The Brexit department has handed over to the Commons Brexit committee internal government reports about the impact of Brexit on different sectors of the economy as commanded by a Commons vote. (See 4.33pm and 5.30pm.) But the information does not consist of the 58 separate sectoral impact assessments MPs were expecting and the Labour MP Seema Malhotra, who sits on the committee, said David Davis, the Brexit secretary, would face further “embarrassment and defeat” in the Commons if it turned out that the documents had been edited in an effort to keep MPs in the dark. She said:
If it is true that the reports they are handing over have already been redacted or edited, this would be against the spirit and the letter of parliament’s motion.It would show once again how desperate ministers are to hide the facts about Brexit from parliament and the public.
The select committee must be given the analyses which were completed and nothing less. We cannot and should not be short-changed. The public and parliament must no longer be kept in the dark.
A spokesman for the Brexit department said it had done what parliament requested. He said:
We have always been clear that our analysis does not exist in the form parliament requested. We have taken time to bring together the analysis we do have in a way that meets parliament’s specific ask. Our overall programme of work is comprehensive, thorough and is continuously updated. This sectoral analysis is simply one part of it.
Simon Coveney, the Irish foreign minister, has said that the EU27 are united behind Ireland in wanting “more progress” on the border issue in the Brexit talks before being willing to open negotiations on a future UK-EU trade relationship. (See 11.56am.)
Britain and Turkey have begun work on a post-Brexit free trade agreement, the Turkish prime minister has disclosed. Following talks in Downing Street with Theresa May, Binali Yildirim said the two countries had set up a joint working group which met for the first time earlier this month. As the Press Association reports, he said that while a deal could not be finalised until the UK had actually withdrawn from the EU, the preparations would take place “in parallel” with the Brexit negotiations. He said:
These will take place simultaneously. It is not like we will first wait for the UK to finish Brexit and then see what happens. That is not the kind of approach we have in mind. That would be wrong. Work has already started on it and it has to start.
This way we will make sure that, in a gradual manner, we will be paving the way into a free trade agreement and we need to finish the necessary preparations before that time.
Both parties are aware of the significance of this joint working group and we have been taking the necessary steps with this aim in mind.
Sky’s Faisal Islam has more on the government Brexit impact reports sent to the Commons Brexit committee.
Brexit Committee now have the sector reports - there are 39 Sectoral reports, not 58 (some cover same areas), covering 800 pages - will discuss tomorrow when to publish
Turning back to Michel Barnier (see 1.43pm) for a moment, the Express’s Nick Gutteridge has an interesting Twitter thread on his speech. It starts here.
1/ Now I've got a sec, a quick recap of Barnier's speech to COSAC this morning. It was essentially an abridged version of his CER one, but with a few I thought distinctly more upbeat additions.
Budget fails to boost Tory fortunes, Guardian/ICM poll suggests
The latest Guardian/ICM polling is out - and it has mixed messages for the government.
The budget has not boosted the Conservatives’ lead over Labour on the economy. Theresa May and Philip Hammond are still comfortably ahead of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell on this measure, but their lead is smaller now, after the budget, than it was last month.
Respondents were asked, irrespective of which party they support, which team they thought was best able to manage the economy properly. The results were:
We also asked the “Brexit bill” that the UK is due to pay to the EU when it leaves. We first asked about this in April, when some people were suggesting the amount the UK ends up paying could be as low as £3bn. Now it is has been reported that Theresa May is in principle willing to pay up to £40bn, although ministers seem to want to make that conditional on getting a good response from the EU on trade.
To allow a meaningful comparison, we phrased the question on this topic in exactly the same way we did in August. People were asked if paying an “exit fee” of up to £10bn/£20bn/£30bn/£40bn, “as a one-off or in instalments, as the UK’s contribution to spending commitments made by the EU when the UK was a member”, was acceptable or not acceptable. Here are the results:
Support for paying a minimal “Brexit bill” to the EU when the UK leaves has gone up over the last three months. In August only 41% thought paying £10bn was acceptable. That has now risen to 50%, and even support for much larger payments has risen slightly.
But voters are strongly opposed to paying a “Brexit bill” on the scale planned by ministers. Only 11% of respondents said a £40bn payment would be acceptable, even though it has been widely reported in recent days that this is what ministers think will be necessary. Some 71% of respondents said paying that amount would be unacceptable.
Finally, here are the ICM state-of-the-party polling figures.
The budget has failed to boost the Conservatives’ popularity, the poll suggests. It has the Conservatives and Labour both on 41%, exactly where they were two weeks ago.
I will post a link to the tables here, as soon as they go up on the ICM website.
ICM Unlimited interviewed a representative online sample of 2,029 adults aged 18+ on 24 to 26 November 2017. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.
My colleague Anushka Asthana has more on the Brexit impact assessment reports that have been handed over to the Commons Brexit committee for publication.
Sources say that DEXEU has handed over information to Brexit select committee. Not 58 reports (they say they didn't exist) but a "piece of sectoral analysis covering 58 sectors".
The information is not redacted, but it sounds like govt has pulled together essentially edited documents in response to parliamentary demands and have NOT included anything market sensitive or that they believe will harm negotiating stance.
This is not what many MPs were expecting when the Commons voted for this information to be released. If Hilary Benn, the committee chairman, and his colleagues feel that the government has not complied with parliament’s wishes, they could push for a vote on a motion accusing the government of contempt of parliament. But that would be seen as a very provocative step, only justified if the government is clearly failing to honour its obligations. It would also trigger a vote in the Commons that would almost inevitably see MPs splitting along party lines, which is normally the last thing committee chairmen want, because they prefer to proceed by consensus.
Here is Sky’s defence correspondent, Alistair Bunkall, on Gavin Williamson’s debut at the despatch box as defence secretary.
Defence Questions over. Highlights/lowlights: No-one prepared to say Bulwark & Albion won't be cut. Williamson hasn't met Hammond to formally ask for more money yet. RAF ops over Iraq and Syria to keep going for now. UK clearly lobbying to host NATO Northern Command
Verdict on Gavin Williamson's debut: clearly nervous but generally solid. Making the right noises and giving impression he won't shy away from a fight with the Treasury if necessary.
And here is HuffPost’s Paul Waugh on Williamson’s performance.
Gavin Williamson debut at despatch box marked by Dalek-style delivery, 'I'll take no lectures...' cliche, referring to Lab opponent as 'you' and refusal to say if he lobbied Treasury against cuts. His ministerial critics may feel vindicated..
Williamson warned he faces 'very substantial rebellion' if he tries to armed forces
During defence questions the Conservative MP James Gray told Gavin Williamson, the new defence secretary, that he would face a “very substantial rebellion” if he tried to cut the size of the armed forces. Gray said:
His background ideally suits him to fighting the corner in the review that’s coming along. So will he please speak to the prime minister and remind her that her primary duty is the defence of the realm?
Will he speak to the national security adviser, and indeed the secretary of state at the Cabinet Office, to remind them that they must not use [the national security capability] review as some kind of camouflage to cut our services? Will he speak to the chancellor of the exchequer to make sure he digs deep in his pockets to produce the money we need? And above all, will he speak to the chief whip to remind him if he does not do so he’s going to be facing a very substantial rebellion?
Williamson replied:
I can assure him I will speak to every single one of those people that he has outlined. As he rightly points out, the defence of our nation is the first and primary responsibility of every government - that is one I take exceptionally seriously.
He was also challenged on this topic by his Labour shadow, Nia Griffith, who said it was “surreal” to hear last week that Williamson had not made any submissions to the chancellor on defence spending ahead of the budget.
Williamson replied:
What we have to do is to ensure that we understand what the needs are for our defence, our armed forces, going forward. She may wish to rush into things and actually just demand and demand and demand. What I want to do is to make sure that we have the arguments ready, understand the threats that this country faces and make sure that we deliver for our armed forces. That is what the focus is going to be.
I have many conversations with the chancellor and I’m looking forward to many, many more going forward.
Here is the full quote from Gavin Williamson, the new defence secretary, when he told MPs that he regarded the 2% of GDP defence spending target as a minimum, not a maximum.
Julian Lewis, the Conservative chair of the Commons defence committee, asked:
When he does speak to the chancellor, will he take the opportunity of reminding him that in the cold war years we spent 5% of GDP on defence. Now, we spend barely 2% of GEDP on defence, and perhaps a target nearer to 3% of GDP on defence might prevent our armed forces being further hollowed out?
Williamson replied:
I’ve always seen 2% as a base as against a ceiling, and I will certainly be taking on board his thoughts and comments going forward.
Number 10 confirmed this morning that the government would hand over to the Commons Brexit committee its Brexit impact assessments by tomorrow, in accordance with the deadline set after the parliamentary vote. (See 12.45pm.) The committee does not yet know what form the impact assessments will arrive in, but the expectation is that they will be unredacted and then the chair, Hilary Benn, will discuss with David Davis any concerns about publication. They then believe it will be for the committee to decide what is published. The government has changed its position on the existence of the papers, although Davis has said - a number of times - that the reports have been completed. There could well be some toing and froing over publication once they have been received.
Williamson says he sees 2% GDP defence spending target as minimum, not maximum
Gavin Williamson has started taking questions in the Commons for the first time as defence secretary. In his short time at the MoD he already seems to have gone a bit native. As the Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn reports, in his first answers he adopted a hawkish tone on defence spending.
Gavin Williamson is off the mark v the Treasury. Describes concerns about new defence cuts as "a vary valuable point", and adds: "I'm taking the opportunity to look at all the work that has been done and making my own judgement on this" #DefenceQs
Another salvo lobbed at HMT by @GavinWilliamson. Warm response to request to lift defence spending to 3%: "I’ve always seen 2% as base, not a ceiling” #DefenceQs
Peter Hain, the Labour former Northern Ireland secretary (and a firm remainer), has criticised his Brexiter colleague Kate Hoey for saying Ireland should pay if there has to be a hard border with Northern Ireland after Brexit. (See 10.29am.) In a statement issued by Open Britain, which is campaigning for a soft Brexit, he said:
With her suggestion that Ireland will have to pay for any border, Kate Hoey seems to have been taking diplomacy lessons from Donald Trump.
It really is astonishing how much damage Brexit is already doing to our country’s reputation. Even our closest friends, Ireland, are now becoming the target of unhinged attacks from hard Brexit cheerleaders.
The cold, hard reality is very clear: outside of the customs union and the single market, there will have to be a hard border of some kind on the island of Ireland.
The only way to prevent a return to the borders of the past is to keep both Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK in the single market and the customs union on a permanent basis.
Caroline Dinenage, the work and pensions minister, has released a written ministerial statement today confirming benefit and pension rates for 2018/19. The full rates for every benefit are in this document (pdf). Pensions are going up in line with inflation, at 3%, but she confirms that “the majority of working-age benefits have been frozen at their 2015/16 levels for four years under the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016”.
Business, unions and opposition react to industrial strategy white paper
The 255-page industrial strategy white paper is out. You can read it here (pdf).
As the Press Association reports, business groups welcomed the government’s industrial strategy, but unions and opposition parties have attacked it - with one official branding it a “joke.”
The TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said:
Ministers have failed to explain how workers will be given a say in the new industrial strategy. They are missing a trick if they don’t listen to the factory floor.
The GMB leader Tim Roache said:
To suggest what we need are ‘new business models’ in care as part of an industrial strategy is an unfunny joke from a government that just doesn’t get it.
Stephen Martin, director general of the Institute of Directors, said:
Business leaders will welcome the Government’s grand ambition to turn around the UK’s woeful performance productivity. The measures in today’s industrial strategy could be the beginning of a bold, new approach to the economy - but only if what has been announced today is followed through, not just in this parliament, but over many parliaments to come.
Rebecca Long-Bailey, shadow business secretary, said:
This is a white paper made up of re-announced policies and old spending commitments, showing once again that this is a government short on details and new ideas. Nothing in the white paper will help give businesses the certainty or incentives they need to invest in the face of the government’s catastrophic handling of Brexit.
What detail there is concentrates on a few elite industries in which Britain already has an advantage, and will do nothing to help the millions of people who work in low productivity and low wage sectors such as retail, hospitality and social care.
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable said:
The combination of falling apprenticeship starts and restricted access to skilled labour after Brexit will cripple the industrial strategy.
What is being announced today is not much more than a reinvention of the wheel. We’ve had an industrial strategy already for five years. But there is a big cloud hanging over it now caused by the major uncertainties around Brexit.
Carolyn Fairbairn, director general of the CBI, said:
Nine in 10 firms see a modern Industrial Strategy as vital to improving living standards in the face of Brexit uncertainty and a sombre economic outlook.
This announcement shows the government has its eye firmly on the horizon, not just the next few yards. We welcome the recognition that success will require urgent action in partnership with business. This is the route to raising living standards in every corner of the country.
Greg Clark, the business secretary, who had today published an industrial strategy white paper. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
Comments (…)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion