Sturgeon to publish new independence referendum bill for Scotland - Politics live

• Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minister, has encouraged Nicola Sturgeon to hold another independence referendum even if the polls are just 50/50. In an interview with the House magazine he said:

There have been six opinion polls since the European vote. Three of which have shown a majority for independence and the other three have all shown an increase from 45%.

Will Nicola Sturgeon push the button on a referendum if support for independence is, say, 50:50 or at that level? Well, I hit the button for a referendum when support was 27%. Why would she be reluctant on a much larger level than that?

• Russia’s foreign minister Sergey Lavrov has accused Boris Johnson of “politicking” over his condemnations of Moscow’s involvement in the bombardment of the Syrian city of Aleppo. In an interview with CNN Lavrov said:

What my friend and new colleague Boris Johnson is saying is absolute politicking, in the usual arrogant way. Boris is the Jack of all trades, as you know. Having served as mayor, he said he was a very good friend of Russia and was very famous at the Russian festivals in London.

Now I think he is getting ready to become maybe an internationally-recognised prosecutor-general at The Hague, especially after our British colleagues decided that the slogan ‘Yes, we can’ should be additioned by a ‘You can’t’ - when they decided to remove their military from the jurisdiction of the European Human Rights Convention.

Some kind of clarity must be introduced in these discussions. We are open to these discussions. We never cut connections. We want to discuss things and arrive at some truth, instead of accusing each other without any justification.

View image in fullscreen

• Downing Street has refused to rule out the possibility of the UK continuing to pay budget contributions to the EU after Britain’s departure from the bloc, as analysis suggested the country could face a €20bn (£18bn) “Brexit divorce” bill in shared payment liabilities.

• A heartbreaking speech by a Labour MP moved several members of the House of Commons to tears during a debate on stillbirths, as Vicky Foxcroft described being pregnant at 16 and losing her baby after just five days.

• The BBC has hit back against a renewed attack on what the Daily Mail has called its “Brexit bias” by pointing out that its EU coverage has been criticised by both sides of the debate.

That’s all from me for today.

Tomorrow I will be blogging from the SNP conference in Glasgow.

View image in fullscreen

Boris Johnson is facing criticism for his comments to the foreign affairs committee earlier about how the Britain could get an even better trade deal with the EU when it leaves than it has at the moment. (See 2.33pm.) This is from the Conservative MP Anna Soubry, a campaigner for Open Britain, which wants the UK to stay in the single market.

If there’s a deal of ‘greater value’ out there than single market membership, then businesses and economists have not come across it. The government needs to provide concrete evidence before it pulls us out of our home market of 500 million customers.

And this is from the Lib Dem leader Tim Farron.

After his bungling performance today, it’s clear the only thing which is becoming ‘increasingly useless’ is Boris Johnson himself. His glib dismissal of the single market shows the Conservatives have given up any claim to be the party of business and are putting jobs, prosperity and lower prices at risk.

The SNP conference has passed a resolution saying that the UK government should abandon the policy of having lower minimum wage rates for the young and that workers aged 16 to 24 should get the same as over-25s, who are currently the only group who get the more generous “national living wage”. The SNP MP Chris Stephens said:

Conference has been resounding in its condemnation of the UK government and their discriminatory policy on wages. To pay workers less than their colleagues based purely on age is unacceptable and today the SNP has made that clear.

Simon Wolfson, the Next chief executive and prominent leave campaigner, has warned that the British economy is “finished” if the government pursues an isolationist Brexit course. The Tory peer told the Press Association that the referendum vote was about UK independence, not isolation, adding that Britain is setting itself up for economic failure if it closes itself off from the rest of the world.

I think the hard, soft Brexit language is unhelpful, and what we should be talking about is whether we have an ‘open’ or ‘closed’ Brexit.

Britain voted for independence, it didn’t vote for isolation and so we have a choice: are we going to choose to build an open, global-facing economy, or one that’s closed and isolated?

If we choose the latter, then our economy is finished. If we choose the former, we stand a chance of flourishing greatly.

Here is the Labour MSP Anas Sarwar on Nicola Sturgeon’s speech.

13 Oct 201609.41 EDT

Anushka Asthana

Theresa May’s cabinet committee on Brexit met yesterday and considered three new papers, I’ve heard. A draft of one was reported to include that controversial £66bn cost of reverting WTO rules.

But there were two others as well, on free movement and interestingly the customs union, which was discussed.

Liam Fox has suggested Britain will leave the customs union, and Raoul Ruparel - the new adviser to David Davis who was the co-director at Open Europe- has said Britain will have to leave, arguing “that ship has sailed”.

But Treasury ministers are pushing back internally saying there has to be a conversation about cost of an exit, and clearly the issue remains on the table.

• Nicola Sturgeon is to publish a draft bill next week calling for a second Scottish independence referendum in a direct challenge to Theresa May’s hardline stance on Britain leaving the EU.

• Boris Johnson has given his first hint that the west is willing to step up military activity against the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, saying a meeting of foreign ministers on Sunday will look at new options. As Patrick Wintour reports, Johnson stressed in evidence to the foreign affairs committee that he did not want to give false hope to the Syrian opposition, and said it might be a long day’s march, but “more kinetic options, the military options” were being considered. He said as a result of the bombardment of Aleppo public opinion was changing, but it remained to be seen if a coalition for a military option could be constructed. “It is vital we consider them and we will do that now,” he said.

• Johnson has said that Britain could get a trade deal with the EU when it leaves that will be even better than the status quo. Giving evidence to the foreign affairs committee, he also said he found the term single market “increasingly useless”. He told the MPs:

I think the term single market is increasingly useless. We are going to get a deal that will be of huge value, and possibly greater value - if you at what is still unachieved in services, for instance - in goods and services for our friends on the continent and for business investing in the UK.

He said he thought those who predicted “doom” if Britain voted to leave the EU had been proved wrong, but that the full benefits of Brexit would take time to emerge.

I think those who prophesied doom before the referendum have been proved wrong and I think they will continue to be proved wrong. Obviously it will take time before the full benefits of Brexit appear.

He said that leaving the EU could take longer than the two years laid down in article 50. If that happened, there were “mechanisms” for extending the talks, he said.

I think there will be a deal, I think it will be a great deal. If it can’t be done in two years then there are mechanisms for extending the period of discussion. I don’t think that will be necessary, I think we can do it.

And he also said that the vote for Brexit was not a mandate to “haul up the drawbridge” and that “people of talent” from abroad would still be welcome after the UK left the EU.

• He said the UK would maintain “a completely implacable, marmoreal and rocklike resistance” to Spanish claims for any change in the status of Gibraltar as a result of Brexit. And he compared himself to movie mafia boss Don Vito Corleone dismissing a proposal from a fellow-mobster when he described how he rejected a Spanish attempt to raise the issue.

I remember the Spanish foreign minister raised it with me and... you remember Marlon Brando in The Godfather when he said: ‘Mr Barzini, I must tell you my answer is No’.

• He said Britain should be prepared to be “supportive” of any moves by the European Union to create its own defence capability.

If our friends want to go ahead with a new security architecture, as they have pledged to do many times over the past four decades, I don’t think, post-Brexit, we can reasonably stand in their way.

• He said that wealthy philanthropists could fund a new Royal Yacht for the Queen but that replacing Britannia was “not a government priority”. He was replying to a question prompted by a Daily Telegraph campaign for a new Royal Yacht.

• He admitted that he did not know what the Commonwealth flag looked like. This emerged when the Tory Andrew Rosindell asked if it would be flown over British embassies instead of the EU flag. Johnson replied:

You are testing my vexillography. I’m going to have to own up, I am unaware of the exact configuration of the Commonwealth flag. What does it look like?

When told what it looked like, he refused to give a commitment to fly it over embassies.

• The government does not have legal authority to use royal prerogative powers to trigger Brexit without parliamentary approval, the high court has been told. As Owen Bowcott reports, in opening arguments over who should initiate the UK’s departure from the EU, Lord Pannick QC, who represents the lead challenger in the claim, Gina Miller, said formal notification by ministers alone would undermine parliament and “deprive people of their statutory rights”. Three of the most senior judges – the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, the master of the rolls, Sir Terence Etherton, and Lord Justice Sales – are hearing the challenge, which could have far-reaching political and constitutional effects.

• Two of the largest German trade associations have come out in support of Angela Merkel taking a firm stance during negotiations over Britain’s exit from the EU, even if it comes at a short-term cost.

• The number of hate crimes leaped by 41% in the month after the vote to leave the European Union, new Home Office statistics confirm.

Alex Massie at the Spectator says, in the light of Nicola Sturgeon’s speech, that it’s a mistake to write off the chances of Scotland voting for independence. Here’s an excerpt.

In any event, these are still the opening exchanges in a long game. Sturgeon might have announced a crowd-pleasing consultation on a draft referendum bill – sometimes a piece of paper makes a convincing rabbit – but we are still in the wait and see stages. She may need to keep her troops happy but past experience, and the evidence of our present circumstances, suggests the promise of jam tomorrow is always enough to maintain their morale.

Again, the sage and serious people will tell us it’s all a ruse and we can calm down because, come on, sage and serious people in London know the Jocks aren’t stupid enough to vote for independence. They are, instead, trapped in a Brexit box and that’s worth a chortle or two. Maybe that is so, but many of these sage and serious people are also the idiots who thought, for reasons best explained by their own ignorance and complacency, that only one in three Scots would vote for independence in 2014. They were warned not to be fools then but chose not to listen until it was almost too late but I suppose it’s too late – and probably pointless anyway – to warn them not to be fools again.

SNP members at the conference in Glasgow have passed a motion condemning xenophobia and prejudice and saying foreigners are welcome in Scotland. Christian Allard, a former SNP MSP and a French citizen, said:

The difference between the SNP conference and last week’s Tory conference could not be starker. Here in Glasgow, we are promoting a message of inclusivity and diversity - a million miles away from the Tory message of xenophobia and division.

Labour would not try to stop the Scottish government holding a second independence referendum, PoliticsHome’s Kevin Schofield reports.

Here is some more comment from journalists on Nicola Sturgeon’s speech.

From the Guardian’s Martin Kettle

From the Times’ Kenny Farquharson

From the Guardian’s Libby Brooks

From the Sun’s Steve Hawkes

Kezia Dugdale, the Scottish Labour leader, has also accused Nicola Sturgeon of dividing Scotland.

She says:

Nicola Sturgeon’s top priority is to divide our country once again. But our country is already divided following the Tories’ reckless Brexit gamble and we should not be seeking further divisions.

Here is Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader, responding to Nicola Sturgeon’s speech.

Here is the full statement Davidson has released about Sturgeon’s speech. And here is an extract.

Nicola Sturgeon could today have set out a positive, constructive vision for how the country progresses together.

Instead she has made it clear she wants to take Scotland back to yet more uncertainty, more division and more constitutional upheaval.

Her comments show she has given up on speaking for Scotland and is now solely playing to the SNP gallery.

This isn’t the action of a first minister of Scotland but an SNP fundamentalist who puts independence first, last and always.

Earlier I posted a tweet suggesting that Andrew Rosindell may have asked Boris Johnson a question about Norfolk Island because he had been there on a freebie. Actually, there was a bit more to it than that. I have posted an update at 10.17am.

Here are the key points from Nicola Sturgeon’s speech.

• Sturgeon indicated that she would call a second referendum on independence if the UK opts for a hard Brexit. Addressing the prime minister, she said:

If you think for one single second that I’m not serious about doing what it takes to protect Scotland’s interests, then think again.

If you can’t - or won’t - allow us to protect our interests within the UK, then Scotland will have the right to decide, afresh, if it wants to take a different path.

A hard Brexit will change the UK fundamentally.

A UK out of the single market - isolated, inward looking, haemorrhaging jobs, investment and opportunities - will not be the same country that Scotland voted to stay part of in 2014.

If that’s the insecure, unstable prospect we face as part of the UK, then no one will have the right to deny Scotland the chance to choose a better future.

She said the Scottish government would publish an independence referendum bill next week. (See 11.33am.) In some respects, this sounded more like a negotiating gambit than a statement of intent. As my colleague Severin Carrell points out (see 12.12pm), there are still considerable obstacles to winning a second independence referendum. Sturgeon does not have the power to call a legally-binding independence referendum, and Theresa May has hinted that, unlike David Cameron in 2014, she would not facilitate such a poll. Sturgeon also seems to be ignoring the promise she made last year, which was that she would not call a second independence referendum unless there was “strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted No have changed their minds”. At the moment that evidence does not exist.

• She made remaining in the single market Scotland’s key priority.

The prime minister may have a mandate to take England and Wales out of the EU but she has no mandate whatsoever to remove any part of the UK from the single market.

• She said she wanted Scotland to acquire extensive new powers. She explained that she would be developing a Brexit plan for Scotland and that, if Scotland were not to become independent, it needed to acquire new powers to ensure that it did not lose out from Brexit.

The Scottish government will set out a plan for Scotland.

We will seek to make this plan a key element of the UK’s Article 50 negotiation.

It will require substantial additional powers for the Scottish Parliament.

All the powers in our areas of responsibility that currently lie with the EU - and significant new powers too.

Powers to strike international deals.

And greater powers over immigration. Powers not just to protect our economy, but also our values.

UK ministers might believe it acceptable to order businesses to create lists of foreign workers.

We do not.

This passage suggests that, as an alternative to a second independence referendum, Sturgeon is demanding a new version of independence-lite.

• She said a second independence referendum would not be a re-run of the last one.

There is one final point I want to make. And it’s an important one.

When Scotland does come to take this decision again - whenever that might be - we must not take for granted how anyone will vote.

It will be a new debate - not a rerun of 2014.

We must not assume that people’s views - yes or no - are the same today as they were two years ago.

Instead we must engage the arguments with a fresh eye and an open mind.

The case for independence will have to be made and won.

• She said the SNP would vote against the proposed “great repeal bill” - the bill planned for the next session of parliament to repeal the European Communities Act 1972.

I can confirm today that SNP MPs will vote against the Brexit bill when it come before the House of Commons next year.

That Bill will repeal the legislation that enacted our EU membership. Scotland didn’t vote for that and so neither will our MPs.

But we will also work to persuade others - Labour, Liberals and moderate Tories - to join us in a coalition against a hard Brexit: not just for Scotland, but for the whole UK.

In practice this is unlikely to make much difference because Labour is unlikely to vote against the bill at second reading. Many Labour MPs are opposed to a “hard” Brexit, but most of them do not intend to right against the principle of the UK leaving the EU.

• She said the Conservatives were pushing for a hard Brexit for which they had no mandate.

They are using the [referendum] result as cover for a hard Brexit for which they have no mandate - but which they are determined to impose, regardless of the ruinous consequences.

• She accused the Conservatives of embracing Ukip-style xenophobia and said their views had “no place in a civilised society”.

Last week, in Birmingham, we heard an intolerance towards those from other countries that has no place in a modern, multicultural, civilised society.

You know, on the day of the prime minister’s speech to the Tory conference, the new leader of UKIP resigned.

Perhaps she realized that her job and her party are now redundant.

Last week, we saw the Tories adopt UKIP policy and Farage-style rhetoric - lock, stock and beer-barrel.

It was a disgrace. It shames the Tory party and all who speak for it.

But make no mistake - the right wing of the Tory party is now in the ascendancy and it is seeking to hijack the referendum result.

Brexit has become Tory Brexit.

The rampant right wing of the party are using it as license for the xenophobia that has long lain under the surface - but which is now in full, unlovely view.

• She compared Theresa May to Margaret Thatcher. This was noteworthy because of Thatcher’s continuing unpopularity in Scotland.

• Sturgeon said that even though 1m Scots voted for Brexit, they did not vote for the hard Brexit now on offer from the Tories.

Of course, I know that one million of our fellow citizens voted to Leave. They did so for a range of legitimate reasons and as first minister, I have a duty to listen to, to understand and to respond to these reasons.

But I suspect that many of those who voted to Leave, look now at the actions and rhetoric of the Tories and think ‘that’s not what I voted for’.

They may have voted to take back control.

But I can’t imagine many of them voted to hand control to the unholy trinity of Boris Johnson, David Davis and Liam Fox ...

They didn’t vote to throw economic rationality out of the window.

They didn’t vote to lower their own living standards or to sacrifice jobs and investment.

They didn’t vote for our businesses to face tariffs or for holiday-makers to need visas.

They didn’t vote for the scapegoating of foreigners.

Sturgeon’s language at this point in the speech is similar to what has been said by Philip Hammond, the chancellor, who has also been arguing that the referendum vote was not a vote for “hard” Brexit. (The problem for Hammond and Sturgeon is that there is ample evidence that people were voting for this, because the UK government warned very clearly about the economic consequences of Brexit, and Ukip’s Nigel Farage even said explicitly that lower living standards would be a price worth paying for independence from Brussels.)

View image in fullscreen