this is bbc news, and these are the top stories developing at 11am: hurricane irma cuts a trail of destruction across the caribbean, leaving at least nine people dead. we had cars flying over our heads, we had containers — 40—foot containers — flying left and right. flags are suspended and traffic queues build in florida as people tried to leave the state this weekend. the uk will take another step towards brexit, as a parliamentary debate on the european union withdrawal bill begins injust over an hour. live at westminster, will have continuing coverage of this the year at westminster. we'll be talking to politicians from across the divide, as well as analysts, about what today means for britain and brexit. universities could be fined by

paying their leaders large salaries under new regulations, unless they can under new regulations, unless they ca n prove under new regulations, unless they can prove they are worth the money. also, growing up fast... prince george starts his first day at school with a handshake, escorted by prince william. good morning. it's thursday the 7th of september. i'm annita mcveigh. welcome to bbc newsroom live. hurricane irma has caused devastation across the caribbean, killing at least nine people. the small island of barbuda has been severely hit, making it, in the words of its prime minister, " ba rely habitable", while the islands of anguilla and st martin have also suffered loss of life and significant damage. the storm is currently passing north of puerto rico, where more than half of the island's three million

residents are without power. officials have said it could be cut off for several days. projections suggest the storm could hit the us state of florida by sunday. authorities in the french island territory of saint martin say it has been reduced to rubble and its airport is virtually destroyed, while the dutch prime minister says the death toll on the dutch section of the island is still unknown. the bbc‘s andy moore reports. an entire island raised to the ground, barbuda, home to 16,000 people, both at full force of hurricane irma. the communication tower was destroyed, cutting it off from the outside world. the prime minister said the island is barely habitable. what i saw was heart—rending, absolutely devastating. in fact,

heart—rending, absolutely devastating. infact, i heart—rending, absolutely devastating. in fact, i believe on a per capita basis, the extent of the destruction in barbuda is unprecedented. a two-year-old toddler was killed, and there were many lucky escapes. we had cars flying over our head, we had 40 foot containers flying left and right. and the story that you are getting from most of the residents here is that the eye of the storm came just in time. people were literally tying themselves to their homes with ropes to keep them down. on the more affluent french territory of saint martin, a similar picture of devastation. at least nine people are dead and dozens injured. 0n the dutch side of the island, there is no news yet of casualties, but the airport has been completely destroyed, effectively cutting off several islands, including anguilla. we're talking about large—scale destruction of infrastructure. there

is no power, there is no petrol and there's no running water. houses are underwater, cars are floating in the street, people are living in the dark, cut off from the outside world. this is hurricane irma seen from space. the size of france, is currently passing over the dominican republic and could hit florida at the beacon. the worst is still to come, close behind irma isjose. islands like these could not withstand another storm. if jose islands like these could not withstand another storm. ifjose has its way, they may need to be com pletely its way, they may need to be completely evacuated. joining me now is blondel cluff, representative of the government of anguilla to the uk and eu. i heard you saying, in absolute agreement with the last line of the report, anguilla could not stand another hurricane, if jose

report, anguilla could not stand another hurricane, ifjose hits. bring us up to date since we spoke yesterday. this yesterday, is being confirmed we have suffered loss of life. unfortunately, we are still lacking communication, so we've been unable to undertake a comprehensive review, but certainly, at least one gentleman has died thus far. with the devastation of saint martin, you simply cannot access anguilla. you we re simply cannot access anguilla. you were in explaining yesterday that anguilla is very much dependent on neighbouring islands, which are not necessarily british 0verseas territories, as anguilla is. nor, indeed, in fact, the closest location as france, is part of the eu, which is the french side of saint maarten. as you've seen a new report, the closest international airport is on the dutch side of saint martin, and that has been com pletely saint martin, and that has been completely wiped out, so there is no international access to is readily

available. so, have you been able to have any communication with people on anguilla? it's been sporadic. i got through to a minister yesterday and received a report on the fatality. the other setback for us is that our hospital, which is minuscule, with only 32 beds for 15,000 british citizens, has lost pa rt 15,000 british citizens, has lost part of its roof, as has the old peoples home, that prison and the police station major infrastructure is now under pressure, frankly. dire situation, even before you get to the threat of another hardy came. we know that on saint martin, the french part of the island, there we re french part of the island, there were troops on the ground in readiness for this. that was not the case for anguilla. boris johnson said earlier the uk is acting swiftly in response to the devastation caused by hurricane irma. how do you react to that? do

you think the uk could and should have done more in advance?” you think the uk could and should have done more in advance? i think it's always important to learn from these situations. saint martin had trips on the ground, because saint martin is france. is the collectivity of france. and of course, they look after themselves more readily than perhaps the united kingdom does for an overseas territory, which is not deemed to be a constituent part of the united kingdom. that's a very diplomatic answer, but if france can do it for its overseas territory, shouldn't the uk be acting in a similar fashion? continuing in a diplomatic thing, i think that if france can do it, perhaps the uk could learn from that. given that neighbouring saint martin has suffered terribly as a result of irma as well, and you've explained that anguilla is very dependent on it for its own recovery, other people essentially be on the run for the moments? we

invariably are on a roll and without the assistance of neighbouring islands. for example, we simply cannot receive major shipments of anything, because our waters are far too shallow. but there is a naval vessel in the india? yes, it has 40 members of crew on it, but it will have to cater for the needs of hundreds of thousands of people in the vicinity, i understand. thank you very much for coming along to talk to us again. i'm sure we'll be staying in touch to find out what the situation on the island is like. thank you again. thank you. the uk takes another step towards brexit today, as mps debate the european union withdrawal bill before a vote takes place on monday. the bill will mean that thousands of eu laws and regulations are transferred into british law. many in the commons, including some conservative backbenchers, have expressed concerns about the bill. labour says it will vote against it — arguing it's simply a power grab by the government. my

my colleague jane my colleaguejane is in westminster for us this morning. this will be one of the most contested debates and sometime. yes. there will be extra debate in the commons this morning, in the wake of storm irma. and going to be talking to iain duncan smith for the conservatives ina duncan smith for the conservatives in a moment, but first let's go to achieve political correspondent norman smith, because it will be watching all of this for us. norman, just to give us less sense of the anxieties here, whether it's going to go through, because they will ultimately have a port on it at the end of two days of debate. what are you picking up on? i think it was certainly will go through, even though the opposition parties are poised to vote against it. they're not going to be joined poised to vote against it. they're not going to bejoined by poised to vote against it. they're not going to be joined by tory rebels. let's be clear, this is a

big moment in the brexit story. this is the key bill that basically paves way to leave the eu. it undertakes the original legislation back in 1972, which took us into the then european community. this is a very significant piece of legislation and asa significant piece of legislation and as a result, it's an almighty big piece of legislation, something like 60 places with innumerable clauses and subclauses. what that means is there are all sorts of opportunities for the prime minister's critics and those opposed to brexit to try and change, to amend, to introduce different elements. so we may well see down the line, eat a few weeks' time, mps trying to table amendments, saying we must stay in the single market, we should leave the single market, we should leave the customs union, mps must have a vote before any brexit deal is signed off. there are huge

opportunities to shape the sort of brexit we eventually have. the curiosity is, the flash point which is emerging at the moment has nothing to do with brexit. it's all about the power of the government, because there is legislation means ministers will have a huge amount of say in transferring european law into british law and in some insta nces, into british law and in some instances, they would have to bother getting the approval of parliament. in many instances, some say up to a thousand different pieces of legislation, will be in effect signed off by ministers. that has provoked a backlash from those concerned about the power and role of parliament, including the former conservative attorney general dominic greene. i asked an hourly of what was his concern about this. as drafted, the bill is undoubtedly eat powergrab, drafted, the bill is undoubtedly eat power grab, because it gives the government the ability to rewrite

primary legislation in a way that has no adequate safeguards. i should explain, i entirely recognise that they cannot do this massive change without giving the government statutory instrument power to change statute law. but there have got to be safeguards, there has to be a syste m be safeguards, there has to be a system where parliament to scrutinise. in addition, we need to go through the bill to see if these powers should be granted. i think the government's approach so far has been remarkably cavalier in the way this has been drafted, because it has all the hallmarks of a power grab. and it's not necessarily, and they're going to have to change it if they want to get this bill through the commons. let me put it to you, is simply impossible to debate all the many cia, the thousands of bits and pieces of eu legislation. we have to cut the government some slack, to allow them to carry out what i'd just nips and tucks. absolutely right, i agree

with that entirely. what i'm suggesting is not that we somehow have to get rid of all these henry viii clauses, but there has to be a structure in place. you're so have to make sure that each time the lizzie henry viii clause allowing the government to government by decree, is this necessarily in this particular context? the legislation is full of them. my own view is that there are places where they are not necessarily. there are other places where what we need is a structure that guarantees that parliament will be able to have oversight in this pi’ocess. be able to have oversight in this process. as long as we have that, the government will have my support. it is necessary that we have this bill, we need in order to leave the eu without chaos, and the government is entitled to support in order to achieve that. but the draft is insufficient. what happens if the government says they don't agree with you and the defeated on this. because this bill is pivotal to our departure from the eu. would you not

then in effect be scuppering the key legislative plank to brexit?” then in effect be scuppering the key legislative plank to brexit? i think that's a rather apocalyptic description. in my view, if the government doesn't listen, there must be a strong likelihood of individual issues and the government might lose. i wouldn't wish to see that happening, my view is that the government is likely to listen carefully to what we have to see and amend the bill accordingly. if the bill was an appalling condition at the end of committee stage, that might call into question whether one could support it at third reading. but of course one has to have in mind that we need a piece of legislation of this kind, and if it's not this legislation, we would need some other piece of legislation. although i may have campaigned to remain in the eu, i have accepted the verdict of the electorate. my task as an mp is to make sure this exit is carried out ina make sure this exit is carried out in a smoothly and in a way that is compatible with our constitution. the difficulty is that there legislation at the moment doesn't do

that. indeed, far from creating certainty, there are other aspects of the bill but create uncertainty, and that has been commented on by a large numberof and that has been commented on by a large number of people and that bubbly to be addressed. beyond this argument over the powers of parliament, this is a piece of legislation that provides ample opportunity to table allsorts of amendments how far is it likely that mps opposed to the government's approach to brexit will use this legislation to derail the government's plans? that certainly not my understanding of what is likely to happen, as far as conservative mps are concerned. i've no idea what the labour party is going to do. speaking personally, i think this bill is a very poor vehicle for trying to obstruct brexit. anyone who has any sense of responsibility must recognise that we need such a piece of regulation if we are to leave the eu smoothly. there's responsibility on all of us

to do that. there may be all sorts of background issues that people would like to argue about, including the principle of brexit itself, but this isn't the place to do it and it's certainly not my purpose in the issues i've been reading with the government, to try to obstruct brexit being carried out, far from it. so potentialtrouble brexit being carried out, far from it. so potential trouble ahead for mrs may. but potential trouble ahead forjeremy corbyn, because labour have decided they are going to vote against the big second reading vote, the main vote on monday. but some labour mps the main vote on monday. but some labourmps are the main vote on monday. but some labour mps are not at all happy about that, because their fear is that labour will be seen as trying to sabotage brexit, and their concern is that this will be a slap in the face of those many labour voters who actually backed brexit in the referendum. so trouble for mrs may potentially, potential trouble forjeremy corbyn as well. we'll be

putting some of that to labour members later in the day. i'll be talking to hillary benn among others later on. but right now, let's talk to iain duncan smith, in favour of britain leading the eu. good morning. you could not hear dominic grieve there, but i'm sure you know the former attorney general was describing this bill is a power grab. he says that are significant problems with that. the first thing is there will be plenty of time to debate what he thinks is in this bill, but can ijust remind him of something he skates over. in 1972, the act that routers into the european union, gave the government enormous powers to ignore parliament. for 40 years, enormous powers to ignore parliament. for40 years, i enormous powers to ignore parliament. for 40 years, i don't re call parliament. for 40 years, i don't recall him or others complaining about the lack of accountability of parliament. the set of powers are

time—limited and then about simply getting this stuff into uk law, all the european law that were going to repeal, but it into uk law and get it done and then the powers all. that's all it is. if there are ways of scrutinising whether the change are not, i'm in favour of that, but let's not complain about the power grab, that took place 40 years ago. this will now empower parliament and agree to win and we had for 40 years. but the fact that people like him, with the role he has heard, there are many backbench mps in your own party who are expressing similar concerns. does that not suggest that theresa may has not been able to reassure people probably that there will be scrutiny? that the issues has not filtered through, because dominic grieve is not the only person saying it. he has been an opponent of us leaving from the word go. but he says he acknowledges the way the vote went. they'll say that. let's put it in context. it is a

let's; eat it: in. tar-tut“ i—‘z ai reading today the bill it second reading today the bill it will be debated here and in the lords. there will be a lot of give and take on the scrutiny of it, to assure people there is no intention to expand or extend those provisions in any way. it's simply about implementing and not changing the laws. i think will be able to get it through, but the bill itself has one purpose only, to make sure that when we leave, it is as smooth as possible, that businesses and others now, that the law that applies today will still apply in the same way tomorrow, and that's the purpose of the bill. and those who want to vote against it, like the labour party at the moment, it's ridiculous. if you vote this bill down, you will have chaos. what would the impact be of that? some of your party members might do that as well? all the law

we've implemented in 40 years would disappear from the statute books, with no mechanism to restrain it. that would be chaos. the labour party is playing a silly game. by all means, complain about elements of the bill and seek to get the change, but to vote against the second reading is to vote for chaotic exit. quickly about devolved governments. this, this is all about we are bringing powers back and is the powers will be devolved. things that fisheries, that will take place with devolved administrations. but they are devolved, remember, they are not federal parliaments, so the government retains certain powers like trade. they are making a fuss about nothing. thank you very much for your time this morning. banks are being with us. at half past three this afternoon, we want to a

special ask this. we will have two experts and academics with those just have half past three to go through as many of your questions as we possibly can. abby back with more here in westminster throughout the day. if you would like to put a question to our experts, you can text us on 61124, use the hashtag bbc ask this on social media, or email us at askthis@bbc.co.uk before we get to that debate, with expecting a statement from the foreign office on hurricane irma. the british territory anguilla has been badly hit. with expecting that statement ahead of the withdrawal debate. let's talk a little bit more

about the withdrawal debate. we can go to brussels, and our correspondent adam fleming is there. adam, a lot of people watching billy keely and brussels to see the content keely and brussels to see the co nte nt of keely and brussels to see the content of this debate, the nature of this debate, and also expecting a statement from michel barnier today on the irish border issue after brexit. yes, michel barnier is due to do eat press conference. use it there to talk about what to do about there to talk about what to do about the border between the republic of ireland and northern ireland. i've a feeling it may be slightly overshadowed by this document which has just overshadowed by this document which hasjust emerged. this is minutes recently published of a meeting held by european officials, including jean—claude juncker, the president of the european commission, and michel barnier, on the 12th ofjuly to review progress of the first

round of brexit talks that took place at the end ofjune. that is very interesting language, i would say it's a damning verdict on david davis. the minute see the president expressed his concern about the question of the stability and accountability of the uk negotiator david davis and his apparent lack of involvement, which risked jeopardising the success of the negotiations. that was backed up by michel barnier in an earlier part of the meeting, where he said that the impression he caught was that david davis did not regard being directly involved in the brexit talks in brussels as one of his priorities. i imagine some people will think those are quite undiplomatic descriptions of the brexit circuitry they're sitting on the opposite side of the table from in the negotiations. some of those comments really quite damning, and it almost creates a sense of two tracks continuing alongside each other in parallel, but never actually meeting, to come

to an agreement. and i had a discussion earlier today, where someone was suggesting that progress by next month, which is the first date there was hope to be significant movement forward on the discussions, was in the neighbourhood of zeal. what the eu said is that there has to be what they call sufficient progress, decisive progress made in those three key issues of citizens rights, the uk financial obligations and the irish border, before the talks can move from phase one about brexit related issues, to phase two, which is about the future relationship between the uk and the eu. people got that could happen in when there's an eu summit of eu leaders, now people are suggesting that's very unlikely. the latest person to make that suggestion is the former president of the european council, who used to cheer those summits, who told the bbc radio four today programme this morning that the

chances of that happening where in the neighbourhood of zero, in his words. there's quite a lot going on behind the scenes and in front of the scenes, but the focus on the next hour or so will be whether michel barnier still stands by these comments he and john claudejunker read about david davis and his stability and accountability, whether he was even wanting to be that directly involved in the brexit process , that directly involved in the brexit process, or if that was an out of date statements they made. also, the substance being debated today, which is the crucial issue of the irish border. a lot going on. thank you very much, adam fleming in brussels. universities in england could face fines if they pay their leaders more than the prime minister — unless they can convince a regulator that their bosses are worth it. dozens of vice chancellors currently earn more than double the prime minister's annual salary of £150,000. the universities minister, jojohnson, says urgent measures are needed to ensure a good deal

for both students and taxpayers. 0ur education correspondent gillian hargreaves is at the conference in west london, where the universities minister jojohnson is due to speak later. gillian joins us now. what is the reaction been to what he has had to say? i would describe it as subdued. there was no slow handclapping, there was nojeering. these are very respectable leaders of the universities across the united kingdom, so they're not the sort of people who would throw rotten eggs at a politician. but they are not very happy about this and they are saying this is government interference in their autonomy. many vice chancellors have said to me, we don't actually have a say in what we are paid and when you of as as global organisations, recruiting from all over the world, worth quite a lot of money in our local communities, and also generating a lot of revenue in terms of research, then frankly, quite a

lot of us are worth it. but this morning, jojohnson lot of us are worth it. but this morning, jo johnson said, lot of us are worth it. but this morning, jojohnson said, no, that he wanted much more strictly of their pay packages, and in some cases, universities could please sanctions, if the feeling is there being a top people are not a lot of money and that isn't much evidence that they're bringing a lot of the university. this is what he said when was talking about vice chancellors' pain. i don't want to read about their pay in the newspapers, any more than you do. these headlines raise fears that student fees are not being used efficiently, and that there governance processes are not working effectively. this is why i have repeatedly urged the sector, through guidance, to show restraint in levels of seeing your pain. we do need demonstrable action now to protect value for money for students and taxpayers in the future, to

ensure that vice chancellor pay levels are seen as fair and justified. and he also criticised universities on the issue of what he sees are at the rising numbers of top grades being awarded to students. he said there should be greater scrutiny. he described this as grade inflation. we've seen politicians talk about grade inflation at gcse and a—level in england's schools, so it feels like he's saying to universities, come on, you've got to shake up your act here. i want to see value for money, i want to see proof that the best stu d e nts i want to see proof that the best students are really worth those first—class degrees that are being awarded in the nation's universities. and crucially, that vice chancellors are showing some restraint when it comes to their own pay packets. thank you. prince george is starting school today. the four—year—old is attending thomas's school in battersea, south london. fees at the school are more than £17,000 a year. prince george was taken

to school by his father. the duchess of cambridge, who is pregnant with the couple's third child, is suffering from severe morning sickness. 0ur royal correspondent sarah campbell is here. a fairly serious looking prince george this morning, and of course, the notable absence of his mother. yes, indeed. prince george's to was slightly nervous. i'm sure any pa rent to slightly nervous. i'm sure any parent to stick their child to school in the first day will recognise that. and also the fact that his mum wasn't there. it was announced on monday that she was suffering severe morning sickness again. it was announced this morning that she is simply too unwell to add tens. so dad dropped off. as they plan to do as often as possible. the school is about half an hour drive from kensington palace. it is called

thomas's in battersea. he will be known to his classmates as george cambridge. it's been described by the good schools guide as a big, busy, slightly chaotic school. just after george arrived, the principal was asked what kind of child george would be when he left school. was asked what kind of child george would be when he left schoollj was asked what kind of child george would be when he left school. i hope very much that he will be himself. the whole aim of these precious years of early education is to give children that confidence in who they are. we're not going to try and mould them into any particular person and we wouldn't do that with anyone. i hope you have the confidence to be himself, with all his quirks and idiosyncrasies and characteristics. that's what i want for all of our children. also notable this morning was the discrete media presence covering this occasion, which is very much setting the tone that the royal couple want to establish a round coverage of what is going on in their lives and especially their children's lives. as it has been

from day one. there was a large crowd outside the front entrance of the school. but there was only one camera, and it wasn't a live camera. there was not the big bank of cameras, if you remember prince william's first day at school, it was more of a media event. the principal said they want to be himself, they want him to be just another thomas's pupil. how possible that will be? do you invite george to the play date or the party? all these questions were the parents. thank you very much. time to take a look at the weather. some outbreaks of rain affecting scotla nd some outbreaks of rain affecting scotland and northern ireland which will move into north—west england and northern wales. elsewhere cloud increasing. 0ne

and northern wales. elsewhere cloud increasing. one or two showers around a disappointingly cool across the north. maximum temperature is about 14 to 16 celsius. through this evening that rain will continue to spread south and east, breaking up, but behind it we can see quite a breeze and that is bringing showers into the early hours of friday. temperatures down to around 12 to 14. friday starts with a lot of showers, quite breezy, some sunny spells across the northern half of the uk but towards the south we will see more persistent rain starting to move in. some could be on the heavy side. maximum temperature 16 to 19. the weekend will be pretty u nsettled, the weekend will be pretty unsettled, cool and windy with rain at times. this is bbc newsroom live — the headlines: at least nine people have died as a result

—— ten people. of hurricane irma in the caribbean, one of the most powerful storms ever recorded. my whole house caved in. there was seven of us. all we had to do was pray and call for help. the firemen came to our rescue as soon as they could have come. i have to thank god for life. we are going straight to the house of commons now whether foreign 0ffice minister is making a statement on hurricane emma. everyone appreciates the importance of the latest position on this unfolding catastrophe. as with any hurricane one can never be sure of the ultimate effect until the extent and location of its inevitable damage has become clear. it's predicted force however put everyone on the highest state of alert and preparedness, to which end the foreign office crisis sensor and differed planning were all put onto the high state of readiness over two days ago. the sco prices centre has two important functions, one is to organise the fullest citizens to

citizens abroad. and the other is to monitor the path of the hurricane and coordinate every possible uk results in particular to the british territories affected. hurricane, having reached category five, the highest possible category, hit three british 0verseas territories yesterday. anguilla, montserrat and the british virgin islands. today we expect the hurricane to affect a further uk territory. the hurricane yesterday also cause damage in the independent commonwealth countries of antigua and barbuda and we expect it to affect the dominican republic, haiti and the bahamas today. it will most likely affect you and south—eastern florida tomorrow. the hurricane is heading westwards and remain strong. we have an initial assessment of the severity of the damage it has caused and i will outline for the house what we know so far. montserrat was swiped by the

hurricane yesterday. but our initial assessment is relatively positive. fortu nately assessment is relatively positive. fortunately the damage is not as severe as first thought. however in contrast anguilla received the hurricane's full blast. the initial assessment is that the damage has been severe and in places critical. we expect further reports to make clear the full nature of the devastation and at the moment and we'll‘s port and airport remain closed. the british virgin islands we re closed. the british virgin islands were also not spared the hurricane's full force when it passed through yesterday morning. 0ur full force when it passed through yesterday morning. our initial assessment is of severe damage. we expect that the islands will need extensive humanitarian assistance which we will of course provide. the hurricane is expected to hit another british 0verseas territory later today. the turks and caicos islands lie ina today. the turks and caicos islands lie in a hurricane's predicted path

and officials and in london and the territories are preparing. they are also liaising with their cou nterpa rts also liaising with their counterparts in the cayman islands for assistance. the french and dutch territories of guadeloupe and saint martin have also been hit at the initial assessments are of widespread damage. the more detailed assessment continues. no british nationals have yet contacted us to ask for assistance from these islands. to commonwealth realms were affected by hurricane yesterday. antigua and barbuda's less populated island barbuda was severely affected. antigua and think its neighbours were less badly affected than many had with only minor damage. we expect the hurricane will affect the dominican republic and haiti today. it will sweep on through the south—east of the bahamas later and tomorrow is predicted to hit cuba and southern florida. 0fficials

predicted to hit cuba and southern florida. officials in london and the territories have been working throughout the day and night to assess and quantify the needs of our territories anti—collision eight at a cross government response. 0fficials a cross government response. officials in london are maintaining contact although this is sometimes difficult, with our governor offices in the territories. the governor ‘s teams are themselves working closely with the territory ‘s governments to respond to this crisis. the royal naval ship, mounts bay, respond to this crisis. the royal navalship, mounts bay, is respond to this crisis. the royal naval ship, mounts bay, is already in the caribbean and should reach the affected territories later today. the ship carries royal marines and army engineers and her primary task is the protection of our overseas territories. she is loaded with a range of equipment, vehicles, tense, stores and hydraulic vehicles specifically intended to response to disasters like this. in addition, differed stands ready to charter flights to deliver additional supplies as appropriate. i spoke last night to

the london representatives of the british virgin islands. i was in our prices centre yesterday afternoon and again late last night and have been based there this morning. at 8:45pm last night the foreign secretary spoke to anguilla's chief minister and the foreign secretary tried but was unable to contact the premiere of the british virgin islands last night but my noble friend has been in contact with governor this morning. we will be working in support of the overseas territories governments to develop the best possible assessment of their immediate and longer—term needs. to that end, my right honourable friend the secretary of state for defence will chair a meeting of cobra at two o'clock this afternoon. 0ur priority is to support the territories governments in meeting their immediate humanitarian and security needs including shelter, water, and accommodation. we have four uk aid

humanitarian experts in the region who are helping to coordinate response. we will assess with the territories governments their long—term reconstruction requirements as we have done in the past. and as the house will appreciate, the relationship between overseas territories and their pa rent overseas territories and their parent countries differs. whilst french territories are directly governed, that is not the case with our overseas territories. while this means our responses will of course be different, we will seek to achieve the same objectives and are taking immediate steps to do so. the prime minister called president macron this morning to discuss our respective responses to hurricane,. they agreed that is devastation wreaked was terrible with unconfirmed reports emerging of a number of the territories. the prime minister updated the french president on our response, noting that humanitarian advisers had already deployed to the region to

conduct damage assessments and to provide vies humanitarian as support and that rfa mounts bay was already near the area. they agreed to cooperate closely including with the dutch to understand the extent of the damage and to coordinate our relief efforts. we will all do our utmost to help those affected. i undertake to keep the harris updated as required. thank you. i thank the minister for as required. thank you. i thank the ministerfor his as required. thank you. i thank the minister for his statement and for allowing me to see the statement. may i start by associating myself with the mr‘s remarks in sending the deepest sympathies of this house to the people whose lives and livelihoods have been lost due to the devastation caused by hurricane hirmer. many thousands of british tourists visit the carrot beer and

every year for the holidays and i would like to ask what is the government estimate of the number of uk nationals currently in the countries that have been hit by a hurricane, or are likely to be affected in the coming days and what requests for consular assistance as the foreign office referred received from british nationals in the countries affected ? and from british nationals in the countries affected? and also what assistance is the government ready to provide in response to such requests, what efforts is it making to communicate with british nationals across the region to make sure they know what help is available to them ? sure they know what help is available to them? and of course, holiday—makers are no means the only people who will have been affected. the damage for those who live in the region will be both profound and lasting, particularly with the effect on the tourism industry. many of these people may also be british, given the number of uk overseas territories in the caribbean. the

minister has given us the government ‘s original assessment of the impact of the hurricane on overseas territories such as anguilla, montserrat, turks and caicos and the british virgin islands, but i would like to ask what discussions the minister has had or intends to have with the governments of these territories about the effects of the hurricane and also with the governments of countries like antigua and barbuda which have also been affected. and also what efforts is the government making to work with the authorities in these areas on their reconstruction plans? i would also like to ask what reassu ra nces would also like to ask what reassurances he can give that the uk stands ready not only to provide the immediate humanitarian and security relief that is needed so urgently but also the sustained commitment to reconstruction which will be so important in the longer term. and finally i am sure the minister will

commit to providing regular updates to the house on the progress of reconstruction efforts, and particularly on what steps this government is taking to assist with those efforts, and also i am confident that he will update the house killed in the cobra meeting to be held this afternoon. very grateful for what she said and the tone in which she said it, because i think this house will want to send a united message of concern and we all just want to do the very best for those who have been in many cases devastated by the ferocity of this hurricane. 0n the question of tourists, many of course will have left because there was some notice this was likely to come and it is not peak season. so we have not had any direct requests for consular assistance, but i think we all have concern that beneath the rubble in some cases there will be cases which

will require our urgent personal response. 0ur will require our urgent personal response. our focus is will require our urgent personal response. 0urfocus is of will require our urgent personal response. our focus is of course not just on tourists it is on everybody. we really have complete overall concern particularly for our overseas territories which are affected, and to that end we have £12 million immediately available through our rapid response mechanism for disaster receive and recovery, and with me is the secretary of state for international development, who like the foreign office are on full alert and doing their utmost with a great wealth of expertise to deploy on this, and i can speak not only as a foreign minister was as someone who in the past two has been a differed minister. we will of course in the long term always meet ourfull course in the long term always meet our full legal obligations to our overseas territory, but can i assure the house that we are pulling out

all the stops to make sure we can do our utmost to bring urgent assistance once we with the professionalism and if it has does the assessment to make sure we know who are in greatest need and then we can use our adeptness and flexibility are urgently to address those who most need our help. so foreign office minister saying £12 million is available at many immediately for disaster relief to british citizens and british territories affected so far by hurricane irma. he said anguilla had received the full blast of the damage is severe in places and critical in other parts of the island. whilst it has been swiped by. island. whilst it has been swiped by, yesterday but the initial fear over damage was that it was not as severe as first feared. the british

virgin islands were also not spared hurricane irma's the full force. and the turks and caicos also expected to be affected. the government says it will do its utmost to help those affected in the caribbean. some news just coming into us in the last few moments while we were listening to what was going on in the house of commons. this relates to the killing of seven—year—old katie injanuary who was found stabbed and asphyxiated in a playing field in york in january. asphyxiated in a playing field in york injanuary. the teenager who killed her has been given an interim hospital order to assess her mental health. the 16—year—old, she was 15 at the time, can't be named for legal reasons but admitted the manslaughter of katie rough earlier in court as an earlier hearing. she was told she would be assessed in

hospital before a further hearing in november and the judge told her all sentencing options remain open. let's get more now on the news that mps are about to begin scrutinising the eu withdrawal bill. chris morris from our reality check team can tell us more about the bill and why opposition parties are trying to block it. it began life in a prime ministerial speech as the great repeal bill then it became simply the repeal bill and now we are working with its official title, the rather more prosaic european union withdraw bell. here is where it will end up with all the other violence scrolls in the houses of parliament going back centuries. what does it do? it is a complex mix of constitutional change and legal continuity. firstly it repeals the 1972 european community ‘s act that took the uk into what was then known

as the european economic community. the repeal will come into effect on the day of brexit which until anyone decides otherwise will be march 29 2019. secondly the bill will tra nsfer 2019. secondly the bill will transfer eu rules and regulations wholesale into uk law to avoid legal and financial chaos when we leave. we are talking about an estimated 19,000 separate pieces of legislation, a vast body of law that has developed over more than 40 yea rs. has developed over more than 40 years. a new category of domestic law will be created called retained eu law. after brexit any of it could then be amended or repealed by the uk parliament. 30 and perhaps most co ntroversially, uk parliament. 30 and perhaps most controversially, the bill will channel this henry viii knew a thing or two about trying to can take back control from europe. it is about things called henry viii clauses which gave henry viii the power to legislate by proclamation. a modern day equivalent gives ministers and

officials the power to make changes to some laws without full parliamentary scrutiny. this has set alarm bells ringing in many quarters. there are those who argue it will undermine the ultimate sovereignty of parliament and those who worry eu laws covering workers' rights or environmental protection could be changed on the quiet. the brexit secretary david davis says such concerns are ‘nonsense' — the government insists that henry viii powers will only be used to deal with technical issues, not to make substantive policy changes. that's why there will be separate bills during the course of this parliament in areas where new legislation will be needed — customs, immigration, agriculture and so on. but this is an argument that will run and run, and there is another point of contention — the role of the devolved parliaments and assemblies in scotland, wales and northern ireland. the first ministers of scotland and wales have described the withdrawal bill as a ‘naked power grab' because it returns all powers from the eu to the uk parliament, all in all, then, there are massive challenges for the government, as it embarks on the daunting

legislative task of turning brexit policy into practice. i hope it works better than our screen! lets continue discussing the bill and the debate that will be beginning soon. lots of interesting issues there ,— jane hill is at westminster. there is or was plenty to explain so we can pick up on that easily. jill rutter has joined us we can pick up on that easily. jill rutter hasjoined us here we can pick up on that easily. jill rutter has joined us here at westminster. we'll be listening to the debate when it starts. hello again. it is a significant day isn't it? your thoughts first on the overall significance. is it just symbolic or is it actually the beginning of how the future in this country is going to look? this is taking another important first step. a second reading in next two days, second reading is where parliament

agrees to the principle of the bill. we don't, we have lots of amendments going down but we're not getting into the nitty—gritty yet but it will flush out where those big arguments will be, some of which i think chris was talking about earlier. i am going to mention the henry viii clauses. viewers are forgive them for not beginning to understand this. the good thing is you understand this inside out. it sounds archaic, explain what these clauses are and why it is something we should be talking about. what this is really about is about parliamentary scrutiny of what the government is trying to do. the government is trying to do. the government is trying to do. the government is putting forward a bill thatis government is putting forward a bill that is almost like a shell bell, it isa that is almost like a shell bell, it is a sort of vehicle for giving itself the powers it will need to make changes. it is transferring this body of eu law into uk law that says we will need to correct some bits because some bits won't work and it is basically saying to parliament these are all pretty boring, you don't want to be looking at all of these so we will do it through this thing called secondary

legislation. statutory instruments which parliament does not get much say on. that is why some people are upset, because they are saying we are elected mps we should have scrutiny of every line. what they are basically saying is we do not trust you to keep those technical changes. you are going to use those to potentially sneak in some significant policy changes. you are also going to use these powers to implement notjust also going to use these powers to implement not just technical changes but also things that are in the withdrawal agreement and if you are going to do that we want to scrutinise those properly. we get to do that if we have to do it through primary legislation, through normal acts of parliament, but if you do these arcane procedures, you take these arcane procedures, you take these powers to yourselves, we'll don't get much say. we need more of a say. the interesting battle is whether safeguards are put into the bill to say you can use secondary powers that some things but not

others. stay with us if you can because we shall barnier has just started speaking. let's hear what he is saying. translation: i do apologise. we can hear him, but it depends what languages you have to hand. we don't have our interpreter to hand. as soon as we hear a bit more we will analyse what he is saying and we will bring that to you. i think we do have an interpreter now let's head back. translation: that means we are all in the same footing and you are on the same footing. it is a level

playing field amongst yourselves. today we published our guiding principles we also published for papers on issues that will need to be part of the withdrawal agreement. let me first focus on ireland. the european council and the european parliament have recognised the unique situation and the specific circumstances of the island of ireland. i see the specific situation as a special responsibility. first, the responsibility. first, the responsibility to preserve the peace process and the gains of the good friday agreement in all its parts. secondly, the responsibility to

maintain the common travel area. and thirdly, the responsibility to avoid the return of a hard border between ireland and northern ireland. we need first to agree on political principles, discussing technical solutions will be premature in the political context of northern ireland. and we are working hand—in—hand with the irish government, and i want to thank the taoiseach and the minister of foreign affairs and their teams in dublin and brussels for their commitment. i also want to thank the other magistrates and the european parliament for their full support.

we have seen in this negotiation is that ireland's interests is the 27th interests and vice versa. the uk said that it is ready to ensure the common travel area can continue to operate while respecting ireland's obligations as an eu member state including in relation to free movement. the good friday agreement, the uk as guarantor will also need put solutions forward in particular the interlocking political institutions created by the good friday agreement will need to continue operating effectively. we need to avoid a return to hard border between higher ireland and northern ireland while respecting ireland plays in the single market.

north south operation will need to be preserved in all policy areas. irish citizens residing in northern ireland must continue to enjoy their rights as eu citizens. it is the birthright of all people of northern ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as irish or british or both. and the european union will honour its financial commitments in favour of programmes supporting the peace process such as. we expect the uk to do the same as part of its financial settlement. but, ladies and gentlemen, we're not there yet. the solution for the border issue

will need to be unique. it cannot reconfigure the future relationship between the european union and the uk. it will require both sides to be flexible and creative. and what i see in the uk's paper on ireland and northern ireland worries me. the uk once the eu to suspend the application of its laws, its customs union and its single market as what would be a new external border for the eu. and the uk wants to use ireland as a kind of test case. you are watching bbc news. we will stay with mr barnier. if you would like to continue to see this news conference, we will have continuing

coverage on news channel. this will be not fair for ireland and it would not be fair for the europe pn union. monsieur... translation: ladies and gentlemen, as ireland is on citizens rights and the financial settlement, we need sufficient progress to move forwards and in our paper today, if you read the text carefully on ireland, you can see what our definition is of sufficient progress, what sort of political progress must be made so that on ireland we reach that level of sufficient progress. once that step has been taken,... on all

subjects, ireland, the financial settlement, and securing the rights of eu citizens and others,. sorry about that, is the monthly drill. buzzer rings. i was talking about something quite important. once this step has been taken, important. once this step has been ta ken, weave, important. once this step has been taken, weave, with the united kingdom, shall draft treaty

organising this orderly withdrawal. this withdrawal under article 15 must be precise. it will have to create legal certainty in all areas where brexit has created and is creating uncertainty on the three priority subjects, but also on technical matters, which negotiations will have to clarify in the months ahead. in order to achieve this legal certainty and precision, we are therefore publishing today for a new position papers on intellectual property rights, customs, protection of data exchanged before withdrawal and public procurement. so in total, and i'm sure you've counted them, since june, we have published 14 papers, covering areas dealing with the

orderly withdrawal of the united kingdom. from my point of view, it is very positive that the united kingdom has published the days ahead, we'll be publishing new position papers. obviously, we will study those papers and positions very carefully, working immediately on everything which is part of orderly withdrawal, and keeping for later what concerns the future relationship. the important thing for us is that these papers are sufficiently precise for us to make real progress. this sooner, ladies and gentlemen, we can see genuine sufficient progress, the sooner we will start discussing in parallel impossible transition period, if the united kingdom makes a request to that effect, and our future relationship, which as you know, will require a second treaty. through this second treaty, we also

wa nt through this second treaty, we also want an ambitious agreement with the united kingdom. and notjust in terms of doing trade, but also in terms of doing trade, but also in terms of doing trade, but also in terms of our cooperation, which is necessary in the areas of security, the fight against terrorism and defence this second treaty must be built, will be built upon a balance between rights and obligations, as is the case with all of those agreements that we have already concluded with other third countries. for example, norway, iceland, and next and steyn, you have chosen to be part of the single market, to accept their rules, and to make a financial contribution to european cohesion. but i also think of canada, with whom we have just negotiated a highly ambitious

free—trade agreement. canada is not pa rt of free—trade agreement. canada is not part of the single market and therefore has neither the opportunities nor the obligations. and i'm sure everyone will understand that it is not possible, it will not be possible for a third country to combine simultaneously the benefits of the norwegian model with the weak constraints of the canadian model. and it's in the light of those principles, which the united kingdom is very familiar with, as it has been applying them for 44 years, it is in the light of those principles that we await with great interest and will study objectively and constructively, the next proposals from the british government, which we require in order to make progress. thank you. leicester is the questions. i'll start with bruno. times of london.

very quickly, the minutes of the 12th ofjuly commission college have been published and the discussions we re been published and the discussions were rather gloomy on article 50. and you noted that david davis did not regard his direct involvement in these negotiations as his priority. his remarks were enlarged upon by the commission president later on. do you still hold that rather negative assessment of david davis? and on the financial settlement, there was something of a breakthrough before thejuly round, when britain acknowledged it has obligations that will survive the uk's withdrawal, because of concerns that the uk saw the financial settle m e nt

that the uk saw the financial settlement as an entrance fee into the single market. i understand now the single market. i understand now the lack of detail from britain on those obligations that survived withdrawal is something of a sticking point. can you give us a bit more of what you would like to see, in terms of britain fleshing out on explaining its obligations? to start with, i have known david davies for about 20 years. back then, we were both european affairs ministers, myself and france and he in the uk, so this was in 19951996, when we were both preparing the amsterdam treaty. and i have cordial relations with him still and a good professional relation. and i would

add another thing, and professional relation. and i would add anotherthing, and here's professional relation. and i would add another thing, and here's your question, i have one thing to tell ye here now, seven days ago exactly, at this time, we arrived at the end of the third round of negotiations, and david davis was standing here, and david davis was standing here, andl and david davis was standing here, and i paid a tribute to his professionalism and the competence of the whole of the uk team. and i have nothing further to add on that point. i don't want people to get emotional, but on a less emotive

issue, something about facts and figures and the legal base and so on, on the financial settlement, it's a very important issue for the 27 member states and for the parliament. just to recall, ladies and gentlemen, in 2013, the heads of state and government agreed on a multi annual framework, spanning seven years, which sets out the different policies and the expenditure and the way things are going to be financed. and this agreement was signed by the uk prime minister, mr cameron. and we collect resources from each of the member states, that's the system. and this syste m states, that's the system. and this system was ratified by every member parliament, including the uk parliament. so every euro spent has

a specific legal base. and if you read our financial settlement position paper, you'll find all the details there, line by line, allthe legal basis corresponding to the different areas of expenditure for the seven—year period. plus other areas of commitment in the medium and long—term. so the council legal service is behind this, commissioner legal service as well. they all believe that any commitments of the 20 member states need to be honoured by the 28. and this is based on the own resources system. if a decision was taken own resources system. if a decision was ta ken before own resources system. if a decision was taken before brexit, even if it only comes to fruition after the withdrawal of the uk, this rule

still applies. in the withdrawal of the uk, this rule stillapplies. in the past, iwas responsible for regional policy. and those seen in the uk and the other 27 member states, there weren't so many back then. but you have projects for infrastructure, road infrastructure, transport, universities, these only come to fruition in terms of payments several years down the line. so there are thousands of people, stakeholders, companies, citizens, universities, laboratories, they have set up their projects on the basis of the promise made by the 28 member states. so there is a moral dilemma here. you can't have 27 paying for what was decided by 28. so what was decided by 28 member

states, that has to be borne out by the 20 member states, so right up to be in. it's as simple as that. just to respond to your precise question, i've been very disappointed by the uk position as expressed last week. because it seems to me a backtracking on the original commitment from the uk to honour its international commitments. including the commitments post brexit. ladies and gentlemen, there is a problem of confidence here, so what i'm worried about is the credibility of 28 member states signing up to something, signing up to the commitments entailed by the uk budget. we need to think about the future, we need to be working on a basis of confidence, off trust. so

quite calmly, quite objectively, i can say there is no exit bill, is not a matter of punishment, that's not a matter of punishment, that's not the way i think and it never will be. but to have confidence, you need to balance the books in a rigorous, objective, legalfashion, legally sound fashion. thank you. irish times. and what you said, you referred again to one of the three priorities in the irish discussion has now returned to a hard border. and the top then later about how the commission is making clear its view on what is sufficient progress in these discussions. are you suggesting that we have to see progress on that particular strand of the talks? because my understanding had been up till now that everybody saw the border issue as an issue for the second phase future relationship talks? well, you have understood correctly.

ididn't well, you have understood correctly. i didn't say anything other than that. we have to complete the whole process of explaining a joint decision with the british about, first of all, what the good friday agreement represents, and second of all, the conditions for the common travel area. as you know, it's not first and foremost just a question of borders and economic matters. under the good friday agreement, you have a dozen areas, education, public health, other areas where there is cooperation between the two parties. the good friday agreement, of which the united kingdom is call guarantor. we have made progress, i've said this year before. our

discussions have been fruitful, but have not yet been completed. so we need to conclude our agreement on all of them political agreements and then, that's what i mean by sufficient progress, as far as ireland is concerned. and i say this having been in close contact with the irish government. and then in a second stage, will we are finalising the new treaty with the uk and the second phase will then have to go into the details of all the technical arrangements, and i'll be looking to the uk for proposals, because, let us not forget, this whole situation has been created by the sovereign decision of the uk to leave the european union, the single market and the customs union. so, as call guarantor of the good friday agreement... we will leave that

michel barnier news conference for now. he's talking in brussels. or keep an eye across that, because it maybe there are still questions to come by him. very striking at the last few minutes, he was talking about the divorce bill, as we and called in this country, and expressing disappointment, talking again about the need to set that there are certain moral obligations. at the start of what he was saying, he was addressing key issues, including the irish border, which we know is absolutely one of the key elements were to set that there are certain moral obligations. at the start of what he was saying, he was addressing key issues, including the irish border, which we know is absolutely one of the key elements for a debate in this topic. if you can hear noises off, there have been a number of process today, and the current protests is from a man who doesn't want britain to leave the eu. apologies if that is distracting. when michel barnier started speaking, i was talking to a spokesperson from the institute of government. he addressed quite a few different topics there, and i guess

that reinforces, reminds us that there are different strands of this and essentially how complicated business. that's right. normally, you would expect to do the negotiation, legislator men have time to implement. the real challenge for the government is its legislating without knowing at the moment what it's really legislating for. so all these positions so there is nitty—gritty detail all over the place that is all up for discussion. as pa rt of place that is all up for discussion. as part of the divorce agreement and then as part of this much bigger deep and special partnership with government says it wants to negotiate. the debate will begin behind is in the next 20 minutes or so. the people who are justjoining us, it is a significant, and other significant day, i should say. yes, it is parliament really starting to get stuck into the mass of processes going to face, which is going to

dominate this parliament. taking the idea of leaving the eu, endorsed by steve on the referendum, taking that and making it happen. so this is another step towards brexit. good to see you. thanks were staying with this. a very busy and noisy debut in westminster. the debate should get under way in the next while. back to you. let's talk about our other main story of the day. hurricane irma has caused devastation across the caribbean killing at least ten people. the small island of barbuda has been severely hit — making it, in the words of its prime minister, barely habitable. while the islands of anguilla and st martin have also suffered loss of life and significant damage. the storm is currently passing north of puerto rico where more than half of the island's three million residents are without power. officials have said it could be cut off for several days. projections suggest the storm could hit the us state of florida by sunday.

authorities in the french island territory of saint martin say it has been reduced to rubble and its airport is virtually destroyed. hurricane irma, a storm the size of france. the islands of barbuda has been devastated. apologies, we're going to pull away from that report and go to the house of commons, where the brexit bill debate is getting under way. today, we begin the next step in the historic process of honouring that decision. put simply, bill is an essential step. while it does not

ta ke essential step. while it does not take is out of the european union, thatis take is out of the european union, that is a matter for the article 50 process, it doesn't shoot on the day we leave, businesses know where they stand. workers' rights are upheld and consumers remain protected. this bill is vital to ensuring that as we leave, we do so in an orderly manner. let me start with a brief summary of the bill before going to set out is key provisions in depth. the bill is designed to provide maximum possible legal certainty and continuity, while restoring control to the united kingdom. it does so in the broad steps. first, it removes from the statute book the key legislation passed by this parliament in 1972, the european communities act. that gave european mossop in stages over law made in this country. is therefore right it be removed from our statute book on the on the date the uk leads the eu,

bringing supremacy of the law back there. second, the bill gives a snapshot of the law at the moment and ensures that it will continue to apply in the uk after we leave. this is to make sure that wherever possible, the same rules and laws will apply the day after exit as they did before. without this step, a large part of our law would fall away when the european communities act is repealed. simply preserving european union law is not enough. there will be many areas where the preserved law does not work as it should. so as its third key elements, the bill provides ministers in this parliament and evolved legislators with powers to make statutory instruments to address the problems that will arise when we leave the eu. these powers allow ministers to make those

changes to ensure the statute book works on day one. this will be a major share undertaking across the united kingdom. iwill give major share undertaking across the united kingdom. i will give way to both of them in a few minutes. following this, it will be for uk legislators to pass laws and for the uk courts to adjudicate those laws. the bill enables us to leave the european union in the smoothest and most orderly way possible. it's the most orderly way possible. it's the most significant piece of legislation to be considered by both sides were some time, and it will be scrutinised clause by clause, line by line on the floor of this house. i stand really to listen to those who offer improvements to the bill in the spirit of preparing our statute book for withdrawal from the eu. the right honourable member or saint hoberman the honourable member for holborn and st pancras likes to remind me. i've not changed my views

one jot. let me be clear, this bill does only what is necessary for a smooth exit, and to provide stability. however, as i have repeatedly said, i well, and encourage contributions from those who approach the task in good faith and the spirit of collaboration. all of us is legislators have a shared interest in making this building success and in the national interest. i give way. thanks to the secretary of state by giving way. he mentioned that the bill gives ministers the chance to change laws. does that include changing laws to devolved administrations?” does that include changing laws to devolved administrations? i will come to the detail of that later in this speech. and how that process will work. if he will be patient.” thank the secretary of state forgiving way. will he take this opportunity to confirm that the

government will not use this bill to make policy changes? the primary aim of the bill is to maintain policy as it is now. the only exception to thatis it is now. the only exception to that is under with the withdrawal arrangements appleby time determined and limited and al detail that again. i will give away one more time. george osborne in the evening standard headline last night referred to the secretary of state's approach as rule by decree. why is he taking this high—handed approach to the practices of this parliament is? i don't read the evening standard, i have to tell you. and it sounds like with good reason. i have to tell him that if i'm going to ta ke to tell him that if i'm going to take lectures on rule by decree, it would be from the editor of the evening standard. one more time. can

he confirmed that if the government wishes to make you change by statutory instrument, that the parliamentary process. it would be a synthetic nonsense to suggest that ministers are bypassing parliament. he is entirely right, is a point i'll elaborate on later. and the editor of the evening standard should know that from his own experience. the key point of this bill is to avoid significant and serious gaps in our statute book. the bill issues consumers can be clear about the protections, employees can be clear about the rights and businesses can be clear about the rules that regulate their trade. workers' rights, consumerand environmental protections will be legislated by british courts, which are renowned world over. the bill

assurance businesses can continue when problems arise. without this bill, all of these things are put at risk. the bill must be on the statute book in good time ahead of our withdrawal, so that the changes that will flow from the bill can be made in time. so we are in a position to take control of our laws from day one. the bill provides a clear basis for negotiation with the european union by ensuring continuity and clarity in our laws, without prejudice to the ongoing negotiations. that this legislation, a smooth and orderly exit is impossible. the shape of any interim period will be to be determined by the negotiations, but we cannot await the completion of negotiations before ensuring there is certainty and continuity at the point of an exit. to do so would be reckless.

katie confirm his view that in choosing not to transpose eu charter of fundamental rights, that it will have no impact on the actual rights of the british people, their interpretation or enforcement in courts? i will come again to this later. if she remembers, when the white paper was in the house, i did actually say to her right honourable friends, her opposite number, if there were any powers that were missing, to come to the government, tell me and the how's and we will put that right. i haven't had a single comment since on that. i will make some progress in and a away a little later. i'm very conscious of the point that was made by the father of the house that we will have tight time or less, and give way as much as reasonably, but i wa nt

way as much as reasonably, but i want to dally too long. if you'll forgive me for the moment. let me know talk that house through the bill's mean provisions. the first clause repeals the european communities act on the day we leave the european union, ending the supremacy of eu law in the uk and preventing new eu law from automatically flowing into uk law after that point. when the then prime minister harold wilson led the debate here in may 1967 on the question of the uk's entry into the european community, you said, it's important to realise that community law is mainly concerned with industrial and commercial activities, with corporate bodies rather than private individuals. by far the greater part of our domestic law which remain unchanged after entry. the passage of time would surely is mistaken. european union law touches on all aspects of our lives and in a fire wiser way than the draft of the european community 's the draft of the european community '5 act could have envisaged. this means the bill be happy for the city

has a difficult task. it must rebuild uk law in a way that makes sense outside the eu. to do this, the first step the bill takes is to preserve all the domestic law we have made to implement our eu obligations. this memory means preserving thousands of statutory instruments with subjects ranging from aeroplane noise to sue licensing. extensive preserving any other domestic law that fulfils are eu obligations. equally, the bill converts european union law, principally legislation, all 12,000 of them, into domestic law and exit dave. it also ensures that rights directly affected, right second be relied on in court as an individual, continue to be available under uk law. i've no doubt there is much about you more that could be improved and i know this parliament

will look to improve it over time. but that is not the purpose of this bill. this bill simply brings european union law into uk law, ensuring that wherever possible, the rules and laws are the same after exit as before. just as important as the text of the law is the interpretation of it. for that reason, the bill make sure that the meaning of the law is to be decided on by uk courts and retain general principles of european union law as they stood an exit dave. there's approach maximises stability by making sure that the meaning of the law does not change overnight, and only the supreme court and the high court ofjustice judy in scotland would be able to depart from eu case law. they will do so on the same base as they depart from their own

case law. any other approach would actively cause uncertainty or fossilise the lovren ever. last point now give way. future decisions of the court ofjustice will not bind our courts, but our cause will have discretion to have regard for such decisions if they considered releva nt such decisions if they considered relevant and appropriate to do so. injust the relevant and appropriate to do so. in just the same relevant and appropriate to do so. injust the same way relevant and appropriate to do so. in just the same way that cause might at the moment reverted other cases in 'sjulia. the honourable gentleman has been patient. given the scale of the task is setting out in his introduction to this bill and a huge impact this has on every aspect of our lives, workers' rights, environmental rights, security, can he explain why were only getting eight days to discuss this bill in committee, when the bill to present had 22, and the maastricht treaty had 20? the first thing i'd say to him, eight days is

quite a long time. perhaps the most releva nt quite a long time. perhaps the most relevant comparison is the lisbon treaty, which recreated european law and a major basins. this doesn't do that. this does not aim to change law. this aims to maintain, is primarily technical respect, and it aims to maintain the laws we currently have. if he sees that there is different, how give way to him. the trouble with relying on secondary legislation is that secretary legislation is an amendable and only gets one and a half hours debate. would it not in particular, in relation to secondary regulation, be sensible to allow a new form of secondary legislation, where you can amend and you have substantial debates? in essence, the aim of the bill is to translate eu

law into uk law and to make sure that there are no problems arising, whether that means references to bodies that we are no longer subordinate to, whether it means a language is different or whether it applies to reciprocal rights. much of all the and seeks to make the resolution proportionate. if he wants to talk about this issue further i am happy to talk to him. i'm not going to re i nve nt to talk to him. i'm not going to reinvent the constitution at this dispatch box. i will give way. what conclusion should the electorate draw about respect from democracy from other parties refusal to give this bill a second reading?” from other parties refusal to give this bill a second reading? i am not going to presume ill intent from the start. what i say to everybody in this house is the electorate will draw their own judgment. as to

whether people are addressing this ina sensible whether people are addressing this in a sensible way to maintain the rights of british citizens and to maintain the continuity of british law. in a way which will enable that to happen in good time for our departure from the union which is after all a fixed date, or whether simply using it as a political exercise. that is a decision for the electorate and make it very well. overall, then,... electorate and make it very well. overall, then, . .. the electorate and make it very well. overall, then,... the bill provides... in a moment! overallthe bill provides for significant continuity in the law but there are some elements... in a moment! that simply do not make sense if they remain on the uk statute book once we have left the eu and in the years and decades to come. it would not make sense, for example, for the will to preserve the supremacy of eu law or to make that law supreme over

future legislation passed by this parliament. laws passed in this two houses after exit date will take precedence over retained eu law. we do not also do not believe it would make sense to retain the charter of fundamental rights. it only applies to member states when acting within the scope of eu law. we will not be a member state nor will it we'd be acting within the scope of eu law. asl acting within the scope of eu law. as i said to the house when i published a paper on the bell, the charter catalogues the rights found under eu law which we brought into law by the bell. it was not and never was the source of those rights. those rights have their origins elsewhere in domestic law or relate to international treaties or obligations which the uk remains party to. for example, the ec hr. let me be clear, the absence of the charter will not affect the substantive rights available in the uk and as i said earlier, if members opposite or anyone in the house find

a substantive rights that is not carried forward into uk law they should say so and we will deal with it. in several months since i said that, no one has yet brought to my attention to what we have missed. it maybe that will happen in next two minutes, but i will start with the honourable lady... i thank him for giving way. people know that the key issueis giving way. people know that the key issue is not what ministers say the aim of the bill is but what the actual powers are that are contained in it. so can he tell the house what safeguards are there, anywhere in the bill, in statute, that would prevent ministers in future using clause seven or nine or 17 to com pletely clause seven or nine or 17 to completely rewrite extradition policy in the demise of the european arrest warrant without coming back to parliament through primary legislation? i will come back to the

details in a moment, there are a numberof details in a moment, there are a number of limitations. we cannot impinge on the human rights act. i give way. i understand his point about the charter, because i agree with him the general principles and the charter should be identical. although that does suggest, raise the question of why the charter should go. it says quite clearly in schedule one but after we have done this there is no right of action in domestic law on or after exit date based on a failure to comply with any of the general principles of eu law. he must agree that the is means the right of the individual to challenge on the basis that a principle of eu law imported into our law by this act will no longer be possible. in our own courts,

forget the european court of justice, in our courts, and that seems to be a mark 's diminutive and in the rights of the individual and corporate entities. i'm afraid we will have a difference of opinion. we will put in the library a letter in this specific issue which we have already sent. but before we go there, the simple truth is that these laws, these rights, originate from a whole series. some british common law, some eu laws which we will bring in ourselves and some the european convention on human rights which we are continuing with. all of these things will provide those undertakings. why we need an extra layer of declaratory law i do not know. it was brought in under the blair government, perhaps that explains it. in a moment. i will

make some progress. mr speaker, the conversion of eu law into uk law is an essential measure to ensure the uk release eu in the smoothest way possible. however that alone is not enough to ensure the statute book continues to function. many laws will no longer makes some sense outside the eu. if we only convert eu into uk law the statute book would still be broken. many laws and other laws was using european union institutions as key public authorities in the uk, a role they would not be able to perform or fulfil. the problems which arise with our making these changes range from inconvenience to the disruption of vital services we rely on. in practical terms, this ranges from a public authority being required to submit reports on water quality to

the eu to actually causing disruption to the city by removing the supervision of credit ratings agencies entirely. it is essential theissues agencies entirely. it is essential the issues are addressed before we leave the eu or we will be in breach of our duty to provide a functioning and clear set of laws for our citizens. that is why the bill provides a power to correct that arise in retaining eu law. this is clause seven of the bill. unlike section to this goes straight to the point the lady raised. unlike section two to the acts which can be used to do almost anything to the statute book, the correcting power isa statute book, the correcting power is a limited power. it can only be used to correct problems with the statute book arises directly from our withdrawal the eu. ministers cannot use it simply to replace european union laws they do not like. it is designed to allow us to replicate as closely as possible existing eu laws and regimes in a

domestic context. it is also restricted so it cannot for example be used to create serious criminal offences, and then the human rights act,. we are insuring it expires two years after exit taser there is no permanent attempt to transfer power to the executive. i accept that proposing a delegated power of this bread is unusual but you leaving the eu presents a unique set of challenges that need a pragmatic solution. using secondary legislation to tackle this is not unusual. secondary legislation is a process of long standing with clear and established roles for parliament. following on from the point made by the members of beaconsfield, the secretary has asked a concrete examples of rights that will be lost to uk citizens as a result. i would like to give him one. and ask for his undertaking

that he will amend the act to make sure this right would be lost. earlier this summer a man relied on eu equality law to bring his successful challenge to a loophole in uk law that meant employers could refuse to pay same—sex partners the same pensions benefits as heterosexual couples if the funds we re heterosexual couples if the funds were paid in before his 2005, and our supreme court agreed that there was a loophole in uk law which was a violation of the general principles of non—discrimination in eu law. so mr walker was able to use his right of action under the general prince was of eu law to close at loophole so he and his husband can enjoy the same rights as a heterosexual couple. that would not be possible under this bill because... this is a very lawyerly intervention. i am looking for the?. i am i'm coming to

that. the minister examples. this wouldn't be possible under the bill because there is no right to sue. will he give an undertaking that he will close this loophole in the bill if we bring forward an appropriate amendment? i think that will be brought forward in the course of the bill's translation. if not, i'm standing by my undertaking, she should come to me and we will find a way of correcting that problem. with respect, we have had one lengthy intervention. our current estimate is that the uk government will need to make between 800 and 1000 statutory instruments to make exit a reality in uk law. this may seem in some ways like a large number, it is a little less than one year's quoter. i understand members have concerns about scrutiny. let me

contrast this to the 12,000 european union regulations and 8000 domestic regulations, 20,000 pieces of law that are brought forward new policies while we have members of the eu. this one—off task is very different to the flow of new law we have had from eu in the last 40 years and is ultimately about ensuring that power returns to this house. the people who complain about having using secondary legislation should remember that 20,000 pieces of law, 8000 went through and secondary legislation. the remaining 12,000 went through without any involvement from this house at all. they were changing the law rather than maintaining the law. all of these changes must happen quickly to maintain stability as we leave the eu. many of the changes will be minorand eu. many of the changes will be minor and technical. replacing for

example references to eu law or to other member states. it would not make sense nor would it be possible to make his numerous changes in primary legislation. some of the changes will by their nature be more substantial and will demand more scrutiny. an example would be a proposal to transfer function currently exercised by the commission to a new domestic body that needs to be set up from scratch. we hope to minimise the need for such bodies but where they are needed i readily accept these changes require further parliamentary scrutiny. that is why the bill sets clear criteria that will trigger the use of the affirmative procedure ensuring debate and vote on the instrument in both houses. over the course of the two days we will spend debating the bill, i'm sure we will hear calls for secondary legislation to receive greater scrutiny, which have already been made, along the lines given to primary legislation. i am clear the

way to make significant changes is through primary legislation, that is why the queen '5 speech set out plans for several further bills to follow this one including on immigration, trade and sanctions. bringing in significant new policy changes is not the task at hand. with this power we are making corrections to the statute book rather than bringing in new policies that take advantages of the opportunities offered by withdrawal from the eu. these corrections need to be made to ensure we have a functioning statute book. as far as we can see the power we have proposed is the only logical and feasible way to make those corrections. this approach remains the only viable plan put forward in this house. we have heard complaints from the benches opposite but we have not seen any of alternative. the central premise of what he has argued this morning is that in order to ensure a smooth exit we need to maintain as much of the status quo as possible on the way out. but this

bill goes much further. looking at clause five and close sex, those changes contained within would effectively roll out being within the customs union and the single market for a transitional period. that is the single biggest risk to our economy and that is what is contained in this bill. he is right in one respect, that is clear government policy. it is in fact the decision that was taken by the british people last year, that they wanted to leave the eu which means leaving the single market and customs union. that point is clear. i know it is an fusing on that side by! but let me make some further progress after that silly intervention. the bill also contains a limited power to implement the withdrawal agreement by set treachery instrument of it proves necessary. the government's

aspiration is to agree a new, deep and special partnership with the eu. under the article 50 process we are negotiating withdrawal, provisions of that agreement will need to be implanted in domestic law and some of that will need to be done by exit day given the timetable set by article 50, it is prudent to take this power now so that we are ready if necessary to move quickly to implement ouragreement if necessary to move quickly to implement our agreement in domestic law. this will be particularly important if the negotiations concluded late in a two—year period. this power will help to ensure that the uk government and devolved administrations are able to implement the outcome. the power is limited. it will only be available until exit and then expires. it is aimed at making legislative changes that need to be made for day one of exit. i have listened patiently. he

has waxed lyrical about these legislations. it is not standard. i would like him to say something about the status of these denigrated legislation is made under clause seven. it gives us the status of an act of parliament. this is an attempt to oust review by the. i would like him to elaborate upon that important issue. i'm afraid it is not correct. this point was made by another member. about the ability to change primary legislation. the simple truth is that is a fairly standard set of words used in these legislatures. the 2002 legislative... it legislatures. the 2002 it is the normal routine because you wa nt it is the normal routine because you want to make sure that nothing in the bill prevents the ability to go

into a transition phase and into the next phase. the exact use of the power will depend on the contents of the withdrawal agreement. a power could be used to clarify the status of uk cases at the cj you that started before exit but were not yet concluded by exit day it could also be used to enable regulatory approval of uk products that were pending at the point of exit in line with the proposals set out on continuity and availability. it is thoseissues continuity and availability. it is those issues need to be capable of being changed. we have already committed to bringing forward a motion on the final agreement to be approved by both houses of parliament before it is concluded. that vote is in addition to parliament's that vote is in addition to pa rliament's scrutiny of that vote is in addition to parliament's scrutiny of any instrument is we propose. also in addition to the amount of debate and scrutiny to be applied to primary

legislation that covers all and every major policy change around exit from the eu. parliament will be fully involved in taking forward a withdrawal agreement.” fully involved in taking forward a withdrawal agreement. i give way. what is the most offensive kinds of provision that appear in our domestic legislation is that henry viii clause as we call it. there have been long—standing real concerns about statutory instruments for many years right across these benches. to allay those concerns, would he look at what is called a triaging of these proposed statutory instruments. many thousands will be com pletely instruments. many thousands will be completely uncontroversial and can be dealt with very quickly and efficiently, but those which really must be considered fully by this chamber could then happen if we have this triaging, would he please agree

to look at that principle. it will solve many of the difficulties with this bill across all these benches. i thank this bill across all these benches. ithank her this bill across all these benches. i thank her for her suggestion. there will not be many thousands. it is 800 to 1000. because we have taken up much of the most serious legislation in primary legislation. i will happily talk to her about mechanisms for making sure this is a fully democratic and open process and so let's come back to it. i will talk to about it in the build process. . . talk to about it in the build process... i will discuss it with her. i will give way. process... i will discuss it with her. iwill give way. on process... i will discuss it with her. i will give way. on the powers in clause nine to implement the withdrawal agreement, is he able to give the house assurance that those

powers will not be exercised until parliament has had an opportunity to vote on the agreement? to vote on the agreement? i'm thinking through the agreement? i'm thinking through the logic of that. it seems logical injuries. —— logical in truth. if you'll allow me a few moments to the matter, i won't do it on the fly in case i missed something. he is right... let me say to the house committee is right about one thing in that the two issues run together, the question of overalljudgment on the question of overalljudgment on the outcome and any withdrawal arrangements. the withdrawal arrangements. the withdrawal arrangements are most likely to come up arrangements are most likely to come up if it arrives late. that is why we have to think through. he will rememberwhen we we have to think through. he will remember when we talked about how the house will be able to review the negotiated agreement that we said we

would make best endeavours, we intend i'd expect that we will get into the house before anybody else does that. that is what we intend. but we had to say that because we weren't sure but we had to say that because we we ren't sure about but we had to say that because we weren't sure about timing. i will come back to him on that. i want to move onto another subject, which is the of devolution. it relates directly to some of the things the opposition have been saying. let me now deal with the bill's approach to devolution. as i set out, the overall approach of the bill is to provide the continuity wherever possible at the point of exit, not seek to initiate reforms immediately. that is the approach that guides the devolution provisions as well. let me be clear, this government has a strong track re cord this government has a strong track record of devolution. our commitment to strengthen devolution settlement is clear most recently the wales act and the scotland act. that gave something like 12 billion tax—raising powers. not such small

things. leaving the eu allows us to make sure the decision—making sits close to the people than ever before. we expect a significant increase in the decision—making power of the devolved institutions. the current devolution... the current devolution settlements have always created common frameworks within the united kingdom by reflecting the context of the uk's eu membership. so in areas subject to eu law or parts of the uk currently to eu law or parts of the uk cu rre ntly follow to eu law or parts of the uk currently follow car common rules and principles even where rules are otherwise devolved. for example, they pass their own laws would be relating to food policy but all have to comply with eu rules on food hygiene. when we leave the eu it is not in the interests of people and businesses living and working across the uk for all those arrangements to disappear. 0r the uk for all those arrangements to disappear. or for there to be new barriers to living and doing business within our own country. so

the bill provides certainty and continuity for people across the uk by recreating in uk law the common frameworks commonly provided by eu law and providing the devolved institutions cannot generally modify them. it also ensures every decision them. it also ensures every decision the devolved administrations can ta ke the devolved administrations can take before exit day they can still ta ke take before exit day they can still take ever after exit day this is a transitional arrangement, to ensure certainty and continuity whilst the uk undertakes negotiations with the eu on its future relationship and the uk government and devolved administrations discuss precisely where we need to retain common frameworks within the uk future. the brexit secretary continuing to speak in this withdrawal bill debate. he was urging mps to vote for the bill, saying it would leave the uk in a position to take control of its laws with clarity and continuity. and without prejudice to the ongoing

brexit negotiations. he was asked in a number of interventions about this being a power grab but he dismissed that suggestion, saying he was willing to consult with mps if they had any concerns. you can continue to watch this debate on bbc parliament, but here in a moment we will have the news that one, first the weather forecast. we have seen catastrophic damaged caused by barbuda along with sam martyn ware hurricane home made direct impact. yesterday the british virgin islands to the direct hit. this is the latest satellite picture. rape is still affecting puerto rico and the dominican republic. the idea is offshore. the storm is heading to the turks and ca icos storm is heading to the turks and caicos islands. there is a small island amongst this called praveen ciel and it is looking like it is

going to be working in here midnight. from the turks and caicos islands it will work the bahamas and is forecast to reach florida at the latter pa rt is forecast to reach florida at the latter part of the weekend. it is the second strongest atlantic hurricane ever. catastrophic damage will happen to the turks and caicos islands along with the bahamas where that i wall comes on store. the storm surge could reach 20 foot high. across the uk we have fairly quiet conditions across england and wales, cloudierfurther north. a band of rain will continue to push south with heavy bursts this afternoon, across northern england, steyn damp across wales and the south—west. there will be rain at times across east anglia and south—east england. occasional bright spells just about possible. cold in the winter. overnight tonight out love band of rain pushes

southwards and becomes quite slow moving across southern england with the wind is really picking up here. it will be a mild night with temperatures at 11 to 15. denver friday the rain is still with us across southern counties, some uncertainty as to how far north or south it will go. to the north we will see sunshine and showers. the showers will be blustery, with a cool and strong wind. here feeling autumnal. getting cooler in the rain towards london. the weekend sees the low— pressure towards london. the weekend sees the low—pressure stay. widespread showers, quite cloudy, occasional son, also becoming increasingly windy as the weekend goes by. the scale of the devastation left by hurricane irma as it tears through the caribbean is beginning to emerge. barbuda has suffered massive destruction to its roads, schools, shops, water and power supplies. the extent of the destruction

in barbuda is unprecedented. in fact, i'm of the view that as this stands now, that barbuda is barely habitable. this is the moment it struck st martin, severing communications and destroying the airport. parts of the island are unreachable. what we experienced, it's like something you see in a horror movie. last night was a horrible experience. my mum cried and my brother woke me up. i was frightened. as the united nations warns that as many as 37 million people could be affected, we'll have reports from across the region. also this lunchtime: