Gove defends Boris Johnson over WW2 jibe, saying it's 'witty metaphor' – as it happened

Jeremy Corbyn says May snubbed parliament yesterday, and the Brexit committee’s call for a white paper. But she was supposed to be standing up for parliamentary sovereignty. Why was she snubbing the Commons?

May says she set out a vision for a global Britain. It was a vision that will shape a stronger future and build a better Britain.

Corbyn says May was was talking about restoring parliamentary democracy while sidelining parliament. This is not so much the iron lady as the irony lady. He says a bargain basement Britain would be bad for Britain. May demeans her office by making these threats.

May says she set out a vision for a global Britain. But we learnt more about Corbyn’s thinking too. She quotes Corbyn saying he wanted access to the single market, while also criticising May for wanting access to the single market. She has a plan. He does not have a clue.

Laurence Robertson, a Conservative, says people who miss NHS appointments cost the NHS a lot of money. What can May do about this?

May pays tribute to those who work in the NHS. She says there are a number of way hospitals are trying to stop people missing appointments.

Labour’s Kelvin Hopkins asks about the damage done by drinking during pregnancy. Does Theresa May recognise the seriousness of this problem?

May says she recognises the problems alcohol causes, not just medical, but in relation to domestic violence.

This is from the SNP’s Angus MacNeil.

PMQs is about to start.

Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, is giving a speech in Davos today. He will say that a “hard” Brexit would be a “lose-lose situation” that could tear the UK apart.

A ‘hard Brexit’ would cut Europe off from its only truly global financial center. This would be bad news for Europe as well as Britain. So a hard Brexit really would be a lose-lose situation ...

Securing privileged access to the single market must be the top priority for the negotiations. It’s critical for London. Nothing else will do. It can’t be brushed aside – as it was yesterday.

A hard-line approach to Brexit … could rip Britain apart.

And if we continue on this path - towards a ‘hard Brexit’ – we risk having to explain to future generations why we knowingly put their economy, their prosperity and their place on the world stage in such peril.

But he will also say he is “confident” that “despite the prime minister’s rhetoric, there is still a sensible deal to be done.”

Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, was also speaking in the European parliament this morning. He said he hoped the Brexit negotiations could lead to a “balanced” solution. He told the MEPs:

For my part, I will do everything so that the negotiations reach a balanced solution, with full respect for our rules.

I welcome the clarifications given by [Theresa] May, but I said to her last night that a speech will not launch the negotiations.

There will be an unprecedented negotiation which must finish within two years and the consequences will be considerable for the United Kingdom, its 27 partners and the whole union.

Juncker is giving a press conference later. It will clash with PMQs, but my colleague Jennifer Rankin will be covering it and we will be featuring it here, in the blog.

This is what Joseph Muscat, the Maltese prime minister, told the European parliament earlier about how Britain’s Brexit deal would have to be “inferior to membership”. (See 10.43am.) He said that to think otherwise would indicate “a detachment from reality”.

He started by saying that, as a former British colony, it was particularly hard for Malta to see the UK leaving the EU. “This is not a happy event for us,” he said. He went on:

We want a fair deal for the United Kingdom. But that deal necessarily needs to be inferior to membership.

This should not come as a surprise to anyone. Indeed, thinking it can be otherwise would indicate a detachment from reality.

Yesterday’s statement by my colleague and friend Prime Minister May helps clarify the priorities of the British government during the impending negotiations. Our understanding is that Prime Minister May is prioritising curbs to freedom of movement of people over membership of the single market and the customs union.

She added that she did not want for the UK to replicate something that exists, but the creation of something new.

I would like to confirm to this House today that at this point there is unequivocal unity within [the European] council. This stance does not arise from antagonism but from belief in the core principles of the European project, as stated by the 27 heads of government after the Brexit referendum result which we respect as a sovereign decision.

The freedom of movement of persons, goods, services and capital cannot be decoupled. Put simply, the four freedoms are indivisible.

View image in fullscreen

18 Jan 201706.00 EST

Boris Johnson uses WW2 comparison to criticise French president's stance on Brexit

Michael Safi

Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, is in India and, speaking in Delhi, he has responded to French criticism of the UK’s plan to leave the European union, implicitly comparing the French president, Francois Hollande, to a Nazi. He said:

If Mr Hollande wants to administer punishment beatings to anybody who seeks to escape [the EU], in the manner of some world war two movie, I don’t think that is the way forward, and it’s not in the interests of our friends and partners.

It seems absolutely incredible to me that in the 21st century member states of the EU should be seriously contemplating the reintroduction of tariffs or whatever to administer punishment to the UK.

“These things cut both ways,” Johnson said, pointing out that Britain is an enormous market for German cars.

You can put a 10% tariff on 820,000 cars, Mercs. That’s a lot of money for the Exchequer.

We think we can do a great free trade deal for the benefit of both sides. The more trade, the more jobs on both sides.

Hollande has not responded to the speech Theresa May gave yesterday, but he did say this in October last year about Britain leaving the EU.

There must be a threat, there must be a risk, there must be a price, otherwise we will be in negotiations that will not end well and, inevitably, will have economic and human consequences.

View image in fullscreen