eu itﬁi‘it eu if‘ai‘ii mug eu that they are the eu that they are supposedly going to negotiate after this withdrawal agreement? have they ruled out a long—term customs union, yes or no? can i say to the right honourable lady, she referenced what happened to greybull capital's british steel. she will be aware there is a number of challenges facing the steel industry, notjust the uk but globally. supply is outstripping demand and a lot of the excess outstripping demand and a lot of the excess production is coming from china and that is why in the g 23 yea rs china and that is why in the g 23 years ago, we acted to bring china around the table to try and deal with the issue. she asks about the long term, the compromise solution i put forward and referenced in my statement is designed to ensure a future government can take that issue in the direction it wishes to ta ke issue in the direction it wishes to take it and for the house to
determine what those negotiating objectives should be. what matters to our manufacturing industry is the frictions that take place at the border and having the benefits of the customs union and no tariffs and no quotas. that is what is in the political declaration, the benefits of the customs union. we are committed to ensuring that trade is as frictionless as possible. it is quite difficult to make any judgments about a bill when it hasn't been published. if there were issues, the announcement shouldn't have been made this week. next week, the house is in recess, but it is not needed given the seriousness of the situation. i will probably vote for the bill when it comes back, but cani for the bill when it comes back, but can i ask the prime minister to reflect carefully on whether it should be put to parliament? the consequences of it not being passed are very serious and if she really wa nts to are very serious and if she really wants to heal the divisions and get on with it, i would ask her to
reflect very seriously about this bill not been put to parliament in earlyjune and allow more compromise, more time being taken? canl compromise, more time being taken? can i say to my right honourable friend, she is right that if the bill is not passed, then this house will be faced with a very stark choice and that choice will be whether they go for no deal over whether they go for no deal over whether they go for no deal over whether they go for something which is either invoking article 50 or a second referendum, which many have been asking for a second referendum to stop brexit. that will be the choice that will face this house. people talk about the compromises made so far, people are telling me i have compromise too much in the package being put forward and others are telling me i haven't compromised enoughin are telling me i haven't compromised enough in the package being put forward. at some stage the house has to come together and we have to decide the distance we will go together in order to deliver brexit
and deliver on what people asked us to do. mr speaker, the prime minister has referred a lot in this statement and yesterday to the new deal, the new brexit deal. but isn't ita deal, the new brexit deal. but isn't it a fact the deal itself hasn't changed, the treaty is still as it is and these are a series of domestic legislative provisions to try to mitigate what is, in some cases, a very bad deal. they wouldn't actually change the brexit deal itself. to illustrate that, the alternative arrangements proposal which he has put forward seeks merely to legally oblige the government to conclude its own processes . government to conclude its own processes. but would she confirm there is absolutely no obligation on there is absolutely no obligation on the european union to a great alternative arrangements and indeed the final decision as to whether they accept them or view them as reasonable, is entirely a matter for
them. it wouldn't even be a member of objective assessment. there will be no means of getting out of a customs union. we have put forward to the house today, a package of proposals. it is a new package of proposals. it is a new package of proposals. the right honourable gentleman has been clear in relation to the operation of the backstop, one of the concerns is making it uk wide and the commitment is there. we are happy to sit down and discuss how we can ensure these are enshrined in law, which i know it has always been an issue of concern to the right honourable gentleman. with regard to the alternative arrangements, the groups to do that work being set up by government, the money being afforded by government to do that work. but the european union were clear, they have committed themselves in the legally binding commitments being made at recent council meetings, they will work with us to make sure those
alternative arrangements are in place and available by december 2020. have the european union agreed to any changes to the withdrawal agreement, which are legally binding in international law? i have said to my right honourable friend and others are many occasions, the eu council have made it clear they are not reopening the withdrawal agreement. we have done in the processes we have ta ken agreement. we have done in the processes we have taken through the house up until now and the most recent discussions with the european union, is being able to have certain legally binding commitments made by the uk and the european union, in addition to the text of the withdrawal agreement which covers a number of issues which have been of concern to people in this house. does the prime minister understands she will not get enough support from members on this side of the house to allow her withdrawal agreement to pass unless she includes a
confirmatory vote on the face of the bill? she has come to the end of the road, but if she and indeed any conservative mp, who wants to stop the prime minister's success from inevitably pursuing a no—deal brexit, they must back, giving the public the final say. time is running out, prime minister, please change your mind. this is an issue on which, as i say, very strong feelings across the house. i have met with members from all side of the house which support a second referendum and have put forward their case with their sincere belief with their second referendum. i do believe we should be delivering on the first referendum, but because of the first referendum, but because of the strength of the views across this house on both sides of the argument, it is important the house has the opportunity to properly consider it in a way that is appropriate and that is through the withdrawal agreement bill. one of
the ironies of resigning from government is it gives you rather more freedom and emphasis when you choose to support the government, rather than just oppose it. choose to support the government, rather thanjust oppose it. i choose to support the government, rather than just oppose it. i will be supporting the prime minister's bill. can i thank herfor her effo rts bill. can i thank herfor her efforts and ask her to recognise there are still many people in the country who believe the best future for the uk outside the eu is with the compromise deal, based on the interests of both, rather than a reckless and increasingly bitter pursuit of a single type of no deal leaving, at the cost to many businesses, industry, agriculture and a cost to the country. so expertly skewered by the chancellor in his speech yesterday. can i say to my right honourable friend, i do agree with him there are many people across this country who want to see us across this country who want to see us leaving the eu in an orderly way and with a deal. that was the
ma nifesto and with a deal. that was the manifesto and which he and i and those of us who sit here as conservatives, stood at the last election. we stood to deliver the best dealfor britain election. we stood to deliver the best deal for britain as we leave the eu, delivered by a smooth, orderly brexit with a deep and special partnership including a comprehensive free trade and customs agreement with the european union. those are the objectives i have been pursuing. i put forward today a new package that does change the situation that has been voted on previously and i hope all those who wa nt to previously and i hope all those who want to leave the european union with the deal will indeed support it. in 1992 the prime minister and with the deal will indeed support it. in 1992 the prime ministerand i told the working men ‘s clubs of north west durham. i was hugely impressed with her resilience in front of audiences that were as hostile to her as they were indifferent to me. but it turns out the audience behind her is tougher still. she will fail in her bid in
two weeks, because people behind her who are four brexit refused to vote for brexit. it isn't her fault but it is her problem. so i want to help her out. if she will agree to put her out. if she will agree to put her deal, which to be fair to her, is the only concrete version of brexit we have seen, to the british people in a vote, i willjoin her in the lobby. will she help me, to help her? can i say to the right honourable gentleman, i fondly remember those days in 1992 in north west durham, but can i also say to him,| west durham, but can i also say to him, ithink west durham, but can i also say to him, i think if this house does not pass the withdrawal agreement bill, if this house does not enable the treaty to be ratified, what this house is saying it does not want to leave the european union with a deal. i believe the majority of people in this house want to lead with a deal, this is the vehicle to do it. may i correct my right
honourable friend on two points. she said it was up to the house to decide about a customs union and a second referendum. it is not up to mps to decide that. the country decided to leave the eu. it is as simple as that. it is not for the house. the second point, when responding to my right honourable friend from wokingham, she said we couldn't have left the eu on the 29th of march. the legal position was, that we could. but that she, dare i say, a very heavily remain cabinet decided not to take us out. cani cabinet decided not to take us out. can i say that i and my colleagues across government decided to leave the european union on the 29th of march. we continue to believe the best way to leave is with a deal. that is the manifesto we stood on
the last general election and it is important we recognise that and deliver that for the british people. the point that he makes about whether it is for the house to decide, the british people voted to leave. i have been trying to leave the european union. i am looking forward to voting a fourth time to leave the european union in a withdrawal agreement bill. sadly, opposition members and some of my collea g u es opposition members and some of my colleagues have not voted alongside me in that way. but how we do that, how we do that is a matter for this house, because the deal has to be ratified by this house. government and this house have to determine what the objectives for the next stage of negotiations are going to be. i have been clear those negotiations will be taken forward by somebody else leading this government. what i am also clear about, you cannot get onto the second stage of negotiations until you get over the first stage. that is what the bill is about. the prime
minister in her statement referred rightly to the need to avoid the risks that are inherent in the brexit process. but doesn't she realise that her latest proposal actually hard—wire those risks into the process themselves? is the right honourable gentleman talking about the matters on which there is significant division, namely customs and a second referendum and taking those threw in the withdrawal agreement bill? the government is committing to ensure those issues can be addressed during the passing of the bill. the reality is the way legislation in this house, any bill brought before the house people put amendments. amendments could be seen on the whole range of issues, including those issues. the key issue is, what is determined by this housein issue is, what is determined by this house in response to those issues? this house will have to come to a
decision. on the basis of the negotiations thus far, what arrangements alternative to the irish backstop does my right honourable friend consider our most capable of agreement? the number of proposals put before the european union, which have a number of elements in them bringing together both technological approaches, some of which can be, i think improved, as we see technology improving but the key issues that had been in debate and discussion so far all those around elements of the derogation from eu law, which would be necessary in order to enable the alternative arrangements to provide for the no ha rdboa rd alternative arrangements to provide for the no hardboard in the way both sides intend it to do. with respect, the prime minister is asking us to put our faith the prime minister is asking us to put ourfaith in her deal, as
frankly authority is slipping from her grasp with every passing hour. the tories have had three years to agree a deal among themselves, including weeks of full on collaboration with labour but there is no guarantee she will be in place to bring this bill back next month. so how can we believe there is any guarantee of a peoples' vote when she cannot even bring herself to put it on the face of a bill? she and i have a different view on the issue ofa have a different view on the issue of a second random. what i'm saying is is an issue that we can ensure this house is able to determine. the right honourable lady wants to ensure there is a peoples' vote but it will be for the house to decide. it has already been rejected by this house, but it will be for the house to come to a decision on that issue and for the house to accept that issue. we cannot continue to leave our country in this uncertainty.
this has to stop. the whole house needs to stop saying no to everything on the table just because it is not our favourite dish. the eu negotiations, they need to stop saying no to every time we have an issue as well. but we have to end this uncertainty. if we vote for this uncertainty. if we vote for this bill, we can't move on and the discussions on the next stage can start. but prime minister, what happens if we say no again? my honourable friend is right, we do need to be able to move on and we can move on while restricting the wish of the british people by taking this bill through making sure we ratify and leave the european union. if this house chooses not to take this bill forward, it is facing itself with the choice as to whether itself with the choice as to whether it wants no deal no brexit. that is
the choice that will be available to people in this house. i believe, i still believe there is a majority in this house that want to deliver on a referendum result, but to do so with a deal. this is the bill that allows that to happen. it is clear the house is going to reject the prime minister's dealfor a house is going to reject the prime minister's deal for a fourth time and she has indicated she will set out a timetable for her departure. she has also said there is no mandate to leave without a deal, or indeed the country. with regard to that timetable, if it is the case are changing prime minister occurs nearing the end of october, leaving her successor no time to negotiate a further extension, will she herself request a further extension before the september recess to stop us leaving with no deal? the honourable gentleman knows my answer to that, if he really wants to ensure that if we don't need the european union without a deal, the best way is to agree a deal and that is the bill.
the saddest irene, those of my collea g u es the saddest irene, those of my colleagues who most want to leave the european union have so far frustrated us from doing so by voting with labour and the scottish nationalists. the prime minister is right to highlight the dangers are parliament not supporting their withdrawal bill. does she agree with me that the superficially seductive line from the brexit party, just leave on wto terms holds enormous dangers, above all for our farmers and manufacturers and that this line would in fact cause the break—up of the united kingdom? can i say to my honourable friend, he's absolutely right, particularly in the point he makes about the dangers of a no—deal brexit for the future of the united kingdom and that is a key concern i have in relation to that issue. it
is also surprising to see some of those, who at the time of the referendum and at the time of encouraging people to leave were talking about leaving with a deal, being like norway and accepting the restraints on the abilities of the united kingdom, now not willing to accept a good dealfor the uk which enables us to ensure that we can leave with a deal that is good for the future of the uk. when people come to vote at the european elections tomorrow, they have an opportunity to vote for a party that not only believes in delivering brexit and can do it, and that is the conservatives. the prime minister has said this ten point offer was framed after listening to the devolved administrations. but there is nothing in it to address there is nothing in it to address the concerns expressed by scotland's government, the cross—party majority in scotland's parliament and the majority of scottish members are elected to this house. now that her
days of sneering at the democratically elected representatives of voters in scotla nd representatives of voters in scotland are nearly at an end, did she concede her successor will need a more intelligent approach to scotla nd a more intelligent approach to scotland than she has felt able to adopt? may i say to the honourable lady, we have consistently engaged with the scottish government, we have consistently engaged with the welsh government throughout these discussions and negotiations we've had in relation to our future discussions and negotiations we've had in relation to ourfuture in the european union. can i also say to the honourable lady, that what is important is we all recognise the responsibility we have two deliver on the vote that took place in 2016. cani on the vote that took place in 2016. can i say to the honourable lady, she says she doesn't have that responsibility. she is an elected member of this house. she has a responsibility in the votes she
casts. she has said consistently, she has said consistently she doesn't want us to leave without a deal. that can only happen if we have a deal, or of course if we choose to stay in the european union. she says that we have not listened to the scottish government. what the scottish nationalists have made clear at every stage now, as they wish to revoke article 50, they wish to go back on the referendum result of 2016 and they wish to keep the united kingdom in the eu. the majority of the british public do not want that. they want a party in government and they want parliamentarians in this house to deliver on what they asked us to do. the prime minister rightly referred in her statement abbas khan this is a most extraordinary situation. the honourable gentleman is seeking to ask a question and is being heckled
and prevented in a seemly way from doing so by the chuntering in pursuit of scottish tribal warfare by the honourable member. calm yourself, man. the prime minister is perfectly capable of looking after herself. she was asked a question and she gave an answer. there can be and she gave an answer. there can be a difference of opinion in the interpretation as to what is the responsibility of a member of parliament. thank you mr speaker. the prime minister rightly referred in her statement to the importance of leaving in a way which maintains the closest possible security, policing and judicial cooperation with the eu 27 that we have at the moment. thejustice select committee was given clear evidence by the head of the national crime agency, that to do otherwise would severely impairourability to to do otherwise would severely impair our ability to fight organised crime and terrorism and keep our country safe. does she
agree that to fail to leave it without a deal, to fail to pass the only available means of leaving with a deal would be to put the security of the country at risk and that's not something any member of this house could responsibly contemplate doing? my honourable friend is absolutely right to raise the issue of security. it is one that is rarely raised. the security relationship is fundamental to us being able to keep ourselves safe. that is why i am pleased we have negotiated in the political declaration, the strongest possible security relationship with the eu for the future of any country that would be outside the european union. but if we were to leave no deal, though security relationships would not be open to us. could we negotiate some for the future? that is possible to it would require further negotiation and at the point of leaving those security relationships would be stopped. of leaving those security
relationships would be stoppedlj agree relationships would be stopped.” agree with the right honourable memberfor agree with the right honourable member for loughborough who has left the chamber now, but the essence of what she was saying is that everyone should take a breath and take stock of what is on the table, look at the publish bill when it arrives on friday but also i think to all collea g u es friday but also i think to all colleagues across the house, be mindful of the results of the european elections. the prime minister has said several times already that if the second reading of this bill does not succeed, there will not be another opportunity to leave with a withdrawal bill. the only course and direction will be to leave without any deal at all. does she agree with me that anybody, on whatever side of the house, if they claim to be against no deal, they should give this proposition, without any commitments right now, they should give this proposition due consideration, think about how they will amend it. and as my right
honourable friend for pontefract said recently in a newspaper report, stop shouting and start agreeing on what we can agree to move forward. cani what we can agree to move forward. can i say to the honourable lady, she is right. the point a process of legislation in this house, once we are beyond second reading it will be open to members of the house to put amendments down and have the debate about the precise detail of how we are leaving. but anyone who wants to ensure that we leave with a deal and that we don't see no deal situation, should support the second reading, enter into that debate and that debate itself of course doesn't make commitments towards the end of the process. i would hope that we would see that bill being passed and therefore the treaty ratified, but it would be open to have that debate while the bill is progressing through the house. as usual, the
right honourable lady has spoken with common sense. would my right honourable friend spell out what she has heard would be the consequences for our economy of leaving without a deal? can i say to my honourable friend, there have been a number of bits of analysis done in relation to the impact of leaving without a deal. i think there would be an immediate economic impact. over time we could restore our fortunes, but i think it is much better to be in a position leaving with a deal which will unleash, i believe significant business investment in this country and see that positive future for our economy. that is possible by leaving with a deal. in listening to the prime minister respond to several questions about the consequences of no deal, given what is likely to happen in the european parliament elections tomorrow, and in the conservative party leadership
election to follow, on which she has fired the starting gun, does she regret legitimising and normalising ano regret legitimising and normalising a no deal outcome in the minds of the public through the repetition of the public through the repetition of the mantra, no deal is better than a bad deal? no i don't... studio: the session is continuing as you can see. if you would like to watch that in its entirety you can watch that in its entirety you can watch it on our sister channel, bbc parliament. we will have more analysis in the commons. theresa may trying to urge mps to support her brexit plan, talking about the need to compromise on all sides. continuing coverage on bbc parliament and more analysis coming up parliament and more analysis coming up after tpm with simon mccoy and talking about british steel as well with so manyjobs at risk. —— tpm_ let's pause and catch up with the weather prospects.
most m ost pla ces most places are having a dry day today. the warmest weather was in sussex and it might be again today. it is not blue skies everywhere. there is high, serious cloud around. this cloud further north in cheshire has been producing a few showers and we still have this line all the way from north wales to lincolnshire. though showers easing off to a certain extent. the wettest weather will be across the north—east yet again where it is breezy and it will feel on the cool side. head further south across scotland and there will be some sunshine as they will be across northern ireland and much of northern england. cloud bubbling up in northern scotland could bring an isolated shower but temperature is 21, 22 again. isolated shower but temperature is 21,22 again. cooler in isolated shower but temperature is 21, 22 again. cooler in scotland 12 or 13 21, 22 again. cooler in scotland 12 or13 are 21, 22 again. cooler in scotland 12 or 13 are best. any showers further south will fade away. more club pushing into northern ireland over the rac towards wales and the southwest. some more cloud in
scotla nd southwest. some more cloud in scotland as well. —— over the irish sea. tomorrow we still have the rain in the far north of scotland heading towards grampian. we will find russell arriving in the far south—west of england and wales with more cloud coming into south—west england and wales across northern ireland and perhaps into the north west of england as well. best of the sunshine will be across the south—west of england with 23 degrees or so. most places will have another dry day. most of the rain is coming from the air of low pressure bringing the rain into north—eastern scotla nd bringing the rain into north—eastern scotland that is moving into scandinavia. this weather front will run down from northern ireland, bringing more cloud and a few showers. that will move over the rac and into england and wales, showers arriving here as well. temperatures will be quite as high, there will probably be more cloud around across more of the country but at least it will be a drier day across the north and north—east of scotland. as we head into the bank holiday weekend, promising area of high pressure and that will stay out towards the
azores and it will be squeezed away from these weather fronts coming in from these weather fronts coming in from these weather fronts coming in from the atlantic. most of those will come from scotland and on sunday, generally dry but not as warm as we have seen over sunday, generally dry but not as warm as we have seen over the past few days.
hello, you're watching afternoon live, i'm simon mccoy. today at two: british steel goes into receivership — putting 5000 jobs at risk, as talks between the government and the company's owner break down. i've got a friend who's just about to return after maternity leave. her partner works on the steelworks as well. asking how she's going to pay her mortgage. my cousin's not finished his apprenticeship yet, and he's worried about what he's going to do with his qualifications, and really what the future looks like for scunthorpe. the prime minister is urging mps to back her new plans for brexit, amid signs that opposition from all sides is hardening. she has been focused only on keeping her divided party together, and it hasn't worked! and her time has now run out!