Theresa may

At yesterday’s Special European Council in Brussels, I reached a deal with the leaders of the other 27 EU Member States on a Withdrawal Agreement that will ensure our smooth and orderly departure on 29th March next year; and, tied to this Agreement, a Political Declaration on an ambitious future partnership that is in our national interest. Mr Speaker, this is the right deal for Britain because it delivers on the democratic decision of the British people. It takes back control of our borders. It ends the free movement of people in full once and for all, allowing the government to introduce a new skills-based immigration system. It takes back

Tory MPs offered a warmer reception to Theresa May’s statement in the Commons this afternoon than they managed during yesterday’s Prime Minister’s Questions. The Prime Minister herself seemed very confident as she explained today’s political declaration to MPs. That’s about as far as you can go when looking for signs of success in this afternoon’s Commons Brexit drama. For instance, straight after the statement, we received confirmation from Iain Duncan Smith that he and other Brexiteers do still find the Brexit deal unacceptable and will kill it in the Commons. May had only minutes before praised Duncan Smith and Owen Paterson in her statement for ideas that they’d offered for

MPs and ministers who had settled down in Parliament on Tuesday evening for a late night of votes on the finance bill were given an early reprieve – all votes were off. However, rather than an early Christmas present from No.10, the shelving of votes on the finance bill was down to a reason out of Theresa May’s control: no working majority. With the DUP abstaining for a second day over grievances with the EU withdrawal text, the government decided to concede all amendments to the bill – including one from the SNP. It’s not clear they would have lost on every single amendment but after the antics of Monday

Is Theresa May about to face a vote of no confidence in her leadership? The Prime Minister is acting as though nothing has changed, to coin a phrase, focusing on selling her Brexit plan to business leaders at the CBI, rather than getting too bogged down with the internal problems with her party. But those trying to organise the move against her had been making noises all day that they may have the requisite number of letters calling for such a vote by this evening. This doesn’t look like it’s going to be the case. Indeed, today a number of Brexiteers including Owen Paterson and Iain Duncan Smith have been

Theresa May’s problems have not let up over the weekend. With speculation mounting about an impending confidence vote, the Sunday papers are filled with reports of leadership rivals sounding out colleagues while Dominic Raab – the former Brexit Secretary – has used an interview to tell May to stand up to Brussels’ bullies (though he has since told Andrew Marr he will still back the PM in any confidence vote). Appearing on Ridge on Sunday this morning, May tried to make the case for both her Brexit deal and her premiership continuing. She said that as far as she knew the 48 letters required for a confidence vote were not

Is a deal better than no deal? In a bid to answer that question, Mr Steerpike published a list of the 40 horrors buried in the small print of Theresa May’s Brexit deal. Downing Street have since been in touch to put forward their own 40 rebuttals to those 40 horrors (we’ll respond on Monday). No.10’s points are in italics. After reading this list, why not try Mr Steerpike’s 40 rebuttals to No.10’s 40 rebuttals here. —————————————————————————————– The supposed ‘transition period’ could last indefinitely or, more specifically, to an undefined date sometime this century (“up to 31 December 20XX”, Art. 132). So while this Agreement covers what the government is calling

Jacob Rees-Mogg observed that my resignation last week was ‘the “Emperor’s New Clothes” moment in the Brexit process’. If this is right, that makes me the child, too young to understand the importance of maintaining pretences, who blurts out before the embarrassed townsfolk that the emperor is naked. I’ve been surprised by the noisy reaction to my departure from the middle ranks of the government. The video I made in my office setting out my reasons for going had two million views in two days. Maybe this is an example of Orwell’s dictum that in a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act. The deceit is that

Today’s PMQs ought to have been the calm before the storm. With Theresa May unable to reveal details of the proposed Brexit deal to MPs until her Cabinet signs it off – with a crunch meeting at 2pm – the specifics are not known. However, thanks to a series of leaks from the Brussels side and the European Research Group quickly seeing red it proved to be rather tense affair. As ever, Jeremy Corbyn failed to land a killer blow on the Prime Minister despite the rather wide goal posts. The SNP’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford had one of his more effective outings – using one question to ask why

Jo Johnson’s resignation, the DUP kicking off and the European Commission’s Article 50 task-force talking about a lack of progress mean that it hasn’t been a good end to the week for Theresa May. As I write in The Sun this morning, one government source says ‘if there’s no November Council, then no deal goes into overdrive’. But given Theresa May’s desire to avoid no deal there probably will be some sort of agreement in the not too distant future. But it will be flawed—and Theresa May should say so. Why would a Prime Minister admit that a deal they’ve negotiated isn’t great? Because if May tries to say that

It is quiet out there, too quiet in the views of many Brexiteers in government. As I say in The Sun this morning, they fear that right now a deal is being done that they’ll be bounced into supporting. They worry that since last week’s Cabinet meeting, there hasn’t been any new Brexit offer put either to Cabinet or the inner Cabinet yet technical talks have resumed in Brussels. They fear that a deal will be agreed and then they’ll be faced with a choice of rejecting it and having to take the blame for no deal and the chaos that would involve or accepting the agreement with all its

What is the point of Philip Hammond? Most chancellors have an agenda, but it’s hard to discern any purpose or direction from the current one. Gordon Brown’s project was to oversee the largest expansion of government spending in peacetime history — which he achieved, albeit with ruinous results. George Osborne spoke about trying to wind this programme back. The results were decidedly mixed, but at least he had an idea about what he sought to achieve. Mr Hammond, by contrast, has spent his time in the brace position preparing for Brexit. When he delivers his Budget on Monday, he might have to admit that the country does not seem to