the alternative? to try to get a sensible, reasonable, consensual deal. that could happen in three months? i am not sure what the period of time but you have got to try, you have to try to make a
way forward and make progress on this which we haven‘t for two years simply because, i am sorry to repeat it, but the prime minister has been so intransigent on her own red lines and even her own conservative collea g u es and even her own conservative colleagues are saying the same. there were even suggestions the other day that maybe she would have to resign and let somebody else take over. there is no evidence of that, is there? of her resigning, no, but some of them are asking for it. speaking in the last half hour, the chief negotiator for the eu, speaking in the last half hour, the chief negotiatorfor the eu, michel barnier, says the risk of no—deal brexit has never been higher and he says the eu is ready for all eventualities. if the united kingdom still wants to leave the european union and still wants to do so in an orderly fashion, if that is still the intention of the united kingdom, then this treaty, which we negotiated with the government of theresa may for a year and a half,
this treaty is and will remain the only available treaty. so we are at a critical point. the risk of no—deal has never been higher. that is the risk of an exit, even by accident, by the uk of the european union ina accident, by the uk of the european union in a disorderly fashion. and i urge you, please, not to underestimate that risk or its consequences. michel consequences. michel barnier at the eu‘s —— the chief negotiator, speaking in the last half—hour. what do you think about the country is now and what happens next? the bulk of people wish they had never heard of brexit, please can we turn the clock back, and just think it has been a mad strea m and just think it has been a mad stream from mps and the media? thank god theresa may has lost her voice! peter says, by voting down the deal, mps have destroyed democracy and
trashed what the people voted for in the referendum and labour is a disgrace. this says, it is obvious the eu won‘t negotiate, we tried several times even before the vote and failed, the eu won‘t change. we need to look at what they are giving us and stop looking to make a deal. then decide. philippa says, if the mps managed to sink brexit, a democratic decision, bring on the general election and the 17.4 million voters should shun the main parties and vote for independence and probe exit parties. some of those independents want to remain in the eu. jason says, board stiff and losing the will to care. apologies, jason. the government has announced new measures this morning that will come into force in the event of a no—deal brexit. in the short term, it means most imports into the uk would not attract a tariff, in the event of a no—deal brexit.
so would not be more expensive. we are joined now by our economics correspondent, andrew walker. good morning, and g. tell your audience what this means. the government figures are that we currently import 80% of goods tariff free and that is because more than half of what we import comes from the eu which by virtue of our membership is completely tariff free. 0nce membership is completely tariff free. once there no—deal provisions apply, if they do, it would go up to 87%. it is important to bear this in mind. although the government is proposing to sweep away quite a number of tariffs which would mean that there would be some goods that currently do have tariff supplied that would come in tariff free, there would be stuff coming from the eu that suddenly would have tariffs where it currently is tariff free. and i suppose the standout example of that latter issue is cars, where under these proposals, they would attract a tariff of 10%. important
to say it would not add 10% to the retail price because the 10% would apply to the input price essentially before you would think about mark—ups and vat. but clearly, that would be a significant impact, making cars and other goods more expensive. 0n the other side, there would be other things that would see prices reduced. 0k, prices reduced. ok, so how is business reacting to this? not very well, for the most part. cbi in particular have been very scathing, frankly, about what they see as the last—minute nature of it, the lack of consultation. what i would say is that if you look at the particular types of goods where some tariffs are going to be retained, there clearly is a sensitivity to concerns that some of those industries have about their ability to withstand sudden blast of tariff free competition and those
industries are agriculture, especially high tariffs going to remain on lamb imports, but also high tariffs, although somewhat reduced, on beef. also, there would be tariffs retained on some types of clothing imports and ceramics. things like building tiles and ta blewa re. things like building tiles and tableware. so the government has shown some sensitivity there to the specific concerns those sectors have, although it means correspondingly that there is not the same benefit in terms of reduced prices for consumers buying that particular type of stuff. thank you very much, andrew, andrew walker reporting. what do people who‘ll be affected by whatever brexit we get think about where we are today? doire finn lives near the northern irish border and is part of the group our future, 0ur choice, who are campaigning for a second referendum. harry boparai works at heathrow airport and thinks we should leave with no deal on march 29th.
and alena useinovic is a german citizen, who works in the automotive industry in this country. good morning, all of you. thank you for joining good morning, all of you. thank you forjoining us. what is your reaction to where we are today, doire? i am enraged by the situation. particularly for young people in northern ireland like myself living so close to the border, with the threat of a no—deal which has to be stopped. looking at the parliament, it is an absolute crisis and we have to look to other solutions and i think that has to be towards a second referendum. harry, what is your view of where we are today? it is where i want to be, really, honestly speaking. like i have said previously, it is springboards, not the cliff edge, into the future. a clear message for this evening for the mps who want to ta ke this evening for the mps who want to take the biggest bargaining chip off the table, we will have a future government with split votes, split parties and you will never see majority again. for those of you
doing this for self interest, it is going to not work out for you or the country in the long term. it isjust an opinion tonight, let's make this clear, and then it is down to the prime minister, because it is more we leave on march 29th if there is no agreement, so the plan has two pass, she goes down as one of the worst prime minister is in history or finally shows courage and unlocks those wonderful things out there that we currently cannot explore. and what is your reaction, alena? 992 days since the referendum and me and many eu citizens are still in limbo, so not happy and worried about the threat of no—deal because that reduces citizens' rights even further than they have been so it is imperative the uk and the eu do the honest thing. doire, who do hold responsible for the position this country finds itself in today? i think over the last two years, we
have seen from the government in the uk this hasn‘t been approached in the right way and the uk government have to be held responsible. we met with michel barnier last week and it is very clear the european union have done absolutely everything they can but the parliament is gridlocked and they can‘t decide. so the blame has to fall with them at the minute. harry, do you think brexit might be sleeping from your fingers, particularly with this vote tonight? it is likely that a majority will vote to take no—deal off the table and tomorrow, likely a majority in parliament will vote to ask for an extension. and the eu will grant that extension because it is more money down the drain. these are facts now, not fiction about falling off a cleft and the rest of it. 6.7 billion net contribution, 21,000 office rs billion net contribution, 21,000 officers that we desperately need and ten new hospitals and me —— a year so our elderly are not in cold
corridors, that is what we are facing at the moment, that is the reality. and the fifth biggest economy and our elderly are going through that and our young are getting stabbed. and what is the reality of a no—deal? the reality is opportunity and grabbing that opportunity. and we are dealing with bully boys, arrogant bully boys. even brexiteer cabinet ministers say there will be pain. we don't know that, but there might be short—term possible pain, but i want to look at the positives and other markets we can unlock. life is not a bed of roses at the moment. i'm on the ground, an ordinary working man and it's dangerous out there at the moment to stop we can't afford police officers. i was in one of the richest hospitals in the country a few days ago and there are elderly people in the corridors waiting for a bed. whatjoke is this? can we
afford to pay eu pensions anymore? this money needs to be spent at home. a final word from alena. what‘s your message to politicians today? is an eu citizen, they need today? is an eu citizen, they need to assure our rights. we have been used by bargaining chips by the uk. it's a message from theresa may and her hostile environment and we've had enough of it. we have marched for britain, done everything we can, supported the remaining campaign. the uk needs to support us. we are at home here and we are completely disenfranchised, angry and sad. as somebody in the automotive industry, i can't agree with harry. it is a cliff edge. we have already lost business and the effects of no deal are notjust scary, it's in front of us now and it needs to be taken off the table and sensible politics need to begin to work. thank you to doire, alena and harry. 0ne viewer
tweets, exercise the democratic right of the people and exercise no deal if need be. david tweets, the eu will never give a decent deal and they couldn‘t if they wanted to. it would open the door for more countries to leave the eu. we now trade under wto terms and then do trade under wto terms and then do trade deals with others. try to get a trade deal with the eu. a text that says, surely everyone has the message right now, we are much better off as a member of the eu so why waste time on extending article 50. just revoke it and let us get on with our lives. get in touch with us this morning. send us an e—mail and get in touch. let‘s get a summary of the news so far today. it‘s just after 10 o‘clock — let‘s get a summary of the news from joanna.
the government has announced some of the trade measures it will take if the uk does leave the eu without a deal. to avoid border checks, no duties would be paid on eu goods arriving from the republic of ireland and remaining in northern ireland. under the unilateral, temporary plan, sheep meat tariffs and levies on finished vehicles would stay the same. but it will cut tariffs on a range of imports from outside the european union. mps will return to the commons later today for a further vote on brexit after their resounding defeat of theresa may‘s withdrawal agreement last night. the plan was rejected by a majority of 149. mps will now vote on whether to block the uk from pulling out of the eu without a deal in sixteen days time. the eu‘s chief negotiator says the risk of a no deal brexit has never been higher. translation: we are at a critical point. the risk of no deal has never been higher. and that is the risk of an exit, even by accident, by the uk of the european union. in a
disorderly fashion. i urge you, please, not to underestimate that risk or its consequences. before mps hold their next brexit debate, the chancellor, philip hammond, will deliver his latest economic assessment in the spring statement. the speech will include updates on projected growth and borrowing but it‘s unlikely to include any major spending announcements. mr hammond is expected to say that he needs to be cautious because of the uncertainty around brexit. three climbers have died and one other has been seriously injured following an avalanche on ben nevis, britain‘s highest mountain. police scotland was alerted to the incident in an area known as number five gully which is known for avalanches. officers say they are working to establish the identity of the climbers. two other climbers recently lost their lives in separate incidents on the same mountain. one of the most powerful men in the roman catholic church has been sentenced to six years in prison in australia for sexually abusing two choirboys in the 1990s.
cardinal pell, who‘s 77, is the highest ranking catholic priest to be convicted of child sex offences. thejudge in melbourne said he may not live to be released from prison. the cardinal maintains his innocence and is appealing against his convictions. heavy rain and strong winds have been causing travel disruption in several parts of the uk as storm gareth moves east. northern ireland was the first area to be affected and parts of scotland and north—west england have seen flooding. three yellow met office weather warnings are in place until thursday. forecasters said there could be gusts of up to 80mph along coasts in northern england. the strictly come dancing presenters tess daly and claudia winkleman finished their marathon dancing challenge last night — and vowed never to dance again. the pair raised more than a million pounds by dancing non—stop for 24 hours and five minutes. they battled through back injuries and sickness to raise the money for comic relief. that‘s the latest news —
back to you, victoria. let‘s talk now to some of the mps who changed their minds last night and voted for theresa may‘s deal, having voted against it the last time it came to the house of commons. first, we have conservative mp johnny mercer. why did you change your mind? i changed my mind because i think the window of opportunity is closing to get this done. is it a perfect deal or a good deal? not particularly, but if you were to rewind the clock ten years and say you are 15 days from leaving the european union with an 85% deal, i think most people who wanted to leave would have bitten your hand off. what about those colleagues who voted against it? i will not talk about other colleagues. you must be frustrated. each one of them is weighing up lots of different complex options, so this idea of people being traitors, is complete
nonsense. you people being traitors, is complete nonsense . you have people being traitors, is complete nonsense. you have been called weak for changing your mind.” nonsense. you have been called weak for changing your mind. i have no problem with being called a weak leader, i don‘t worry about that at night. each mp is dealing with lots of different competing factors when they go to vote. at the end of the day, it‘s all our own fault because of the 2017 general election. this was always going to happen, it‘s not a surprise, and this prime minister has to pick a pass through and lead us in the manner we expect. can she do that? she has no other option. she is in that position and the party had a conversation about her leadership in december. she has to find a way through this process and find a way through this process and find a way of delivering on the result of the referendum. that‘s our red line and i think that‘s where people will get very upset with us. this vote tonight on whether the uk should leave with no deal or whether no deal should be taken off the table, how will you vote? we absolutely have to leave that they are. it‘s been government policy for
two and a half years. i didn‘t want to come in and think and talk about europe for the whole of my life, it‘s about trusting politics. europe for the whole of my life, it's about trusting politics. what will it do for your constituents if britain left without a deal on march 29? we know the consequences of what is predicted to happen. what are they? we were here before when george osborne and david cameron we re george osborne and david cameron were challenged for having project for you, that the world would end if people voted to leave in the referendum. it was a very difficult time and the choices are not good at this stage which is why i voted for the prime minister‘s deal last night. but giving up now and walking away and hoping the problems will go away, at this moment you expect to lead us to lead and that‘s what i expect. it's not necessarily giving up expect. it's not necessarily giving up and walking away, it‘s trying to find a solution whereby there is a majority of mps in that building behind us that will vote for something. and there are different options for doing that will stop you could have a series of indicative
votes or other options available. i would think along the lines of something like that. at the end of the day, if no deal is the outcome we get to and one that we have said we get to and one that we have said we are happy to stare down on the behalf of the british people, then i‘m afraid that‘s what we have to do and get on with it. thank you very much, jonny mercer, who voted for mrs may‘s deal last night having voted against it injanuary, explaining his reasons why. we will speak to some more mps who did the same. let‘s speak now to nigel evans and ben bradley. why did you both change your minds? i feared being tracked ifeared being tracked in i feared being tracked in the european union more than i feared being trapped in the backstop. has that possibility... it evaporated last night! we all prayed theresa may, when she was in strasbourg, would be able to get a white rabbit out of a hat, and she did. then the attorney general shot it dead the next day. his advice was quite clear, nothing much had changed and
europe hadn‘t really given a lot on the backstop. so we are where we are. we know what will happen tonight when we thought about leaving without a deal. coming back to that in a second, why did you change your mind? the same thing, it's the balance of risk and the prime minister couldn't change the backstop. the attorney general has talk about being stuck in delay. i thought it was the least risky option. i will vote to leave without a deal. there again, we know the risks. you will be in the minority, it‘s likely. risks. you will be in the minority, it's likely. we will be defeated tonight, roundly. but there is also the suggestion kit malthouse has an amendment to put down meaning we will leave on march 29 but we go immediately into the implementation period, so we then start to talk about future trading arrangements and once we have sorted that... why would the eu let us go into that
transition period without there being a withdrawal agreement? £39 billion worth of reasons. president jean—claude juncker has said billion worth of reasons. president jean—claudejuncker has said that if we leave without a deal that it would damage the european union as much as it would damage the united kingdom, so there are good economic reasons for them to allow us. do you think there is a majority for that suggestion? it's a compromise that has united our benches in recent weeks. whether it has a majority in the house, i don't know. but if we can come to an arrangement where we vote to leave on the 29th, we could do something in the meantime to mitigate the worst impacts of that to make it as smooth as possible. something in the meantime?! something in the meantime?! something like that proposal, rather than leaving totally, going into some sort of implantation. it's 21 months. the one thing we fairly well know is that if the same deal was put to the house of commons next week, which is one room, it would go down again for some it‘s like a pa rent down again for some it‘s like a parent saying to a vegetarian child,
it‘s either my meat pie or no meat pie. most children would say, i‘m not having the meat pie. that‘s where we currently are in parliament, we simply don‘t want the deal she has decided. thank you both very much. let‘s talk with ken clarke, who s always been a supporter of the european union, but backed the prime ministers divorce deal because he says business needs certainty. in all the years you have been in politics, have you known any times like this? never known anything like it in my entire political career. is the biggest shambles, and the craziest situation in parliament i have ever seen. it would be very entertaining if it wasn‘t so very serious, as we are actually trying to determine the future political role of the government in the world, the economic well—being of the next generation and everything has fallen into a complete shambles. what do you think of the fact it‘s a shambles, to use your word, on a conservative government watch?
firstly, if this all comes across party, we still conduct politics on party, we still conduct politics on party lines but both parties break up party lines but both parties break up on the european question into numerous small factions and you have to get a majority together on a cross— party to get a majority together on a cross—party basis to go forward. i think we might succeed in that, actually. i think there will be a big majority against leaving with no deal, which would be catastrophic. i think then we need a good, long time in which to negotiate a new relationship with the eu, which requires votes in parliament. to try to find where there is a broad consensus, what there is a majority for, so the government can go away and negotiate with a reasonable chance of getting it supported in parliament. how long is a good long time? i would go to the end of 2021. ideally, you should go until you actually have an agreement, but everybody is obsessed with putting dates on it. but i think it will ta ke dates on it. but i think it will take until at least the end of 2021.
as you know, the eu has said there has to be a credible justification for any delay because they would have to give their permission. what would be thatjustification? that all of us on both sides of the channel need a settled and new arrangement in place, agreed before we leave. absolutely no point in inflicting damage on all our economies by leaving on march 29, which we are obviously not ready for, and the shambles resulting. even short—term problems would not be as bad as the more sensational things that have been put out because the government has spent £4 billion and there are thousands and thousands of civil servants trying to lessen the impact of no deal overnight, as it were. i think we can avoid a lot of that, but over the medium to long term, having no deal would be pretty disastrous for our economy. there is the risk of financial panic, sterling falling, and continuing uncertainty that is
costing jobs already day by day as companies decide to turn away from britain because they have no idea how you can trade from here with the rest of the world. quite a lot of voters are rest of the world. quite a lot of voters a re not rest of the world. quite a lot of voters are not afraid of leaving with no deal, we have many messages coming in from them this morning.” don‘t think they actually quite understand what that means. i‘m used to being accused of being arrogant. what opinion are those voters giving on the irish border when they say that? what opinion do they give you about citizens‘ rights? what do they say about customs controls and new tariffs? i don‘t think we‘ve even got planning permission for the lorry parks, let alone what the new customs officers that need to be trained on the border. of course i understand the public are fed up and exasperated. they hold parliament in co nte m pt exasperated. they hold parliament in contempt for the chaos. so why don‘t we just leave? the trouble
contempt for the chaos. so why don‘t wejust leave? the trouble is, it‘s the duty of government and parliament to live in the real world and there are hundreds of complex questions you have to answer. we are reversing 50 yea rs questions you have to answer. we are reversing 50 years and abandoning all our previous legal, trading, security and defence arrangements with europe and the rest of the world, and i‘m afraid parliament has to a nswer world, and i‘m afraid parliament has to answer a lot of detailed questions. let‘s just leave?! i understand that, but actually that‘s not the real world and people in government can‘t do that. let‘s speak to michael heseltine, a long—serving conservative minister who now sits in the house of lords. good morning. how fed up are you today? i'm not sure i am fed up. i think that the defeat yesterday opens a number of opportunities which could lead to a second
referendum and a reversal of the disastrous brexit decision. so i‘m not fed up. i think it‘s appalling and humiliating when british government is coming out of it in this manner, and i think they conducted a negotiation in the absence of the attorney general, who then point that out the next day, it‘s amateurish beyond belief. but to a nswer it‘s amateurish beyond belief. but to answer your main question, i think we made a step in the right direction yesterday. talk us through what would have to happen in order for you to get your second referendum. let's take today. i think it‘s probably assumed that the house of commons will reject the idea of no deal. that‘s a very important step, but then there has to be some sort of discussion following thursday‘s vote about a change to the timetables, and i think that will need to negotiations
with the european people. they will ask for a reason. it‘s difficult to know what the true reason is accept we are in chaos and don‘t know what to do, which isn‘t a very persuasive reason, but they all know it‘s the real reason. i think time is necessary. i don‘t think a short period does anything, and nothing will happen in a short period, so i think you need a longer period and you have to give some reason they can accept. i presume it will be something about the renegotiation or new deals or whatever it will be. but the longer it goes on, the better the chances that the story will go back to the people because this place here is hopelessly divided. actually, democratically, it reflects what is happening in the country, because the country is deeply divided as well. the job of parliament in a sense is to represent the country and its doing it in represent the country and its doing itina represent the country and its doing it in a chaotic way. we don't want to go back to the referendum result,
but more people voted to leave and there are more remain mps in there and that could be the issue. there are more remain mps in there and that could be the issuem could be. that is to be resolved perhaps by going back to the people. how would that help heal divisions? we can‘t go on talking about something that happened three years ago as though it is sacrosanct. a significant number of people have died, and they broadly are the brexiteers. a significant number of young people have come up to the register who are broadly remainers. we have no idea what will happen, the realities of the brexit phenomenon, if they were put back to the people. to redo this text from karen who says, if we have a general election or second referendum and parliament don‘t like the result, will we have a third orfourth? where does it stop? i voted to remain and! where does it stop? i voted to remain and i think leaving is going to be awful, but i respect that the uk voted to leave and leave we should. it's very interesting but it
doesn‘t tell you anything. what sort of deal do we have to leave? when it comes to the deals, and this involves looking over the edge of a cliff and some of the awful consequences, this place can‘t agree. so how do we know that if this place can‘t agree that the country can agree until we find out? some more messages. it‘s been an utter farce from start to finish, that‘s from twitter. and we are nowhere near the finish. the best option is to commit to no deal. pull our socks up and work together to prove that this eu organisation and the other 26 member states that we can survive and flourish on our own. john says that a no deal hard border across northern ireland will be a call to arms for the ira. take the deal. joanne tweets, all mps need to stop thinking about their own agenda and own career progression and start
thinking about the british public. work together with theresa may to thrash out a suitable deal instead of acting like kids and saying no to everything put before them. idiots! that‘s from joanne on twitter. she‘s not calling you an idiot but she is frustrated you didn‘t vote for that deal which would have taken us out on march 29 with a transition period in an orderly way. there there is no doubt. i haven‘t introduced you! everyone knows who i am! andrew bridgen, conservative mp from the group of conservative backbench mps who call themselves the european research group. i apologise, you would like a hard and clean brexit and you are happy to leave on march 29 with no deal. but to respond to joanne. it would have been very easy and politically expedient for us last night to vote with the government, vote through theresa may‘s deal. but in her own words, nothing had changed. the legal
advice was we could still end up stuck in a backstop. the problem with the withdrawal agreement, i told the prime minister back injuly that the checkers proposals were not a cce pta ble that the checkers proposals were not acceptable in terms of delivering brexit we had promised to the british people or the best outcome for our country. —— the chequers proposals. that was never going to get through the house of commons and would have been a hotel california brexit where we would have checked out but never left. there is a possibility that brexit will be delayed for three months, nine months, two years? some people are talking about that. what if theresa may comes back and says, you can have a two—year delay or a third meaningful vote. how would you vote then? today we will have votes on whether we leave with no deal. to be clear to your viewers, any mp who votes to take no deal off the table, what they really want to do is stop brexit, but they don‘t have the guts
to come out and say that honestly because they know the vast majority of our constituencies voted to leave. that is the truth. or they are absolutely petrified about the prospect of leaving with no deal and the damage they feel it would do to their constituents. wto is the way we will trade with most of the world and do already. it‘s not about no deal. leaving on wto. it‘s the way we trade with most of the world. our exports are growing twice as fast under wto rules than they are to the european union. we could leave under wto. we could leave under gat 24, the general agreement on tariffs and trades article 24. or we agree a super canada free trade agreement. how worried are you you might have lost brexit, on a scale of one to ten, ten being very worried and one
not worried at all. it's a consideration. the withdrawal agreement we were offered is not brexit. how worried are you have lost brexit? i have not lost brexit. icampaigned to lost brexit? i have not lost brexit. i campaigned to leave. the problem is, only 150 mps out of 650 actually believe in the project and want to leave the european union. the other 500 might say they accept the result but we will see that they don‘t today. the country will be absolutely devastated as far as democracy is concerned if mps take no deal off the table tonight and betray brexit. anyone who has negotiated anything knows that. that is likely to happen, so how will you get brexit? i think the prime minister has to take a lot of responsibility for that withdrawal agreement. she has been told repeatedly it will not go through. how will you get brexit? the prime minister needs to consider her position. you want the prime
minister to resign? we need a prime minister to resign? we need a prime minister that believes in and delivers brexit. we need a general election. i think if the british people speak, and these are all recorded votes tonight, so every mp who votes tonight to stop brexit, and bearing in mind we spent... it's to ta ke and bearing in mind we spent... it's to take no deal off the table. there is no more negotiation. the deal has already been rejected. theresa may‘s deal has been rejected wholeheartedly so if we take no deal off the table that means we have to have an extension. what will the eu holders two and charged us for that extension? anything they want. this is not a negotiating position. these people don‘t want us to leave the eu and they don‘t have the guts to say. it will be recorded votes and they will be held to account by their constituents. it is recorded that you voted against it last night. constituents. it is recorded that you voted against it last nightm wouldn‘t have got us out. we would have had four years of transition and then going into the backstop.
not if you had a free trade deal associated then. the eu will never give us one. we‘ve handed over all the money. there is no incentive for the money. there is no incentive for the eu to give us a free trade deal so we can trade with the rest of the world a re so we can trade with the rest of the world are not trade with them. they will trap us in the backstop and the only way out of that would mean a customs union which again means no free trade deals with the rest of the world. again you are not in control of what happens. ultimately, we are all answerable for what we say the positions we take and the votes we make in that place on behalf of our electorate and i can‘t wait to see the names that go on that list who will be held to account by the vast majority of constituencies in our country who voted to leave the european union. andrew bridgen, thank you, conservative mp. heather says my sister was not old enough to vote on brexit a few years ago. she is 18 and ready to have her say, as are her entire generation. these now 18—year—olds deserve to have their say, whether they choose to remain or leave, it‘s they who haven‘t had
a voice in this, but will and are being affected. we need a second referendum. joe on twitter says that our main parliament will get its way and the politicians will be revealed who do not respect our democracy and rights. a general election is needed so people can take back control from this remain parliament. the snp‘s economic spokesperson, kirsty blackman. you have felt scotland was being forced out of the eu against its will. you voted against the prime minister‘s deal last night. why is that? for a start, in terms of what scotland voted for, which was overwhelmingly leave to remain in the eu, which is what i‘m trying to get for the people of scotland. the prime minister‘s deal is a bad one. even the chancellor admitted that any brexit is a bad brexit in that any brexit is a bad brexit in that our economy will be smaller as a result. if the prime minister was a result. if the prime minister was a deal had gone through we would have lost jobs, reduce a deal had gone through we would
have lostjobs, reduce living standards, and importantly, freedom of movement would have been cancelled, which has been a great thing for people here, who can live and work in other countries and those from other countries who can live and work in places like scotland. i want no deal to be taken off the table today because it‘s even worse than the prime minister‘s deal. then i want parliament to vote foran deal. then i want parliament to vote for an extension and i would like that to happen so we can have a people‘s vote, a second eu referendum so we can ask people, do you want the prime minister‘s deal or remaining in the eu? why would a second referendum help anything? when people voted in 2016, theresa may was not even prime minister. 2019 was not the date in peoples minds and nobody had any idea that this was the deal the prime minister would strike. nobody had any idea that she would put cancelling free movement front and centre and cancelling single market membership. i think its wise people are presented with a choice and are given all the informed opinion and
evidence on this. there isn't a majority in parliament for a second referendum. we haven't tested that so we don‘t know. we could have a vote in parliament to test that and given what we have seen this week, things are a moving feast in parliament. the clarity we bring to this, and we have said all along, scotla nd this, and we have said all along, scotland should be an independent state within the eu. when is it scottish first minister and leader of your party nicola sturgeon going to ask the government again for assent for a second independence referendum? she said from the beginning that when the outcome of brexit becomes clear, she said a couple of weeks ago she would make an announcement within a few weeks on the next steps for scotland and it‘s absolutely right people in scotla nd it‘s absolutely right people in scotland have that choice rather than being dragged out of the eu against our will in a brexit that scottish mps have not voted for. thank you to kirsty blackman, the snp's thank you to kirsty blackman, the snp‘s economic spokesperson.
we can now hear from some british ex pats we can now hear from some british expats living in france. the sun has come out in this pretty little village in the dordogne, home to around 30 british residents, some of whom have congregated in the cafe behind me. they have been watching the votes in westminster this week really carefully to work out what will happen with their pensions, their residency rights and access to health care. two of them have joined me here this morning for top brenda henderson and liz price, who both live in the area. brenda, the deal theresa may put forward was going to guarantee most of your rights under those big areas of residency and pension and health care. now that has been rejected by mps, how are you feeling, what are you preparing for? do you trust the french government‘s contingency plans to protect you? certainly the french are making efforts to help us, but like everybody else they are very
confused. two years ago when brexit started being discussed, we felt the rug was pulled from under our feet all of a sudden and we had become a problem. now we feel the floor has been taken away from under our feet and left us with a pit. we really don't know the answer and the uncertainty continues. the fears and stress continues, particularly for those of us who need regular health ca re those of us who need regular health care and rely on our british pension. you have an ongoing health issue, that must be a concern for you?m is absolutely massive, anytime i try to do anything to find where i am up to do anything to find where i am up to commit it talks about when you are pensionable and at a pensionable age to find out if you are not able to work and if you have got serious health issues. where you stand. there is no information, the french have no information. i take regular
medication. i havejust seen have no information. i take regular medication. i have just seen a neurologist. i cannot afford to pay for my health care. and i have no idea how it will be done. so, 16 days away from the brexit date, what are you doing, are you preparing to leave ? are you doing, are you preparing to leave? what is your plan? at the moment, i have got the hell is going on the market. i am under offer. —— the house. i am 50—50. i am scared if my health changes again, i am not going to be able to get back to the uk if france decides to take away all the rights and the uk isn‘t offering. thank you, both, very much. a real range of opinion here amongst brits in france, some in com plete amongst brits in france, some in complete despair this deal has rejected and others tell me they are more helpful now, —— hopeful now, thinking this is the first step in overturning brexit. thank you. let‘s talk about the options theresa may
may or may not have. norman, let‘s talk through them for our audience. so, where are we now? well, the options mrs may has, assuming that we have the no—deal vote pasta day and assuming that parliament does vote for some sort of delay tomorrow, we are kind of, everything is on the table. it is possible that if there is a delay, mps will try to grab control of the whole process and they will try and hold a series of indicative votes. what are they you say? well, you would have the different options, a second referendum, some sort of customs union deal, world trade organisation terms, you name it, every option put on the table and mps will get to vote on all of them. and the option that got the lowest number would be knocked off and you would go through
it one by one until you are left with just one it one by one until you are left withjust one option. it one by one until you are left with just one option. that is one scenario that could enable you to get to some sort of broad agreement about what on earth mps wanted. the other option is that we have a delay ofa other option is that we have a delay of a couple of months, and nothing much changes, and wejust of a couple of months, and nothing much changes, and we just crash out without an agreement in two, three months‘ time. 0ption three is that mrs may reheats her deal and brings it back for another go. i know people will say, you are joking? it back for another go. i know people will say, you arejoking? she has suffered two cataclysmic defeat, how on earth could she bring it back ain? how on earth could she bring it back again? my view is that she still thinks that is the best way and the only way really to get any sort of agreement with the eu. more than that, any extension is going to be hugely problematic, very uncomfortable, it could go on for
months and months. mps won‘t want it and they will gravitate back to her deal. also, the eu is not going to offer anything else. 0ne deal. also, the eu is not going to offer anything else. one other interesting bit of information coming my way is the attorney he was absolutely key to blowing apart mrs may‘s deal yesterday, is, absolutely key to blowing apart mrs may‘s dealyesterday, is, i absolutely key to blowing apart mrs may‘s deal yesterday, is, i am told, coming up with some fresh advice —— the attorney general. this matters because his view that mrs may‘s revised deal didn‘t change the legal risk others remaining trapped in the backstop was absolutely critical. 0ne reading brexiteer texted me to say a point which hasn‘t come up but which is vital is the effect of the opinion of the attorney general yesterday, it was enormous. so if he changes his view, it might be easier for brexiteers to get back on board mrs may‘s deal and she might think, give it a third go, that she could
get it through. ok, thank you very much. henry newman was an advisor to michael gove, the environment secretary, what do you think of that? the attorney general is to come up with some fresh advice and potentially change his opinion, which might mean more conservative brexiteers could vote for this deal and mrs may would bring it back for and mrs may would bring it back for a third time. i work for a think tank and! a third time. i work for a think tank and i don‘t speak for michael. no, in the past. the attorney has given clear advice yesterday, but a huge amount of attention focused on one sentence, which was that was a particular risk that if neither side could find a solution, that we could be trapped in the backstop, but he also said the idea we had heard previously that was suggested by emmanuel macron, just because the french suggested it, they could hold us in the backs up even if we came
up us in the backs up even if we came up with sensible proposals and use that leveraged to take more of our fish and put pressure on gibraltar or to give us bad terms on a trade deal, that has been ruled out. i don‘t think the attorney needs to change his/her advice, just clarify it. mps had almost no time yesterday to consider his advice after it was published. there was a huge rush to the vote. more time to look at what the attorney said yesterday could be very sensible. do you think that is a realistic outcome? i think the deal coming back at their time, absolutely. there are only three overall choices. we leave it out a deal, parliament will do whatever it ta kes to deal, parliament will do whatever it takes to block that. even those proposing it think it would be very difficult and they need to remember there is no majority for that in the commons so how would you pass the legislation needed to pass no—deal? can‘t see it happening. stopping brexit. we have lots of protesters around just to spite the noise, there is no majority for that in the commons and no massive swing for that in the country so i don‘t see
that in the country so i don‘t see that happening. so we‘re talking about a version of a negotiated deal and there is only one version, that is the prime minister‘s deal, you can is the prime minister‘s deal, you ca n twea k is the prime minister‘s deal, you can tweak it and make changes but they are minor so the chances of this coming back are very high. and that would be enough, if geoffrey cox clarifies his legal advice from yesterday, you think that would be enough to get this over the line? we have already seen changes within the eurosceptic camp of the conservative party. former brexit secretary david davis who resigned of a check is, he backed the deal. nadeem darius. you would need 70 odd conservative to change. not necessarily conservative. the dup are concerned that northern ireland could be against their will put in an different regulatory zone to the rest of the uk, can we give assurances on that, perhaps, that is crucial? can the prime minister dissuade a few others to back her deal and others could come across if
this is a free vote. mps are voting irrespective of what the party whip tells them to do. in the 1970s when we first went into the eu, we had a free vote, i think that is very likely. when could this third meaningful vote be? likely. when could this third meaningfulvote be? shortly after votes today and tomorrow where no—deal is taken off the table, there is an argument for bringing it back then or after the european council towards the end of next week when we see what the terms are that the eu will give us for an extension of article 50 because they might be a very long extension and lack that very unattractive and mps may decide that this deal is the least worst option even if they don‘t love it. we could have a third vote six or seven days before the uk is due to leave the eu? absolutely, none of this is ideal. many mps on both sides of the house voted for article 50, 80% triggered article 50, they are not living up to their responsibilities because they are saying they don‘t want no—deal or a second referendum but they don‘t like this deal. i am sorry, this is
the deal. it is unbelievable but the amount of misunderstanding over what is on the table. i listened to senior backbenchers in the house of commons yesterday like borisjohnson giving a vision of this deal which does not meet the reality of what has been agreed. if people step back and look at this deal even in a worst—case scenario, it allows the uk to control most of its economy. we could turn off the tap of all new eu regulations can take control of migration and end financial contributions, it is a good deal. it is not perfect but it does deserve the support of mps. thank you very much. jeff is determined to leave it no deal even though his factory has had to start stockpiling and carrying is here from solihull, she has had to
halt production on her pushchair product until she has certainty over what will happen on brexit, and when might that be, karen? well, it still hangs in the air, really. i don‘t know. there is no point in me going in production until i do know what is happening. it is still up in the air, i don‘t know what i can do. is happening. it is still up in the air, i don't know what i can do. and how are you feeling today after that vote last night? i feelthere is how are you feeling today after that vote last night? i feel there is a sense of people saying, don‘t panic, but everybody is panicking. how do you respond, jeff? this folks that happen yesterday, the government lost the vote because notjust the backstop, but the government lost the vote because not just the backstop, but these articles in her withdrawal agreement. let's not do that, how are you feeling today, after that vote today, how are you feeling today, what you want to happen next? well, i think they are trying to kill brexit, i think they are trying
to kill it now before the 29th. but ido to kill it now before the 29th. but i do think she is trying to get another vote through at the last minute. to force it through. because everyone is panicking now because we have got no time. she doesn't want to come out with no deal. like most of the people in the country, but they have been saying we want, no—deal. they have been saying we want, no-deal. i don't think most people have, khloe, what do you want to happen next? the ideal situation is we vote in favour of leaving with no deal tonight but realistically, i don't think that is going to happen. i think we will probably end up voting in favour of an extension and i say that because we have a remain parliament and people will want to extend it for the opportunity of a second referendum or to get a soft brexit deal because most of them are
in favour of staying close with the eu. what i would like is, i think it isa eu. what i would like is, i think it is a risky option, voting against the deal yesterday, because then there is the potential for a softer brexit which i would prefer. but i think every option is risky at the moment and i would rather not have the deal that was put forward last night. to really push forward for something to either leave with their no—deal because we don't know how binding the votes will be over the next couple of days, or to negotiate something like the malthouse compromise if we had an extension. karen, do you think you could have done a betterjob than politicians? well, i do think they have rushed into it and ijust think well, i do think they have rushed into it and i just think with any kind of negotiation, you have to ta ke kind of negotiation, you have to take your time kind of negotiation, you have to take yourtime and kind of negotiation, you have to take your time and think about it andi take your time and think about it and i don‘t think anybody has. and now they are just trying to mop up a huge mess they have created. they have had two years! yes, but i don't think that was long enough. for what
they have had to sort out, i don‘t think two years was long enough. i don‘t think that they realised just how much they would have to sort out. because people don‘t know what is going on. i think it is shocking that two years down the line, i cannot launch a brand—new product onto the market. because my manufacturing issues. iwant onto the market. because my manufacturing issues. i want to take it away overseas, i want to keep it within europe, where i can keep an eye on it, monitor my manufacturing processes and bring it over to the uk. i don‘t want it all over in hong kong, china, vietnam, wherever. i wa nted kong, china, vietnam, wherever. i wanted to produce a product which was as close to the uk as possible. jeff, you possibly head on the programme a few moments ago this possibility of the attorney general, the government‘s top lawyer geoffrey cox, clarifying his legal advice
from yesterday, which might then read to theresa may bringing back a dealfor a third time, what do read to theresa may bringing back a deal for a third time, what do you think of that? well, i think it is all snake oil, myself. i really do. we have looked at the documents, i have looked at the articles and read them through and it is not leaving, it isa them through and it is not leaving, it is a transitional period which could lead up to... it could be 2099, stuck in their regulations on ecj laws. there is no end to it. ok, thank you, all of you. let‘s hear from some mps now about what they want to happen next. vicky ford is a conservative mp, who voted for the prime ministers deal for a second time last night. labour mp rushanara ali wants to delay the brexit process
and feels that the pm has not reached out to other parties. if it was brought back of third time, you would vote for it? would you vote for it? no, i wouldn't. time, you would vote for it? would you vote for it? no, iwouldn't. no. that is what we are hearing from norman smith, who is suggesting that geoffrey cox, the attorney general, could clarify his legal advice. you have scoffed at that, why, philip lee? he is being watched by his entirely profession and yesterday, he performed remarkably well considering the circumstances. the labour face won‘t change because the withdrawal agreement isn‘t going to change, it is no more complicated than that. the suggestion is he going to clarify what he said yesterday, it was a rush and people bats did not have time to understand fully what he was suggesting. bats did not have time to understand fully what he was suggestingm bats did not have time to understand fully what he was suggesting. it is all about the assessment of the risk, they will always be risk. u nless risk, they will always be risk. unless the backstop is removed, the risk of us being tied to the backstop remains. yet former brexit
secretary and brexiteer david davis voted for it last night. that is david‘s choice, i don‘t see why anybody change their mind yesterday from where they were on the first fight. there has been no change to the legal risk and the final paragraph of geoffrey because my advice yesterday remains the same whatever. ken clarke said earlier it is an utter shambles, would you agree? on that issue of geoffrey's advice... clearly, it is unprecedented. is it a shambles? no, before the referendum, i predicted the challenges. the shambles? the challenge of trying to agree a relationship with 27 other countries. we are laughing because that protester said, brexit is not going well, is it? we are where we are and that is an annoying phrase, but we are. if the attorney general
can clarify the situation, such that, especially the northern ireland dup mps are happy to vote for the withdrawal agreement, that would bring a lot of people back to support it. it is clearly better to leave with a deal and without a deal. rushanara ali. this is utterly shocking, it is a shambles. it is exasperating that theresa may doesn't seem to pay any attention to the defeats, there is a second big defeat against a deal, what does she think she is going to achieve by having another vote ? think she is going to achieve by having another vote? she think she will get it across the line. she will get it across the line. she will carry on running down the clock. she has lost control which is why there is a free vote today to rule out no—deal and i will certainly support really gets no—deal, there is an amendment being made by caroline spelman and jack dromey, i hope that get selected. and tomorrow, the opportunity to extend article 50 for a short period
of time is going to be voted on and i hope that happens, so we can move forward. what is happening at the moment, she is stuck, she is fixated and driving parliamentarians nuts and driving parliamentarians nuts and the country crazy with this uncertainty. their livelihoods are at risk. i suspect if she brought it again, the number will get narrower. but it won‘t pass. when your strategy has been proven to be a failure, you change it. and i am waiting for downing street to change its strategy. well, that has not happened so far, is there any evidence to suggest it will do?m she said, i will put my deal to the country, i would vote for it. as would a majority of the house. it would a majority of the house. it would pass today if she did that. i do not understand why, when it is self—evident that there is no majority for anything at westminster, why ten downing street doesn‘t make that decision today, it is in the best interests of the
country and we can get beyond this impasse which i‘m sure your viewers think is an absolute disgrace.” think is an absolute disgrace.” think there has been a significant change of strategy because we are voting on a motion today giving the mps the option to take the no—deal exit at the end of the month off the table and the prime minister has been very clear she thinks it would been very clear she thinks it would be better to give us that option. and then, because it is important to know what we would like to see then, i think it would be sensible to consider putting what they call these indicative votes to the house to see where we can reach. a series of votes with all the options. to see what gets knocked out. and that isi see what gets knocked out. and that is i suspect where this will end up. would that be sensible, yes or no question if you compare apples with apples, fine. i am advocating a process change, not the type of knife —— brexit. you can‘t compare norway with canada with the government‘s deal and put on the end
the people‘s vote, that is not the same thing. if you say, gee what a general election or referendum to solve this problem, i would be interested to see what that result would be because i suspect a majority for a referendum. ok, i will leave it there, thank you. we now have guests backing up! and it is bbc news at 11 o‘clock. sarah says, it is an absolute shambles and it has been for a long time and todayis it has been for a long time and today is a scary day for the uk. whether it is a bad deal or no—deal, it is downhill, says sarah. the only way to resolve this mess is to revoke article 50 or have a people‘s vote, it is a total puppet show! this message says, what will happen is that brexit will now be reversed. by is that brexit will now be reversed. by removing no—deal, then a second referendum. steve twitter says, can we just flip referendum. steve twitter says, can wejust flip a referendum. steve twitter says, can we just flip a coin, at least it would be quick and decisive! goran
says, i voted leave but the price of living in a democracy is to compromise. there will be restrictions on movement of people and we will have to increase regulation of financial services, but with the customs union, we do exit partially. let‘s talk now to a former labour mp, angela smith, who is now part of the newly formed independent group. also with us is liberal democrat mp layla moran and green party mp caroline lucas. good morning. what you want to happen, caroline lucas? i want there to be an extension to article 50 so we can have space for a people‘s vote. it is perfectly clear that parliament doesn‘t have a majority behind any other way forward, so given so much has changed since the referendum in 2016, it is right that we go back to the people and let them have their say. i am sympathetic to the kyle wilson proposal, so you go straightaway into making the result of that referendum going to law so
you don‘t have the argument of you might wanta you don‘t have the argument of you might want a third or fourth referendum, get it into law and put it forward. i will get back to the ballot paper in a moment, what you wa nt to ballot paper in a moment, what you want to happen next?” ballot paper in a moment, what you want to happen next? i think caroline is right, but there is no evidence as we are talking now that the labour party will table any amendment and there is no amendment from either peter demo i am afraid what we are looking at is a dismal failure of leadership from the main political parties here and that is the root of the impasse we have now. i think we do need to vote no—deal down today, i think we need to make that binding on the government. and we do need an extension of article 50, attached to the principle of the people's vote. but to do what, an extension to do what? to put theresa may's deal to the people. my point is that it stands —— it doesn't look like the labour party will progress that as it stands and that worries
mea that as it stands and that worries me a lot. we have to take it day by day, i think we will make sure no—deal doesn't happen today and if we don't extend article 50 tomorrow, we don't extend article 50 tomorrow, we are back to square one. that is likely to happen? well, let's see. and it depends what is going, what type of extension. i think an extension is absolutely critical because the keeping right now is to make sure that we career off the cliff edge on march 29th, that would be horrific for businesses. then we have to look at, what next? there is no longer time for unicorn deals and canada plus and norway, whatever it might be. we have a deal that is not perfect, parliament doesn't make it, but if she wants to keep it alive, the best thing theresa may has in her arsenal is to put it in a ratification referendum to the people so they can choose if they wa nt people so they can choose if they want it or stay in the eu. we do not have a lot of time, what would be on your ballot paper in a second referendum? what needs to be on the ballot paper are real known quantities, not more unicorns. the only real things out there right now
i think theresa may‘s deal and remain. a leaf with no deal. you could have a two state ballot if you wanted, i think that is dangerous andi wanted, i think that is dangerous and i would not be in favour. that is no clear because is no—deal immediately into wto? we don't know, we have just seen what that looks like. we still don't know what that no—deal looks like. we have two known quantities, the deal we already have at the eu and the one theresa may has come back with. already have at the eu and the one theresa may has come back withm is likely it would be theresa may's deal versus remain, being the status quo. whatever is agreed by parliament, no—deal or any deal, quo. whatever is agreed by parliament, no—deal orany deal, it should be put back to the people. i do agree theresa may's deal is the most likely option. ok. ithink do agree theresa may's deal is the most likely option. ok. i think that has to be it. it is nearly 11 o‘clock. thank you so much. we will see what happens.
let‘s speak to anand menon, director of uk in a changing europe, and professor of european politics and foreign affairs at king s college london. but he gets his microphone on, i will read my messages, so many today! this says, we are witnessing elaborate choreography leading to remaining in the eu. the only way in which brexit is ever going to happen was if it had been led by leavers. buy is conscious or unconscious has floored this process. i‘m glad to remain, but what a shambles! good morning. we haven‘t got loads of time, what you think is going to happen? i think at the moment, it looks like we will get a short extension from the eu, they said we could have until may the 23rd, and i would not be surprised if the prime minister did not come back with meaningful vote three because parliament has few options at the moment. the attorney general might clarify the legal advice from yesterday, a third meaningful vote, maybe six, seven days before march
29th, is that possible? yes. will she get it over the line? i don‘t know, to be honest, but i think she will get closer for the simple reason parliament yesterday had the luxury of knowing that this wasn‘t the 11th hour. by the time we have had one extension and parliament has to vote one more time on this and the eu has said this is the only extension you can have, then there really, they are really looking at a last chance saloon. either we vote for this or we don‘t know what is happening. brexiteers will fear a push for a referendum and crashing out with no deal would be a fear for the remainers. will this country meet the eu at this point? it is impossible to say with any certainty. if you force me to guess, i would say probably yes. probably yes, that will do, thank you, sorry we cannot have more time! thank you so much. this says, leaving with no deal is not a sensible way forward, we need to ask the eu for extension
or revoke article 50. and stephen an e—mail says, the people‘s case has been betrayed, get a year—long extension? remove mrs may from her post and renegotiate a hard brexit. mrs may‘s lack ofjudgment has been flabbergasted. thank you for so many messages. continuing coverage from westminster next, have a good day. we saw blustery conditions in westminster and storm gareth is giving us quite windy conditions across the uk. this is the satellite imagery from storm gareth, the swell of clouds moving east and towards denmark. things improving weather
ways a cross denmark. things improving weather ways across the uk after heavy rain of yesterday. a mixture of sunny spells and showers this afternoon. especially because scotland, north—western areas of england. some of their shell is working towards the south east. maximum temperatures of ten, 13 degrees. winds continue to bea of ten, 13 degrees. winds continue to be a feature today, up to around 40 to 55 mph across many areas, but they will slowly ease off later this afternoon. this evening, we keep clear skies and eastern parts but cloud and rain spreads into the far north west. during thursday, that rain clears away to the south. behind it, a mixture of sunny spells and showers through thursday afternoon. goodbye for now.
it‘s 11:00am and these are the main stories this morning: the government says it would slash taxes on a range of imports from outside the eu if there was a no—deal brexit and there‘d be no new checks across the irish border. the eyes to the right, 242. the nose to the left, 391. after the prime minister‘s deal was overwhelmingly rejected, mps will vote this evening on whether to leave the eu without a deal on the 29th of march. i know what i think which is that leaving without the deal would be very bad for our economy and our security. i hope parliament will vote not to take the no deal off the table. it's crazy to