hello, you're watching afternoon live, i'm simon mccoy live in westminster. today at two: back my deal or risk uncertainty and division — theresa may attempts to persuade mps, after the eu signed off her brexit deal. she has secured the deal, a very good deal for the united kingdom, and whilst the eu supports her deal, critics argue theresa may faces the biggest battle of all in the commons. the numbers, they say, are strongly stacked against her. freed after a pardon — relief for his family after british academic matthew hedges is told he can go home — but the united arab emirates insists he is a british spy. ratcheting up the tension — ukraine's parliament is to decide whether to bring in martial law after the capture of three of its naval vessels by russia. coming up on afternoon live all the sport with hugh ferris. good afternoon. it's only happened twice before, but england have completed a whitewash in an away test series. their 42—run win against sri lanka in colombo means it finished 3—0.

we'll tell you the story of how they did it at 2.30. thanks hugh. chris fawkes has all the weather. the weather is changing. things tightening more miles towards the weekend, the middle of the week but also turning wet and windy. we will also turning wet and windy. we will also look at the big story in china where we have been seeing dust storms in the past few days. also coming up: it's coming down — facing "seven minutes of terror." the time it takes for nasa's insight lander to enter mars‘s atmosphere at hypersonic speed — to slow to walking pace and gently put itself on the ground. hello, everyone, this is afternoon live, i'm simon mccoy. theresa may has held a meeting of the cabinet

as she begins a two—week push to convince the country, and mp5, to get behind her brexit deal. the prime minister has warned that rejecting the agreement with brussels would throw the country into "division and uncertainty". this afternoon, mrs may will argue her case in the commons, where she faces a tough battle to get the deal approved. labour and the other opposition parties have promised to vote against it, and many of her own mps are expected to join them. our political correspondent, iain watson, has this report. is it really a good dealfor britain? yes. why do you think so? can you get it through parliament? yes. it delivers on brexit. 2a hours after a deal was sealed in brussels, some cabinet ministers were upbeat that it would now be backed here in britain. and some long—standing leave campaigners are now giving the deal their approval. it is very important we back the prime minister, she's secured a good deal for britain and it will mean we will be able to control our borders, we will be in charge of immigration, we will be outside the common fisheries policy and outside

the common agricultural policy. and that's the script that cabinet ministers are expected to stick to, that the deal delivers on the government's promises. that will be put to the test when parliament gets it say around the 12th of december. the cabinet is discussing the brexit deal. we know some of them don't like it, but in public, at least, they are likely to go along with it. but 86 members of theresa may's own party have told us that they are unlikely to support her deal. some might simply abstain rather than vote against, she has a huge job to convince them, but in the next few weeks, her secret weapon, if you like, is you. the prime minister, theresa may. you will be seeing a lot more of the prime list on broadcast and social media and her hope is the public will push their politicians to get on with brexit and back her deal. i think all mps will be wrestling with their consciences over the next two weeks and thinking hard about what their constituents

actually want in a situation like this. anything could happen if this deal does not get through and that is my concern, that is why i want to back this agreement and urge my colleagues to do the same. thank you. but we know that many brexiteers in the conservative backbenches have made their minds up already about the deal and some of those who backed remain are prepared to vote the deal down in the hope of getting a new referendum. it should go back to the british people with all the information available to them and they have that final say which i think, increasingly, they are demanding. labour rejects the prime minister's argument that it is her deal or no deal and are prepared to let it fall. it is obvious she is struggling, she needs a plan b and just to march on to trashing this vote without an alternative is not good enough. a small number of labour mps have not ruled out backing the government. the job of the government is to look across the chamber and find a majority of mps who will support a deal so that we can still accept the outcome of the referendum

but make sure we leave in a way that does the least economic damage to the country. as westminster prepares for the festive season, if mps do reject the dealjust two weeks before christmas, expect the season of goodwill to be put on hold. we can speak now to our brussels reporter, adam fleming. adam, a sense of nervousness here but i suspect that they are as well because they know they battle the prime minister has in westminster. that also westminster phrase got meaningful vote, is common here in brussels now and everyone knows the big characters on the backbenches by jacob rees—mogg and everyone will be watching to see what happens, what arguments are raised and what criticisms are made of the prime minister and who stands up for the deal and, ultimately, what the

result of the meaningful vote is which brussels expects to take place in the week of the 10th of december. they are going full steam ahead with what goes next, meeting of european affairs minister tabled for the european parliament. everyone is acting as if it is going to go through but speaking to people privately and diplomats will speculate about the chances and the parliamentary arithmetic but the official eu policy is not speculate, not to raise what if questions and yesterday none of the 27 other leaders when they had their meeting with theresa may even asked her what was going to happen or even started raising the concept of any kind of plan b. as we heard 100 times yesterday from the special summit, the deal, as far as the eu is concerned, is non—negotiable, final offer. adam, we will talk to you later. with me is the labour mp stephen kinnock.

how big the fight has theresa may got now? it is a huge mountain to climb for her, something like 90 of her own mps said they will not vote for the deal so we have to assume she is now flogging a dead horse. the deal is not going to pass on the question is where do we go from there? there are a number of options. before that that speak about the deal with theresa may is offered, it is, the eu has backed it and theresa may says if you do not back this we have no other option. she's right, isn't she? that fate of no deal is a bluff. i set the brexit select committee and we have hours of evidence from numerous agencies, they have all said our country could not absorb the shock of leaving the eu without a deal. more than that, we will have to pass 51 pieces of

primary legislation before the 29th of march to be ready, lots of secondary legislation, it is not good to happen, it is an empty threat, she is doing it for a cynical, scaremongering in order to balance us into backing her deal. it is time for parliament to stand up and take back control. a lot of people are thinking, we do not want that and our frightens and that we are frightened, and theresa may is saying let's just get on with it. we cannot allow her to bluff us into this, we have to call her blog. she has spent the last two years with the strategy about clinging onto power, yet he forged here in the forge there and parliament will see it through and we will live to fight another day. we have now got to stand up and take back control and show parliament really plays an important role in this country and stop just giving the prime minister

a blank cheque to cling on to power. let's talk about the story this morning that suggests amber rudd michael gove are prepared to join you in this norway plus idea, is that if fair way to describe it? have you spoken to either of them? we have had good conversations with mps from across the house, we have a group called norway... spoken to either of them? i've spoken to a range of mps. have you spoken to amber rudd?” have had several very good conversations with amber rudd. she was a backbencher until recently and she has gone into the cabinet and things change but i've been pleased to see what she has been talking to me and others about as a backbencher is converting now interaction with the important position she has in the important position she has in the cabinet. it's time to stop putting party first, let's put the

country first and get the coalition of mps together to have a deal that delivers on the referendum and is the only deal has a chance of reuniting our divided country. 0ne reuniting our divided country. one more question, lots of people will say it has stephen king and got the answer that has eluded everyone. explain what this norway plus a deal is and how you would get it through because you later what a general election before that would be a possibility. two things, first of all, we primers the's deal, if she puts it to parliament, —— the prime minister's deal. let's assume that fails, then there is various options, i do not see a general election, i don't see us getting a majority for an election in the house of commons. people's road is possible but divisive and i really believe parliament needs to take control —— people's vote. that leaves the plan b option will not a lwa ys leaves the plan b option will not always been —— has always been a

parliamentary majority for its ease us parliamentary majority for its ease us staying in the single market, having a forms of customs union solving the northern ireland border issue, leaving the eu but keeping the really close economic relationship. that gives us far more power and sovereignty than theresa may's deal because you have a whole range of... though still free movement of people, you are still paying, it will not satisfy everybody. article 112 113 of the agreement gives the opportunity for an emergency brake on any one of the four freedoms. we have emergency brake on any one of the fourfreedoms. we have to emergency brake on any one of the four freedoms. we have to very carefully about doing that doing that but that would be sovereign parliament that could make the decision. show me a club anywhere in the world where if you want to have access to the club you do not have to be some kind of membership fee. it is, norwegians pay around 60% of what the uk currently pays and the

budget works very differently so it is an option. it is a strong compromise. you might not have eve ryo ne compromise. you might not have everyone on the extreme sides of the debate supported what is —— it is pragmatic, sensible on the bridge building form brexit that the country is crying out for. 0ur chief political correspondent, vicki young is at central lobby in the houses of parliament behind me. the numbers at the moment i very much against it. theresa may will be back here this afternoon at 3:30pm to make a statement reporting back on the weekend and that deal she has agreed with the eu. in the past she has come here and there has been not that much support across the house for her plans. there are lots of conservatives who do support it but there do not seem to be enough. she we re there do not seem to be enough. she were working on those numbers in the coming weeks and she will be getting her message across out there. i'm

joined by the conservative mp george freeman. theresa may has not got overwhelming backing for this deal but she is determined to go out and sell it, she says sell it to people about how it will impact their lives. is she right to do that? yes, i admire her tenacity and i think her instincts are to position this as a deal for the british people and for the vast majority who want us to get on with it and achieve what they voted for. the problem is people voted for different things and many of those who voted leave want to be out of the political union out of the single market and others want us to have nothing to do with you so it's very difficult for her and i will be listening very carefully to what she says this afternoon in her statement. the alternatives, we were just hearing from a labour mp and i know you agree to some extent with him about this norway plus idea, is

there really any chance of that getting support here in the house of commons as we look at it now? i think there is is why and i think the prime minister's chances of getting her deal through are looking quite slim when the labour party, the dup and the drg, around 50 conservative colleagues from the brexit camp are against —— the erg. it's very difficult to see how it gets too so we have to think about plan b. it's not about, for me, cutting and running or telling the people they were wrong, i want a second referendum would not solve anything, it is about parliament demonstrated we are listing to the people and we are going to put their instincts at the heart of this. for me efta achieve so much of this come out of political union but within the single market. the free trade area gives us the single market, not in the customs union, freedom to do

trade deals. i think it is an attractive solution and commands support from many people, anything that can dine —— combine the support of daniel hannan and douglas ca rswell of daniel hannan and douglas carswell and mrs thatcher of daniel hannan and douglas ca rswell and mrs thatcher and william hague, a broad coalition who recognise we cannot fudge this, they wa nt recognise we cannot fudge this, they want to leave the political union but they do not want to be made poorer and i believe this is the only deal to do that. but at the moment the only deal on the table is theresa may's deal. some push for another referendum and brexiteers in your party say then if we have nothing in place we go to ignore deal. there is still speculation about how this could be brought before the house, how do you stop no deal? there is a huge amount of politics happening and lots of chickens

coming home to roost. businesses looking in and most business people wa nt looking in and most business people want a deal, no deal is too late in the day, the work was not done to make that a credible alternative. those who say we should just threaten to walk off in three months‘ time, they are threatening chaos. ifear our months‘ time, they are threatening chaos. i fear our economic credentials as the party would be very damaged and the nation would be in chaos, more importantly. this is the biggest political crisis since the biggest political crisis since the suez crisis and possibilities irish home rule and the corn laws. the schools to the heart of the country. principally, if we were to exercise the freedoms that secures and loosening ties with the uk and northern ireland. efta has the attraction that the dup could support it. it‘s the only way to find parliament to do a way that what the people want us to do and

get a deal and get it through. i believe every bid for a second vote we would get no answer or the reverse a nswer we would get no answer or the reverse answer and right back to square reverse answer and right back to square one “— reverse answer and right back to square one —— i believe if we went back for a second vote. definitely the case mps are looking for alternatives but theresa may is determined to sell the deal that she has got. in the referendum two years ago, leeds was split down the middle. it voted to remain, but by one of the closest margins in the country. so what do people there make of theresa may‘s deal? 0ur correspondent, fiona trott, has been finding out. a chilly morning at kirk state market in leeds but a warm response to theresa may‘s message. people don‘t want to spend any more time arguing about brexit. we are fed up of arguing about it. i think everyone is fed up about parliament arguing about it as well. we are fed up and fed up with them. twice fed up. definitely people will be fed up. i am because it has been ages and we still don't know where we

stand. we voted out, get out! all the people that are whinging about it, get over it! we voted to get out, just to get out. what about businesses? the northern powerhouse partnerships is the feeling in this region is that this deal is better than no deal. i think the biggest fear for businesses is of a hard brexit and the reality but would be damaging notjust to the northern are important here and also to the uk and that is what pushing business is behind the deal. when you talk to chambers of commerce, the consensus is this would give them more certainty, that outcome. what does it mean for people here who noticed the prices going up? will there be prosperity for them in the future? the reality brexit is it is a huge distraction from what we really need to do which is to

improve productivity in the north of england. new figures released show that we are still seeing lower levels of growth here than in london despite the fact that the gap has closed but are sadly a lot of that closing the gap is currently because all of uk growth and prosperity is being held back by people being afraid of brexit, despite the fact that like in cities here, there are great fundamentals. people are not investing as much as they would have if brexit had not happened. in this corner of northern england which voted to remain, but onlyjust, will they get behind the deal or do they want a people‘s vote? i think it should be a peoples vote, definitely. you've had the referendum, the decision has been made, we don't want another one. we have already had one, the decision was made for brexit. i understand is that we walk away from europe with no deal in fact, we start again. i don‘t trust any of the mp5, any of the government or anything so i don‘t know. do you think they should be a peoples vote?

like i said, i don‘t trust any of it so i don‘t know. here at the market, westminster, let alone brussels, feels very far away. they seem to be backing the deal because theyjust want an end to negotiations but will their mps go along with that? let‘s talk about how the city might look and feel in the future. you have studied the impact of brexit on local communities, stallholders behind us, they say potatoes and onions come from local farms, behind us, they say potatoes and onions come from localfarms, likely they were picked and packed by migrant workers, what effect will this deal have on them? first of all, leeds is a great place to ask this question because it reflects the national average in the

referendum, slightly remaining city over leave. leave over remain. i would say is that employers might have different experiences, some might be used to immigration rules but others who depend on eastern european workers and other european workers might have difficulties transitioning to the new model. having said that, it will not be a full stop and brexit the and there will be two additional years in which freedom of movement will exist as we know it today. it will be based on skills and abilities, not where they come from and that will be difficult for farmers. it is and there will be a combination because there will be family members of those who are already in the country and will preserve this freedom of movement right, including dependent families. what about the leeds community

generally around 20,000 migrant workers came to this city last year, most of them here in leeds are from eastern europe, how will the city look and feel in the future? leeds has a history of attracting migrant workers but also diverse communities from inside the country. there is also a large international student body that will be reflected in this number. how it will feel will depend on how the immigration points system will look like after 2021. thank you very much forjoining us. thoughts from a very chilly market. back to you, simon. just to let you know, there has been a lobby briefing, some lines from that, the cabinet meeting this morning, apparently the spokesman

for theresa may said her cabinet collea g u es for theresa may said her cabinet colleagues congratulated the prime minister in securing a deal. they said the prime minister believes the deal being accepted as the best course of action and she has set out other scenarios include no deal or no brexit. she was asked specifically about the comments from the french president, emmanuel macron, on fishing and comments that could be used as a lever over in backstop arrangements and the spokesman for theresa may said we will be outside of the eu fisheries policy and be in full control of whether french fishermen are in uk waters. the prime minister is hosting a reception of business leaders on monday evening to update them on brexit. she has a full week ahead of her, including this afternoon here at the commons. you can watch the prime minister

addressing mps here live on the bbc news channel, scheduled for 3:30pm, but whenever she gets to her feet we will bring that statement to you and the reaction to it. a british academic who was jailed on alleged spying charges in the united arab emirates, has been freed and could be home tomorrow. matthew hedges, was sentenced to life in prison last week. he‘s always protested his innocence, and his wife says she can‘t wait for him to come home, after an experience she described, as "a nightmare." richard galpin‘s report contains some flash photography. the 31—year—old phd student matthew hedges will be able to return home to britain as soon as formalities are completed after spending months in prison in the united arab emirates. but, despite pardoning him, the uae government went on today to reinforce its message that mr hedges had come to the country earlier this year to spy for the british intelligence agency mi6. he was part—time phd researcher, part—time businessman,

but he was hundred percent a full—time secret service operative. during the investigation, mr hedges confessed he was acting as an agent for a foreign intelligence service. he confirmed that he collected sensitive and classified information about the uae. mr hedges‘ family deny all this, saying he came here to the uae to research security and foreign policy issues for his phd. the british government also dismisses the charges of spying which he faced. we have seen no evidence to support these accusations against matthew hedges but today what we want to do is to thank them for the fact that they have reflected on the strong representations we have made. we have made it very clear for a number of months now that we see no basis in these allegations. they have reflected on that, they have taken the action that they can which means that matthew hedges is going to be

reunited with his family. for mr hedges wife, who had campaigned hard for the foreign office to finally take action, it now seems the ordeal is over. it‘s taken me by surprise and i‘m just so happy and so relieved and really incredulous that this is all happening, finally. it‘s been an absolute nightmarish six or seven months already and i just can‘t wait to have him back. the expectation is that the couple will be together again quite soon. richard galpin, bbc news. the ukrainian parliament is meeting to decide whether to declare martial law, after russian forces seized three of its navy vessels, in the waters off crimea. moscow and kiev are blaming each other over the incident, in which a tug and two gunboats were captured, and a number of ukrainian crew members were injured.

both the eu and nato have urged restraint. 0ur moscow corrrespondent, steve rosenberg, has the details. off the coast of crimea, russian border guards on collision course with the ukrainian navy. here the russians target a ukrainian tug boat. the hint is a less than subtle — get out of these waters. there was more drama to come. later, russian forces shot at and seized the tug and two other ukrainian vessels. this appears to be an sos from one of the ukrainian sailors as the russians storm his boat. a russian replies. the ukrainian vessels were towed to russian—controlled crimea. more than 20 ukrainian servicemen have been detained. the incidents took place near the crimean peninsula, by the kerch strait. russia says ukraine‘s navy illegally entered russian waters.

ukraine denies it. this was the reaction in kiev. "death to russia," he shouts. protests and pyrotechnics outside the russian embassy. ukraine‘s president denounced what he called russia‘s aggression. petro poroshenko will ask parliament to approve martial law to defend ukraine against russia. moscow is refusing to take the blame. russia‘s foreign minister accused kiev of provocations. sergey lavrov said ukraine‘s leaders were trying to score political points ahead of elections. to some, the incident is a reminder ofjust how dangerous the russia ukraine conflict is. the war continues to be live. and the war could escalate any moment. while endangering the relationship between

russia and the west. with its show of force yesterday at sea and in the sky over the kerch strait, russia has sent a clear message to ukraine — don‘t mess with moscow. steve rosenberg, bbc news, moscow. time for a look at the weather. here‘s chris fawkes. when i saw this morning i asked have you seen as when i saw this morning i asked have you seen as pictures of the chinese sandstorm i said, seen them?, we‘ve got them. just for you, simon. here got them. just foryou, simon. here are got them. just for you, simon. here are the are. this is a wall of sand are rolling in the cross—party china, this is close to one of the world‘s great deserts of the world, the gobi desert, partly why we have lots of sand in the sky reducing visibility to 100 metres. the other, perhaps

more surprising thing is what we are physically looking at is a weather front, it is a cold front, not like in the uk, low clouds rain but the big drop in temperatures and change in wind speed and direction when this wall of sand was picked up from the gobi desert the winds accelerated with gusts up to 30 mph. it was a cold front that brought that sandstorm to pass off china. wasn‘t that remarkable? i suppose we better talk about what is happening closer to home. because there is a cold front, i‘m in the middle of it. enough about that hot air. we have some hot air coming our way, big change in our weather. it is quite cool at the moment, weather systems with the end of the atlantic to swing in and bring a change, wetand windy weather. turning much more mild. for now we have the chilly air

and chalmers moved into eastern scotla nd and chalmers moved into eastern scotland and eastern england, and because that is not much wind to move bush hours inland they are sticking to coastal areas although some pushing into southern parts of northern ireland. quite chilly. below average for the time of year. we will see changes. 0vernight, we see the showers turn heavier and more frequent in western scotland, some wintry days over the hills. temperatures into single figures widely. where we keep the longer clear spells that is the risk of some frost and icy spells on the roads. big change tomorrow, this band of rain working into northern ireland, wales and south—west england, wet day out west but the winds change direction and coming from a southerly or south—westerly direction and temperatures increased

to 12 celsius in plymouth but quite called up the eastern side of england and eastern scotland, some bright weather around but some showers moving into north—eastern areas of scotland. into the middle pa rt areas of scotland. into the middle part of the week the weather will get much more windy, low—pressure, this is going to be quite a windy day for sure, three irish sea coast of western hills the gusts could reach 70 mph so the chances for some disruptive weather on wednesday. a brilliant works into scotland that could cause some issues given how wet it has been recently —— wet weather works. south—westerly winds dragging in lots of mild air. highs on wednesday 15 celsius in belfast and in london. bigjump on wednesday 15 celsius in belfast and in london. big jump upwards, staying windy into thursday across the north west, particularly in scotland, then into the weekend we

are looking at further stretches of wet and windy weather but temperatures staying mild. that‘s the latest. this is bbc news — i‘m simon mccoy at westminster, and these are our latest headlines. theresa may has begun a campaign to sell her brexit deal. she‘s due to make a fresh appeal to mps this afternoon. although the eu supports her deal, critics argue the prime minister faces the biggest battle of all in the commons — the numbers, they say, are strongly stacked against her. in other news — matthew hedges, the academicjailed on spying charges in the united arab emirates, has been freed after receiving a presidential pardon. ukraine‘s parliament is to decide whether to bring in martial law after the capture of three of its naval vessels by russia. the man accused of murdering two brighton schoolgirls 32 years ago has declined to give

any further evidence during his cross examination. he denies the charges. helena lee is outside the old bailey. in school girls went missing in brighton in 1986, 32 years ago. the man on trial, 52—year—old russell bishop, a convicted paedophile who was convicted of trying to kill a seven—year—old girl in brighton in 1990, he had been giving evidence in his defence this morning, at the old bailey. he spent about an hour and a half in the witness box. there was then a break. thejury half in the witness box. there was then a break. the jury was half in the witness box. there was then a break. thejury was brought back into court in the last 15 minutes so, expecting to see russell bishop still in the witness box because they expected him to be cross examined by the prosecution barrister. but he was in the dock, not the witness box, and the judge,

mist orjustice sweeney, turned to thejury and mist orjustice sweeney, turned to the jury and said this," you will observe mister bishop is in the dock, not the witness box, because he has declined to give any further evidence. he went on to tell them, "i have given them time to consider that, but that is his position. i will give you directions in due course as to how you should approach that." and he told them what that meant is there would be no further cross—examination of russell bishop in the witness box, and his evidence had come to an end. and thejury has now been sent home for the afternoon because there are no more witnesses to call now until tomorrow. earlier this morning, russell bishop was asked about that attack in 1994 which he was convicted of trying to kill a seven—year—old girl. he told thejury kill a seven—year—old girl. he told the jury that you was not a paedophile. he said he did not attack the girl, he had no sexual

motivation when he attacked the girl, and he told thejury motivation when he attacked the girl, and he told the jury despite being convicted for trying to kill her, that he didn‘t try and kill that seven—year—old. and there were some tense moments when russell bishop appeared tense in the witness box, and at one point he objected to some of the questions being put to him by brian altman qc, the prosecution barrister, one point he asked thejudge prosecution barrister, one point he asked the judge whether what he was being asked was legal. and the judge replied," it is," and that isn‘t, he would stop it. thejury replied," it is," and that isn‘t, he would stop it. the jury sent home this afternoon, russell bishop has declined to give any further evidence in his trial in his defence. it‘s time for bbc ask this — we‘ve been asking you for your questions on brexit throughout the day, and our reality check correspondent chris morris is here withjill rutter from the institute

for government, here to help try to answer some of your burning concerns. ian mckenzie asks where we‘ll be able to negotiate trade deals. there‘s a difference between negotiating in implementing. we can only implement once we have left, at the end of the transition period, the end of the transition period, the rotation period. we don‘t know when it is going to be. december 2020, but there is this possible extension until december 2022. the first thing the department for international trade is focusing is not to go shooting new trade deals, it is trying to make sure we can roll over all those trade deals with about 50 countries that we are now benefiting from as members of the eu. the first thing they will do is

make sure we don‘t lose any of those trade benefits. and after the other transition period and then depends what the future trade deal we agree with the eu looks like. it involves any kind of customs union and we would still not be able to implement any trade deals that deal with goods. removing tariffs on good. there are those in government who say that the world economy is changing, services or more more important, the digital economy is more important. but if you take the world as it is, most free—trade deals are about goods and about removing tariffs, and nontariff barriers on the trade of goods. if we are in a customs union that would still be compensated. and a final point, if your mother country debating whether it is worth spending time negotiating with the uk but you don‘t know what you could negotiate because it is still negotiating with the eu, you might decide to be looking to someone else to spend your time and effort, but is quite a lot of time and effort to

do these trade deals. you might be prioritised the uk. but if you are a country... you can start to go shooting bodyguard implement. another point, everyone is worried about the idea that temporary territory customs union, that is a big problem for the eu because they wa nt big problem for the eu because they want to do other trade deals around the world, those third parties will say, you have this temporary customs deal with the uk, say, you have this temporary customs dealwith the uk, one say, you have this temporary customs deal with the uk, one of the largest economies, are we negotiating with you as 27 or is 28? and the eu says, we don't know, that complicates life for them. question number two. if the deal pass through parliament will we see a revival of the economy and a rise in the pound and the ftse? from zaky ibrahim. hard to tell, and i‘m stealing chris‘s answer which is if we knew we would be betting on the pound.

what is interesting is what the market at the moment think is the most likely thing to happen? if you are saying they would be surprised by deal going through you might see positive effect on confidence. there would be some certainty. ever the moment they say we don‘t know where do some certain you might see some economic uplift. that is what the chancellor said in his budget he did expect to happen. we will wait to see. i wouldn‘t predict that one. 0ne see. i wouldn‘t predict that one. one of the odd things about the economy is that there are a lot of other things that could happen there. i wouldn‘t bank on it. other things that could happen there. i wouldn't bank on it. as you say, businesses keep saying, we need certainty to invest and make long—term plans. if the deal goes through and you know you have a transition period of 21 months and possibly longer, then the really big decision about the future relationship is kicked down the road. it would certainly stabilise things, but it's notjust brexit,

other things about the economy as well. a lot of ifs. if the brexit deal is voted down by parliament as seem likely, does the government have the power to impose it on the country? that‘s from albert brown. the short answer is no. the deal at theresa may has agreed with the other 27 theresa may has agreed with the other27 eu theresa may has agreed with the other 27 eu countries under uk law has to be ratified here by our parliament, and would have to be ratified also by the european parliament and approved by what is called the qualified majority of the other countries, 20 out of 27, real estate lady all have to agree, on a political level. kajzerjust say, i am doing it anyway? no, she can't stop —— can she just say... there is a slight option for renegotiation. it would be difficult if that's

hazard, devoted the deal down to reopen the withdrawal agreement. the political declaration, 26 pages of aspirational language. you could tweak that a little bit. wicked one way to please one person and someone else wants it tweak the other way. what‘s in uk laws that we leave the 29th of march 2019, dealer no deal. it's 29th of march 2019, dealer no deal. it‘s in the withdrawal act and the article 50. if parliament doesn‘t get attack together to do something else and to legislate for something else, that is what happens. tick tock. the pm says free movement will end. does that have to be negotiated and will eu migrants be able to claim benefits after we leave? once we are out of the single market, the rules of the single market, the rules of the single market dictate that one of the things you have to allow is the free

movement of people. the withdrawal agreement does not specific language, but once we're outside a cigar market we can choose to bring it to an end and the government has made it clear it will do that. it also means free movement for uk citizens to the rest of the eu would come to an end at the same point. as for benefits to eu migrants, people who are already here will gain what is called settled status, they have to prove five years' residence. they will be able to claim that and pay taxes. in the future we don't quite know what the social security rules will be. one of the many things will have to be negotiated. i suspect that the claiming benefits by people coming from other countries will probably be something will not see in the future. the government said it will have an underscore military regime, it will treat migrants from the eu the same as non—eu migrants. we will see more details possibly

next week when we see this long—awaited white paper. the other thing to mention is that if we crash out with no deal, we actually aren‘t ina out with no deal, we actually aren‘t in a position to end free movement straight after crashing out with no deal. there have been tetchy hearings at the home affairs select committee where has been dragged out of home office ministers by the chair, that actually, because we won‘t have registered all those eu migrants who are here already living here, things like that, we can‘t actually ask employers and landlords to demand paperwork from people. effectively, free movement will go on for quite a while after even a no deal except. over the years we've talked a lot about id cards. we don't have id cards. one of the things that does is it makes it much more difficult to know who is in the country when we have had a free movement regime. i lived in belgium andl movement regime. i lived in belgium and i covered the eu, and in belgium jatta got your local town hall and register get an jatta got your local town hall and registerget an id jatta got your local town hall and register get an id card within a few weeks. in belgium in exactly who is

there, they know how long we have been there, and if, aftera months, migrants from other eu countries don't have work, they can be... this isa don't have work, they can be... this is a huge criticism. you could argue the rules could be more strict applied, yes. are the odds that the eu would prefer to extend the transition indefinitely rather than shift to a free trade deal without a customs union really that high? isn‘t a free trade deal in their interest as well? that‘s really addressing. it could be much harderfor the eu to have a unified view in phase two of the talks. it‘s been relatively easy for them to agree on the future in the first phase because was guaranteeing citizens‘ writes, asking the uk to pay quite a lot of money to settle the axis will and sort out the northern ireland thing. you might find people have different national views coming forward, and whether they preferred this what is supposed

to bea they preferred this what is supposed to be a temporary arrangement of the backstop, that might suit some, but you have already seen others, for example the french saying they don‘t think the rules about uk access to their market, about environment standards, are strong enough. you get other interests coming into play. i think everybody would say that really they want certainty as well. everyone knowing what the long—term rules and would be everyone‘s long—term interest, but how to get to that is a different matter. one last question. whatjurisdiction will the ecj have over british law? during the transition period, exactly the same as the moment. after the transition comes to an end, the direct jurisdiction after the transition comes to an end, the directjurisdiction will be over, although there are certain circumstances and issues relating to citizens' writes for an eight year period where cases can be referred to the ecj. after that, there is a

dispute resolution system been set up dispute resolution system been set up which can go to arbitration. if the arbitration regime cannot agree then what happens, if there is a matter of eu law, the ruling of the ecj would still be binding. indirect, but there will be a lot of eu law in any future relationship. indirectly it will be there but the direct jurisdiction over time will come to an end. now, we have been talking about political applications, but as ms wa nts to political applications, but as ms wants to know what is happening. yes, and we have heard from a lot of business leaders, and generally they happen rather positive about theresa may‘s withdrawal agreement. let‘s get the headlines... no, we will stick with this. reaction generally has been positive. we know that theresa may spoke at this cbi when

she announced that they had been done. joining us is edwin morgan policy director. firstly, your reaction. it's an important step forward , reaction. it's an important step forward, the summit over the weekend with you in the uk have agreed withdrawal agreement, and now obviously we move on to her parliament are going to react. i think the way business views it is we have gone through these necessary stages, it has been slower than business would have liked, and things are far from certain because everything hinges on her parliament react. the usages of directors reached a statement, you are positive about the agreement, but very important about how the negotiations go forward. in terms of businesses, lots of businesses are saying, this is good because we don‘t like the alternative, which

could be no deal. is that why businesses are backing this, because they don‘t like the alternative? it has nothing to do with the agreement itself. i think that's right, businesses are focused on avoiding no deal. we surveyed rumours last week and two thirds said no deal would be negative for their business. only about 14% said it would be positive. avoiding no deal has to be the priority. that not mean they love every detail of this withdrawal agreement, there are whole range of different views within the business community on various, and it is 585 pages, so you can display most small businesses to read the whole thing. but it is a stage to be got through, that is how most businesses see it. when you look at where we are with the clock ticking down, just hearing about how we will leave by automatic application of the law next march, thatis application of the law next march, that is where we are, and so

businesses predominantly say to us, getting a withdrawal agreement avoids no deal, that is pretty much where they are. thanks forjoining us. sterling was slightly up today, problem following what happened yesterday, the eu nations signing off this agreement. it will be interesting to see how it moves today. theresa may speaking this afternoon, that tends to influence sterling. thanks for that. the first spacecraft designed to study the internal structure of mars will attempt a difficult landing on the planet tonight. the us space agency nasa says the probe will have minutes to slow down from more than 12,000 miles an hour to just 5

miles per hour, to avoid crashing on the surface. from mission control in california, our science correspondent, victoria gill reports. they call it seven minutes of terror. at this last stage of its journey to mars, nasa‘s insight lander will need to slow itself down from more than 12,000 miles an hour to a safe landing speed. so, this is the full—size model? this is the full—size, life—size model of the insight lander. these are our beautiful solar arrays that are gorgeous. they will power everything on the lander. insight is doing amazing science on the surface of mars. we like to say we‘re giving mars its first checkup in four billion years. before any martian science can begin, though, the pressure of a safe touchdown will trigger a beacon to be sent back to earth — insight‘s first call home. once we land, we‘ll get a message back from the spacecraft that says it thinks it‘s safe, and then we have to obviously check up on our spacecraft as well and make sure that it really is in a safe state, but, man,

when we get that first indication, our hearts are just going to explode! it‘ll be really exciting. insight‘s robotic arm will carefully put down a seismometer detecting any vibrations from martian earthquakes, or "marsquakes". and this will be the first robot to drill deep into mars‘ surface in an effort to understand the structure of this planet. it‘s kind of like a meditative spacecraft. we have to sit there, zen—like, and listen for marsquakes. so, all these other instruments have set the stage, but now we‘re going beneath the surface. we‘ve only scratched the surface previously. back at mission control, these measurements will allow scientists to step back in time and work out exactly how rocky bodies like mars, earth and the moon actually formed 4.5 billion years ago. something of a tradition here at nasa mission control — whenever there‘s an attempt to land on another planet, the whole team at mission control eat peanuts, apparently, because the first of nasa‘s attempts to land

on the moon, they had six failures. then on the seventh attempt, the chief engineer was eating and sharing peanuts with the entire team. just one more detail in the effort to help this spacecraft land on its feet on a planet more than 90 million miles away. victoria gill, bbc news, at nasa‘s jet propulsion laboratory, california. the oscar—winning director and screenwriter, bernardo bertolucci, has died in rome. he was 77, and had been suffering from cancer. his films include the last emperor and the highly controversial last tango in paris. here‘s our entertainment correspondent, lizo mzimba. look! this was perhaps bernardo bertolucci‘s masterpiece. the last emperor, the true story of pu yi, only a small child when he became china‘s last imperial ruler. it swept the oscars, winning nine academy awards,

including best film and best director for bertolucci himself. the historical epic, years in the making, was also a movie—making milestone, the first film allowed to be shot in beijing‘s forbidden city. the script had to be approved by the chinese authorities, but the director strongly defended himself against accusations that it was propaganda. if you don‘t show these terrible images of the terrible chinese communist, but you show that they are people like everybody else, you can be accused of doing propaganda. his early film the conformist was an influence on directors like spielberg. his 1972 film last tango in paris shocked audiences with its sexual content. before her death, the actress maria schneider said she felt as if she‘d been assaulted.

bertolucci denied this, saying she was aware in advance of the violent nature of the scene in question. in recent years, he had been in ill health and used a wheelchair, but still travelled to events around the globe where he was often being honoured as one of italy and the world‘s great film—makers. he will be remembered as one of cinema‘s most talented directors, whose images on screen are as powerful today as they were decades ago when first experienced by audiences. the film director, bernardo bertolucci, who‘s died, at the age of 77. in the house of commons, the defence secretary is taking defence questions. it will fill up very soon because the prime minister, theresa may, scheduled to be addressing parliament, telling them about the trip to brussels over the weekend,

and the eu in effect rubber—stamping her plans for brexit, plans that will be debated in the house of commons before they are voted on there. that is happening at 3:30 p:m.. we will be live in the house of commons for that. time for a look at the weather. hello. a big change in the weather over the next couple of days as we lose the relatively clear we have and replace it with something much milder and wetter and windier. today has been cloudy from most parts. looking at the satellite picture, a number of areas of low pressure waiting to swing into the uk, bringing that change. for today it has been quite quiet. we seen the number of showers across eastern areas of england and scotland. not moving far inland. that‘s where they will continue to be through the evening. temperatures falling away

and it will be a chilly evening. overnight the potential of wintry nets in some showers in eastern parts of scotland, some snow in the hills. things could turn icy for a time. signs of a change coming into parts of the south west. as a cloud thickens late the night we will see rain approaching south—west england. but otherwise it is a cool night. patches of frost with a cloud breaks for a length of time. on tuesday this band of rain comes into ireland south—west england and wales. but we still have cold a, so there will be a con trust from west to east. the weather front will continue to edge it away and then eventually gets into parts of north—west england as well. there will be a number of showers running into north—eastern parts of scotland. some could be fairly heavy at times. towards the middle of the week, low pressure firmly in charge. notice the tightly

packed isobars, strong winds up the western side of the country, gusts up western side of the country, gusts up to 70 mph. strong enough to bring down some trees so up to 70 mph. strong enough to bring down some trees so there is the risk of transport disruption. and also heavy rain that could cause some issues. the windsor on the south—west, and the temperatures surge. a big jump from tuesday to wednesday, with high temperatures of 15 in london and belfast. we keep the mild weather over the next few days, it will be windy, particularly across western scotland through thursday. hello, you‘re watching afternoon live. i‘m simon mccoy, live in westminster.

today at three: back my deal — or risk uncertainty and division. theresa may attempts to persuade mps, after the eu signed off her brexit deal. the prime minister has secured the deal, a very good deal for the united kingdom, and it‘s now the job of all us in the cabinet to make the case. this is the scene live in the commons, where the prime minister will shortly appeal to mps to back her deal, but a tough task awaits her as politicians from all sides say they won‘t support it. in other news — freed after a pardon — relief for his family after british academic matthew hedges is told he can go home, but the united arab emirates insists he is a british spy. ratcheting up the tension — ukraine‘s parliament is to decide whether to bring in martial law, after the capture of three of its naval vessels by russia. coming up on afternoon live all the sport with hugh ferris. good afternoon.

england have completed a whitewash in an away test series for only the third time in history. their 42 run win against sri lanka in colombo means it finished 3—0. i‘ll have more later. thanks, hugh. and we‘ll bejoining you for a full update just after half—past. chris fawkes has all the weather. looking ahead to a big change in our weather as we lose the relatively cool air weather as we lose the relatively coolairand weather as we lose the relatively cool air and replace it with more mild conditions. but heading towards the middle of the week it will plan a very wet and very windy. i will have more details later. thanks, chris. also coming up: it‘s coming down — facing "seven minutes of terror." the time it takes for nasa‘s insight lander to enter mars‘s atmosphere at hypersonic speed, to slow to walking pace and gently put itself on the ground. hello, everyone, this

is afternoon live. i‘m simon mccoy. theresa may is beginning a two—week campaign to rally support for her withdrawal agreement with the eu, ahead of a crucial commons vote next month. in around half an hour‘s time, mrs may will argue her case in the commons, where she faces a tough battle to get the deal approved. she‘s to tell mps that rejecting the deal will be "risky" and "lead to division and uncertainty." labour and the other opposition parties have promised to vote against it, and many of her own mps are expected to join them. 0ur political correspondent, iain watson, has this report. is it really a good dealfor britain? yes. why do you think so? can you get it through parliament? yes. it delivers on brexit. 24 hours after a deal was sealed in brussels, some cabinet ministers were upbeat that it would now be backed here in britain. and some long—standing leave campaigners are now giving the deal their approval. it is very important we back the prime minister, she‘s secured a good deal for britain and it will mean we will

be able to control our borders, we will be in charge of immigration, we will be outside the common fisheries policy and outside the common agricultural policy. and that‘s the script that cabinet ministers are expected to stick to, that the deal delivers on the government‘s promises. that will be put to the test in parliament when mps get their say on or around the 12th of december. behind closed doors here at downing street, the cabinet is discussing the brexit deal. we know some of them don‘t like it, but in public, at least, they are likely to go along with it. but 86 members of theresa may‘s own party have told us that they are unlikely to support her deal. some might simply abstain rather than vote against, she has a huge job to convince them, but over the next few weeks, her secret weapon, if you like, is you. the prime minister, theresa may. you will be seeing a lot more of the prime minister on broadcast and social media. her hope is the public will push their politicians to get on with brexit and back her deal.

i think all mps will be wrestling with their consciences over the next two weeks and thinking hard about what their constituents actually want in a situation like this. the thing is that anything could happen if this deal does not get through and that is my concern, that is why i want to back this agreement and urge all my colleagues to do the same. thank you. but we know that many brexiteers in the conservative backbenches have made their minds up already about the deal and some of those who backed remain are prepared to vote the deal down in the hope of getting a new referendum. it should go back to the british people with all the information available to them and they have that final say which i think, increasingly, they are demanding. labour rejects the prime minister‘s argument that it‘s her deal or no deal and are prepared to let it fall. it is obvious she is struggling, she needs a plan b and just to march on to crash in this vote without an alternative is not good enough. but a small number of labour mps have not ruled out backing the government.

the job of the government is to look across the chamber and find a majority of mps who will support a deal so that we can still accept the outcome of the referendum but make sure we leave in a way that does the least economic damage to our country. as westminster prepares for the festive season, if mps do reject the prime minister‘s deal just two weeks before christmas, expect the season of goodwill to be put on hold. 0ur brussels reporter adam fleming says european politicians are now watching westminster closely. that westminster phrase, the meaningful vote, is common parlance here in brussels now and everyone knows the big characters on the backbenches like jacob rees—mogg and everyone will be watching to see what happens, what arguments are raised and what criticisms are made of the prime minister and who stands up for the deal and, ultimately, what the result of the meaningful vote is, which brussels expects to take place in the week of the 10th of december.

they are going full steam ahead with what happens next, there is a meeting of european affairs minister tabled for the 18th december, who will then pass the deal ratified by the british parliament over to the european parliament. everyone is acting as if it is going to go through, speaking to people privately and diplomats will speculate about the chances and the parliamentary arithmetic, but the official eu policy is to not speculate, not to raise what—if questions, and yesterday none of the 27 other leaders when they had their meeting with theresa may even asked her what was going to happen or even started raising the concept of any kind of plan b. as we heard 100 times yesterday from the special summit, the deal, as far as the eu is concerned, is non—negotiable, final offer. 0ur chief political correspondent, vicki young is at central lobby in the houses of parliament behind me. theresa may is going to start that

selling of the deal this afternoon here in the house of commons. she has answered questions here many times in the past couple of weeks and she has not had overwhelming backing, certainly not from the opposition parties and on her own ventures, too, there is certainly a split of opinion. —— her own benches. there are various estimates of the number of conservative mps against her deal but there are many who are still undecided. 0ne against her deal but there are many who are still undecided. one of them joins me now. what is it that would persuade you to back theresa may‘s deal? i'm still undecided because i promised my local party members i will engage with them over the coming weeks, we have the first of those meetings later this week and i wa nt those meetings later this week and i want to hear first— hand those meetings later this week and i want to hear first—hand what my party members think and what my constituents think. for me, the most important issue is the irish backstop. we have to ensure no part

of the uk is ever treated differently to the rest of our country. the dup are making, our partners, and making a real issue of this because they think if the backstop is required it would mean a different regulatory framework for them in northern ireland and the re st of them in northern ireland and the rest of the uk. i am old enough to rememberwhen we rest of the uk. i am old enough to remember when we have gone to war in the falkland islands to protect the rights of british citizens and there are many who think this is the thin end of the wedge. will we exert ourselves as a sovereign nation state after brexit will we continue to allow the eu to enter free and regulate different parts of our country in different ways. that is too far for me and unless the prime mr khan renegotiate that i find it very difficult to support the deal. the eu is making it very clear that the withdrawal agreement that

contains the northern irish backstop cannot be negotiated, has been signed off and the only thing that could perhaps move would be the political declaration. what do you say to that? it would be very surprised if the eu stated this is our deal for now until your parliament rejects it. of course they will say there is no more leeway. i would not expect anything else from them, this is how negotiations they please. what the prime minister will find very interesting is the number of conservative mps who, like me, are prepared to swallow almost everything else, although we are not happy with the deal we may be persuaded to swallow almost everything else, but the issue of the part of our country being treated differently to the rest is something many of us find completely unacceptable. i don't think any country on the planet would accept pa rt of country on the planet would accept part of its sovereign territory being adjudicated on by a foreign

power. i don't know of any precedent for that and so we need to stand shoulder to shoulder with the dup, i do not always agree with the dup and i think they can be unreasonable sometimes but i think this is a very important issue. thank you very much indeed. theresa may due to stand up and the commons and the next half hour or so and start selling that deal to those on her own side as well of —— as well as others in the house of commons chamber. as you see, the banners are back out, we are on a platform this week, there it is, and they have managed to get extension poles for their banners. for those of you tweeting me and asking how we let that happen, there is nothing we can do to stop that. let‘s talk now more

about what we expect in the house of commons. we know that theresa may has a very tough fight ahead of her. let‘s talk about the options if she does not get her deal through. the simple answer is no one knows what happens. there‘s lots of talk about her bringing it back, one argument is the dealfalls, her bringing it back, one argument is the deal falls, the markets her bringing it back, one argument is the dealfalls, the markets panic and she brings it back the next week and she brings it back the next week and ask them to reconsider. that might or might not work. the other options are what parliament can salvage from this. we are legally obliged to leave the eu on the march 29, it is written statutes of the question is whether parliament not only has a majority for anything else, parliament opposes everything but stop —— does not have majority for anything out, but whether that be imposed on the government. there is clearly some traction for

this norway plus idea, can you explain that. norway is essential in the single market but not a member of the eu. the reason they say no way plus is to avoid the border in ireland you also need the customs union and we will do a lot of security cooperation that norway does not do. the shortcoming of that is that would involve continued payments to the eu and freedom of movement continuing and more intrusive and sovereignty than what theresa may has got because of the european court of justice theresa may has got because of the european court ofjustice having far greater reach indirectly through the e fta greater reach indirectly through the efta court. the point of what everybody says about the theresa may‘s deal is it pleases neither side. for the brexiteers, is there anything that theresa may can say which will allay their fears which have been the same they have shown for years. not on the basis of the document she brought back. the brexiteers are

saying this is brexit in name only, we are tied to the customs union. some want someone who we are tied to the customs union. some want someone who will tell brussels this is not good enough and get rid of the backstop. the problem is theresa may has spent the last year trying to get unilateral backstop and there is no chance the eu would get into that, no matter who was negotiating. you do not think there is any would go wrong here because some suggest that theresa may has to go back there may be something that can be offered. there are all sorts of ways you can be creative with the document, if the eu wanted to they could put in positive words and convince the art technology will solve the irish border question and so we solve the irish border question and so we will not need to deploy the backstop. what i don‘t think the eu will do because they‘ve made it a matter of principle is say britain can decide by yourself when you no longer needed backstop because i don‘t think dublin will accept that.

great to talk to you. thank you. the prime minister will be getting to herfeetin prime minister will be getting to her feet in about 15 minutes or so and we of course will take you into the commons for that. in the referendum two years ago, leeds was split down the middle. it voted to remain, but by one of the closest margins in the country. so what do people there make of theresa may‘s deal? 0ur correspondent, fiona trott, has been finding out. a chilly morning at kirkgate market in leeds, but a warm response to theresa may‘s message. people don‘t want to spend any more time arguing about brexit. we are fed up of arguing about it. i think everyone is fed up about parliament arguing about it as well. we are fed up and fed up with them. twice fed up. definitely, people will be fed up. are you fed up? i am, because it has been ages and we still don't know where we stand. we voted out, get out! all the people that are whinging about it, get over it! we voted to get out, just get out. what about businesses?

the northern powerhouse partnership says the feeling in this region is that this deal is better than no deal. i think the biggest fear for businesses is of a hard brexit, and the reality of that would be damaging notjust to the northern economy, but the national economy because key sectors like manufacturing are important here, but they‘re and also to the uk. and that is what‘s pushing businesses behind the prime minister‘s deal. i don‘t think there‘s much enthusiasm for it, but for instance when you talk to the chambers of commerce like here in yorkshire, the consensus is that they would prefer that outcome because it would give them more certainty. what does all that mean for people here in leeds at the market who say they are noticing the price of things going up? will there be prosperity for them in the future? i think the reality of brexit is, it is a huge distraction from what we really need to do, which is to improve productivity here in the north of england. new figures released over the weekend show that we are still seeing lower levels of growth here than in london despite the fact

that the gap has closed. but sadly, a lot of that closing of the gap is currently because all of uk growth and prosperity is being held back by people being afraid of brexit. despite the fact that like in cities here in leeds, there are great fundamentals in the economy, people are not investing as much as they would have done if brexit had not happened. in this corner of northern england, which voted to remain, but onlyjust, will they get behind the deal or do they want a people‘s vote? i think it should be a people‘s vote, definitely. you've already had the referendum, the decision has been made, we don't want another one. we have already had one, the decision was made for brexit. my understanding of brexit was that we walk away from europe with no deal. in effect, we start again. i don‘t trust any of the mp5, any of the government or anything, so i don‘t know. do you think there should be a people‘s vote? like i said, i don‘t trust any of it, so i don‘t know. here at the market, westminster, let alone brussels, feels very far away. they seem to be backing the deal

because they just want an end to negotiations, but will their mps go along with that? fiona trott, bbc news, leeds. when you walk around the smartest people will tell you they care about how much theirfruit people will tell you they care about how much their fruit and veg will cost them —— when you walk around this market. that is why they seemed to be backing the deal because they wa nt to be backing the deal because they want and enter negotiations, for too long, they think, politicians have been focusing on these negotiations and not on the issues that directly affect them. last year and 20,000 migrant workers came to leeds, host of them living in this city are from eastern europe and we spoke to an academic from leeds university earlier who studied the effect of brexit on the international community here and the first thing she spoke about was hit crime in the

north of england, which she directly relates to brexit and said it has increased and it remains high. she was also speaking about the effect on eu citizens living here, although the deal says there are rights will be protected, she says they do not yet feel protected. simon. and you can watch the prime minister addressing mps in the commons live here on the bbc news channel — that‘s due to start shortly, from 3.30 this afternoon. the defence secretary gavin williamson is still taking questions at the moment but the prime minister is scheduled to arrive here at the houses of parliament in the next ten minutes or so and we, as i say, will ta ke minutes or so and we, as i say, will take you into the chamber as soon as she does so. you‘re watching afternoon live, these are our headlines theresa may has met her cabinet as she begins a campaign to sell her brexit deal — she‘ll address mps the commons shortly. matthew hedges, the academic jailed on spying charges in the united arab emirates, has been freed after receiving a presidential pardon.

ukraine‘s parliament is meeting to decide whether to bring in martial law — after the capture of three of its naval vessels by russia. an sport england beach line cut by 42 runs to claim a 3—0 series win. —— england beat sri lanka. andy farrell will take over as ireland‘s rugby head coach following next year‘s world cup. formula 3 driver says her high—speed crash which fractured her spine was her second birthday, as the teenager heads home to start what she calls a new chapter. i will have more on those stories a little bit later. a british academic who was jailed on alleged spying charges in the united arab emirates, has been released and could be home tomorrow. matthew hedges, was sentenced to life in prison last week.

he‘s always protested his innocence, and his wife says she can‘t wait for him to come home, after an experience she described, as "a nightmare." richard galpin‘s report contains some flash photography. the 31—year—old phd student matthew hedges will be able to return home to britain as soon as formalities are completed after spending months in prison in the united arab emirates. but, despite pardoning him, the uae government went on today to reinforce its message that mr hedges had come to the country earlier this year to spy for the british intelligence agency mi6. he was part—time phd researcher, part—time businessman, but he was hundred percent a full—time secret service operative. during the investigation, mr hedges confessed he was acting as an agent for a foreign intelligence service. he confirmed that he collected sensitive and classified information about the uae. mr hedges‘ family deny all this, saying he came here to the uae

to research security and foreign policy issues for his phd. the british government also dismisses the charges of spying which he faced. we have seen no evidence to support these accusations against matthew hedges but today what we want to do is to thank them for the fact that they have reflected on the strong representations we have made. we have made it very clear for a number of months now that we see no basis in these allegations. they have reflected on that, they have taken the action that they can which means that matthew hedges is going to be reunited with his family. for mr hedges‘ wife, who had campaigned hard for the foreign office to finally take action, it now seems the ordeal is over. it‘s taken me by surprise and i‘m just so happy and so relieved and really incredulous that this is all happening, finally. it‘s been an absolute nightmarish six or seven months already and i just can‘t wait

to have him back. the expectation is that the couple will be together again quite soon. richard galpin, bbc news. ukraine‘s president has announced that the country will introduce martial law from wednesday, after russian forces seized three of its navy vessels, in the waters off crimea. moscow and kiev are blaming each other over the incident, in which a tug and two gunboats were captured, and a number of ukrainian crew members were injured. both the eu and nato have urged restraint. 0ur moscow corrrespondent, steve rosenberg, has the details. off the coast of crimea, russian border guards on collision course with the ukrainian navy. here the russians target a ukrainian tug boat. the hint is less than subtle — get out of these waters. there was more drama to come.

later, russian forces shot at and seized the tug and two other ukrainian vessels. this appears to be an sos from one of the ukrainian sailors as the russians storm his boat. a russian replies. the ukrainian vessels were towed to russian—controlled crimea. more than 20 ukrainian servicemen have been detained. the incidents took place near the crimean peninsula, by the kerch strait. russia says ukraine‘s navy illegally entered russian waters. ukraine denies it. this was the reaction in kiev. "death to russia," he shouts. protests and pyrotechnics outside the russian embassy. ukraine‘s president denounced what he called russia‘s aggression. petro poroshenko will ask parliament to approve martial law to defend ukraine against russia. moscow is refusing

to take the blame. russia‘s foreign minister accused kiev of provocations. sergey lavrov said ukraine‘s leaders were trying to score political points ahead of elections. to some, the incident is a reminder ofjust how dangerous the russia ukraine conflict is. the war continues to be live. and the war could escalate any moment. while endangering the relationship between russia and the west. with its show of force yesterday at sea and in the sky over the kerch strait, russia has sent a clear message to ukraine — don‘t mess with moscow. steve rosenberg, bbc news, moscow. we‘re waiting for the prime minister

to address parliament after the eu effectively rubber—stamped her brexit proposals. joining me now is the pro—brexit conservative mp priti patel. good afternoon. if you were theresa may, how hopeful would you be this isa may, how hopeful would you be this is a persuadable place? quite frankly, from everything we are hearing i think it will be very challenging to get the deal through. i know she and colleagues are working hard to sell it to the country but it is parliament that matters, having the debates in parliament and demonstrating, from maesteg, why the agreement cannot be supported because it does not take us out of the agreement, keeps us in the bill making and institutions of the bill making and institutions of the eu such as the court ofjustice and the infamous backstop which basically now has a whole host of customs applications and undermines the integrity of the union. bear to

see you do not care what she says, you are voting against this.” see you do not care what she says, you are voting against this. i have been clear and made my views known when the withdrawal agreement came out, i read it, it is a difficult document full of legal text but it is quite clear and explicit in how we are tied in. to add salt into the wounds, the political declaration is just a statement of aspiration. that is nothing solid there in terms of the deals we are going to get from the deals we are going to get from the eu going forward. if the public think brexit is done, which is what the government is saying, that‘s not true. what the public may be thinking and theresa may maybank on is just getting something salute, give us something because, quite frankly, we‘ve had enough. i think the country has had enough of brexit, there is no doubt about it, but the withdrawal agreement is a treaty, it is not the case of

getting it through and amending it later on, the country and successive governments have previously tried that and field. we have one chance now and that has to be getting this right and looking at how we can effectively get rid of the backstop but have the conversation as the eu are doing with many other third countries on the canada style free trade deal. but they have made it clear that izzard, there is no more negotiating, this is it. it did in their interest to say that because they have believed britain over the past 45 years to accept everything that comes out of them —— they have believed britain. if we are going to stand up and deliver the type of brexit we consistently pledged to deliver we have to speak about or political, economic and democratic freedoms and get the agreement that means we are open to the world and not shackled to the institutions of the eu.

0n institutions of the eu. on your list of favourites, crash out, stay in the eu, what do you... i have never been an advocate of crashing out and there would have to be serious questions asked of the government, what kind of preparation, why have they not planned for no deal? we get the economic impacts on wednesday of an ordeal scenario and they are not going to be glowing, probably similarto going to be glowing, probably similar to the treasury forecasts going into the referendum. they should have done some planning. i have not advocated no deal because i ama have not advocated no deal because i am a believer in the ability to get am a believer in the ability to get a free—trade arrangements and an equal partnership, not my words, theresa may‘s words, equal and fair partnership where we respect each other but are able to go out in the world once we leave the eu. what sort of relationship, what would you say to theresa may?”

what sort of relationship, what would you say to theresa may? i do have discussions with the prime minister and i have seen her and had similar conversation on customs, the backstop on the role of technology, having worked in the private sector, internationally, speak about how we can deliver the brexit that we promised the country we would deliver. also focusing on international trade, deliver. also focusing on internationaltrade, open deliver. also focusing on international trade, open economies and open markets, rather than having the eu, they will have a say on whether or not we can have free—trade agreements with other countries and that is not right. what do you say to your constituents who say you‘re handing the keys to jeremy corbyn? many of my constituents voted to leave, and i don‘t want to see jeremy corbyn and neither do my constituents but we stop jeremy corbyn and stop the politics he proposes, his fantasy economics and all the rest, if we fight for britain and fight for the brexit that conservatives promised we would

deliver. i know you have got your running shoes on you better start because the prime minister has just walked into the chamber so i will let you go. as you can see, the commons is filling up, the prime minister taking her seat, and we will be there in the next few minutes as she addresses parliament hollowing the brussels rubber—stamping of her proposals. she is next to gavin williamson who is still taking defence questions. we will be back there are just defence questions. we will be back there arejust a defence questions. we will be back there are just a moment. now it‘s time for a look at the weather with chris fawkes. many others have had a dry day today but across eastern coasts of england and scotland we have seen showers. they are not moving far inland because there is no wind to push the men. through the evening and overnight showers can get heavy. some snow on the hills, things could

get slippery front line. and a chilly night, temperatures down into low single figures widely. a band of rain approaching south—west towards the end of the night. the wet weather will make its presence felt through the day on tuesday. i have the weather front, still cool air. but turning much milder in the south—west through the day. this is the scene in the house of commons. the atmosphere building, because very shortly the prime minister will address mps as she begins a long week trying to persuade people of the merits of her plan. we will stay with the commons.

she is scheduled to speak very shortly. a difficult week for because on wednesday, prime ministers questions, she will face questions from both the opposition and within our own ranks, as she will this afternoon. let‘s join the prime minister now. with permission, mr speaker, i would like to make a statement on the conclusion of our negotiations. order, order... sort out your seating arrangements. well done, there is is a long afternoon lies ahead, let us have a bit of quiet and respectful order to for the prime minister. with permission i would like to make a statement on the conclusion of our decision to leaner the european union. at the special council in brussels i reached a deal with the

leader of the other 27 member states ofa leader of the other 27 member states of a withdrawal agreement that will ensure our ordinary depar chub on 29th march next year and tie toed a political declaration on ambitious future partnership in the national a interest. this is right dealfor britain because it delivers on the democratic decision of the british people. i takes back control of therd bore, ends the flee movement of people once and for all and lowing the government to introduce a new skills based immigration system. it takes back control of the law, it ends thejury diction it takes back control of the law, it ends the jury diction of the court ofjustice ends the jury diction of the court of justice and instead ends the jury diction of the court ofjustice and instead our laws being made in our parliaments enforced by our courts of. and it ta kes enforced by our courts of. and it takes back control of our money. it ends the vast annual payments we send to brussels, so instead we can spend taxpayer money on our own priorities including the £394 million a week of extra investment into our long—term plan for the

national health service. by creating a new free trade area with no tariff, fees charges quantitative restrictions or rules of origin checks this projects jobs restrictions or rules of origin checks this projectsjobs including those that rely on integrated supply chain u it protects security with a close relationship on defence and tackling crime and terrorism which will help to keep our people safe and it protects the integrity of our united kingdom, meeting our commitments in northern ireland, and delivering for the whole uk family, including our overseas territories and the crown dependency, mr speaker, on gibraltar, we have worked constructively with the government‘s of spain and gibraltar, andi government‘s of spain and gibraltar, and i want to pay tribute in particular to gibraltar‘s chief minister, for his statesmanship in these negotiations. we have ensured that gibraltar is covered by the whole withdrawal agreement and by the implementation period. and for the future

partnership, the uk government will be negotiating for the whole uk family, including gibraltar. as the minister said statesmanship in these negotiations. we have ensured that gibraltar is covered by the whole withdrawal agreement and by the implementation period. and for the future partnership, the uk government will be negotiating for the whole uk family, including gibraltar. as the minister said this weekend, andi as the minister said this weekend, and i quote "every aspect of the response of the united kingdom was agreed with the government of gibraltar. we have worked seamlessly together in this as we have in all other aspects of this two—year period of negotiation." most importantly, the legal text of draft withdrawal agreement has not been changed. that is what the spanish government repeatedly sought, but they have not achieved that. the united kingdom has not let us down. mr speaker, our message to the people of gibraltar is clear, we will always stand by you, we are proud that gibraltar is british, and our position on sovereignty has not and will not change. mr speaker, the withdrawal agreement will ensure we leave the european union on 29th march next year in a smooth and orderly way, it protects

the rite of eu citizens living in the rite of eu citizens living in the uk and uk citizens living in the eu, so they can carry on living their lives as before. it delivers a time limited implementation period to give business time to prepare more the new arrangements during the implementation period trade will continue on current terms so businesses only have to face one set of changes it ensured a fair settle m e nt of changes it ensured a fair settlement of financial arrangement and it meets our commitment to ensure there is no hard border between ireland and northern ireland and no customs border in the irish sea, in the event the future relationship is not ready. mr speaker i know some members remain concerned we could find ourself stuck in this backstop so let me address this directly. fist this is an insurance policy no—one wants to use. but the uk and the eu are fully committed, both the uk and the eu

are fully committed to having our future relationship in place by the first jan 2021, and the withdrawal agreement has a legal duty on both sides, to use best defrs to avoid the backstop coming into force, if despite this the few chur relationship is not ready by the end of 2020 we would not be forced to use the backstop, we would have a clear choice 2000 the backbench stop ora clear choice 2000 the backbench stop or a short extensive, if we did choose the backstop the legal text is clear it should be temporary and that the article 50 legal base cannot provide for a permanent relationship and there is now more flexibility it can be super sided by the future relationship or by alternative arrangements which include the potential for facile ative arrangelets and technologies to avoid a hard border on the island of ireland. there is a termination clause that allows the backstop to be turned off when we have fulfilled

our commitment and there is a right to trigger the review through the joint committee. further more, as a result of the changes we have negotiated, the legal text is is now also clear, that once the backstop has been supper seeded it shall seize to apply so if a futurerly parliament decided to move from a deep trade relationship to a loser one, the backstop could not return. mr speaker, i do not pretend either we or the eu are entirely happy with these arrangements and that is how it must be, were either party entirely happy that party would have no incentive to move on the future relationship but there is no alternative deal that honours our commitment to northern ireland which does not involve this insurance policy, and the eu would not have agreed any future partnership would it. put simply, there is no deal that comes without a backstop, and without a backstop there is no deal.

mr speaker the withdrawal agreement is accompanied by a political deck alreadiration which sets out the scope of a future else are ship between the uk and the eu. it‘s a detailed set of instructions that will be used to deliver a legal agreement on ow our future relationship. the link requires both sides to use best endeavours to get this legal text agreed by the end of 2020. and both sigh are committed to making preparations for an immediate start to the formal negotiation, after our withdrawal. the declaration contains specific detail on ourfuture economic declaration contains specific detail on our future economic relationship, this includes a new free trade area with no tariff, fee, quantitative restrickions or rules of origin check, an economic relationship no other major economy has, it includes liberalisation in trade in service

well beyond wto commitment and built on recent free trade agreements. insures market access cannot be withdrawal on a whim and provides stability and certainty. and it ensures we will leave eu programmes that do not work in our interests, so we that do not work in our interests, so we will be out of the common agricultural policy and out of the common fisheries policy that has failed our coastal community, instead... instead, as the political district council larsration sets out we will an independent coastal state again, we will take back full sovereign control over our waters so we will be be able to decide who we allow to fish in our waters, the eu have maintained throughout this process that they wanted to link overall access to markets to access to fisheries they failed in the withdrawal agreement and they failed

again in the political declaration, it is no surprise some are already trying to lay down markers again for the future regulars #14i7 but they should be getting used to the answer by now, it is not going to happen. finally, the declaration is clear, that whatever is agreed in the future partnership must recognise the independent trade policy so for the independent trade policy so for the first time in 40 year, the uk will be able to strike new trade deals and open up newmarkets for goods and services in the fastest growing economies around the world. mr speaker, as i set out for the house last week the future relationship includes a comprehensive new security partnership with close reciprocal law enforcement to keep our people safe. at the outset we are with told being outside of free movement and outside of the schengen area we would be treated like non—eu states on security but this deal delivers

the broadest security partnership including arrangement for effective data exchange or passenger list and vehicle registration data as well as extradition arrangesments like those in the european arrest warrant and opens the way to sharing the types of information included in the databases on of information included in the data bases on wanted of information included in the databases on wanted or missing persons be and criminal records, mr speaker, this has been a long and complex negotiation, it has required give—and—ta ke complex negotiation, it has required give—and—take on complex negotiation, it has required give—and—ta ke on both complex negotiation, it has required give—and—take on both sides and that is the nature of a negotiation. but this deal honours the result of the referendum, while providing a close economic and security relationship with our nearest neighbours and in so with our nearest neighbours and in so doing offers a brighterfuture for the british people outside of the eu. and i can say to the house with absolutely certainty there is not a belter deal available and my fellow leaders... my fellow leaders we re fellow leaders... my fellow leaders were clear on that themselves

yesterday. 0ur duty as a part. 0ver the coming weeks is to examine this deal in detail, to debate it, respectfully, to listen to our constituents and decide what is in our national interest. there is a choice which this house will have to make, we can back this deal, deliver on the vote and move on to building a pricing brighter future of opportunity and prosperity or this house can choos to reject this and go back to square one, because no—one knows what would happen if it doesn‘t pass, it would hope the door to more division and uncertainty with all the risks that will entail. mr speaker, i believe our national interest is clear. the british people want its to get on with the deal, that honours the referendum, and allows us to come again, together... allows us to come together again as a country which ever way we voted. that, this is

that deal, a deal that delivers for the british people and i commend this statement to the house. thank you mr speaker, i thank the prime ministerfor the thank you mr speaker, i thank the prime minister for the advance copy of her statement, the prime minister may want to try and sell yesterday‘s summit asa may want to try and sell yesterday‘s summit as a great success but to borrow a phrase the reality is nothing has changed. the prime minister says if we reject this deal it will take us back to square this deal it will take us back to square one. this deal it will take us back to square one. the truth is under this government we have never got beyond square government we have never got beyond square one. government we have never got beyond square one. the botched deal is a bad dealfor this square one. the botched deal is a bad deal for this country. square one. the botched deal is a bad dealfor this country. all yesterday did was mark the end of this government‘s failed and miserable negotiations. there can be no doubt that this deal would leave us with the worst of all worlds, no say over future rules and no certainty for the future. even the

prime minister‘s own cabinet can‘t bring themselves to sell this deal. the foreign secretary said yesterday andi the foreign secretary said yesterday and i quote this deal mitigates most of the negative impact. that‘s hardly a glowing endorsement. the silence from much of the rest of the cabinet is telling. they know these negotiations have failed, and they know it will leave britain worse off. in fact, the national institute off. in fact, the national institute of economic and social research confirmed this today, saying the prime minister‘s deal would mean our economy would be 3.9% smaller than it would otherwise be. this is more than our net contribution to the european union, which is currently 8.9 billion a year, around £170 million a week. so why is the prime minister claiming that extra money to the nhs will be due to the brexit dividend? of course, mr speaker, we

look forward to the official treasury forecast, and indeed the legal advice that this house voted nearly two weeks ago. the prime minister‘s claim that this deal ta kes minister‘s claim that this deal takes back control over our borders, money and laws, is a fallacy. the reality is opposite. the prime minister says the political declaration could give us comfort that the northern ireland backstop will be needed, but injune 2012, this country will be faced with a stark choice. we can agree to extend the transitional period or accept the transitional period or accept the backstop. so can the prime minister confirm that under her deal, if we are to avoid the backstop and whatever the european union demands to extend the transition period, leaving a choice of paying more money without a say on the rules or enter a backstop leading to a regulatory border down the irish sea. so much for taking

back control of our borders, money and laws. mr speaker, it may not end there. the president of france, president 0bama, has already made clear what his priorities will be. —— president macron. in order to maintain access to the british waters before the end of the transition period, and of course, all of ourfishermen will transition period, and of course, all of our fishermen will be protected. isn‘t it the case that under the prime minister‘s botched deal, we will have to agree to those demands on access to waters and quota shares if we want to finalise a future trade deal or extend the transition? breaking every promise the prime minister, the environment secretary and the scotland secretary have made ourfishing industry and our coastal communities? and there was another climb—down over gibraltar at the weekend. isn‘t it

the case that spain now has a role over gibraltar, benefiting from any future relationship, that is still to be negotiated. not something the prime minister presented to the commons last week. mr speaker, in two weeks‘ time, this house will begin voting on a legally binding withdrawal agreement, and the vague wish list contained in the political declaration. the prime minister would be negotiating the future agreement from a position of profound weakness, threatened with paying more to extend the transition with no say over our money, laws or borders, and at risk of the utterly unacceptable borders, and at risk of the utterly u na cce pta ble backstop borders, and at risk of the utterly unacceptable backstop which was only made necessary by her own red lines, most of which have since been abandoned by her. is it not in the national interests for the prime minister to plough on when it is clear this deal does not have support of either side of this house all the country as a whole?

ploughing on is not stoic, it is an act of national self harm. and instead of threatening this house with no deal scenario or no brexit scenario, the prime minister now needs to prepare a plan b, something her predecessors failed to do. there isa her predecessors failed to do. there is a sensible deal that could win the support of this house, based on a comprehensive customs union, a strong single market deal that protects... order, order. when the prime minister was addressing the house, i made it clear that she should be heard, and by and large she was. those chuntering or yelling from a sedentary position, stop it, it's rude, foolish and doomed to fail. jeremy corbyn. thank you, mr

speaker. there is a sensible deal that could gain the support of this house, based on a customs union, a strong single market deal that protects rights at work and environmental and consumer safeguards. the prime minister may have achieved agreement across 27 heads of state, but she has lost support of the country. many young people and others see opportunities being taken away from them. many people who voted remain voted for an outward looking and inclusive society, and they fear this deal and they fear the rhetoric of the prime minister in promoting this deal. likewise, many people from areas that voted leave feel this deal has betrayed the brexit they voted for, it does not take back control, it will not make them better off and it will not make them better off and it will not make them better off and it will not solve the economic deprivation that affects far too many communities and towns and cities across this country. this

deal is not a plan for britain‘s future. so, for the good of the nation, the house has very little choice but to reject this deal. prime minister. thank you, mr speaker. just to pick up on a number of points of the right honourable gentleman made. he commented on the brexit dividend and asked where it was. we have been very clear, very clear, that we will be able to use that money that we are not sending to the european union to spend on our priorities including the national health service. there was a time when the right honourable gentleman himself talked about spending the brexit dividend on our public services. he talks about the backstop and the implementation period being the alternative, but we have written in the possibility of alternative arrangements. the key thing is to deliver on our commitment of no hard border between northern ireland and ireland, a

commitment which he appeared to dismiss in his response to my statement. we do not dismiss the people of northern ireland. we believe it is important to maintain a commitment. he talked about control of borders and said that our deal does not bring control of borders. of course it does, because it brings an end to free movement once and for all. i note that the labour party has never been able to stand up and say that it wants to bring an end to free movement once and for all, and that‘s because they are not responding to the real needs and the real concerns of the british people on these issues. the british people on these issues. the british people want control of our borders, they want an end to free movement. this deal delivers it. i was interested that it now appears to be labour party policy to be in both the single market and the customs union. i hear yeses from the front bench. 0f union. i hear yeses from the front bench. of course, there was also a time when the right honourable gentleman talked about the importance of having an independent

trade policy and as a full member of the customs union, which he wants, we can‘t do that, so again he has gone back on his words in relation to these issues. he talked about the comments that president 0bama made in relation to access to waters, and i recognise that this is raised a question here, so for all of those concerned and all of those who have commented on this, it is important to recall that if we win the backstop, we would be outside the common fisheries policy, and we would be deciding who has access to fish in our waters. he mentioned gibraltar. i quoted the chief minister of gibraltar, who made very clear, as i did, that this government stood by gibraltar, and this change tour with withdrawal agreement which the spanish government wished to make, we are clear that gibraltar‘s sovereignty

will not change. it has not changed, it will not change, and we are proud that gibraltar is british. he said, i have to say, and finally he talked about dealing with issues of our economy in those parts of the country where we do need to enhance and improve our economy, and i have to say to him, the one thing that is absolutely clear, the one thing that will never deliver for our economy is his policy on borrowing, taxing and spending. it is a balanced approach to the economy that delivers. mr iain duncan smith. mr speaker, can i recognise my right honourable friend‘s genuine endeavours in all these matters, and just returned to the point about the backstop. she recognise that genuine and real concern held on all sides of the house about what would happen if the uk was to be forced into the backstop? i listened very carefully

to what my right honourable friend said, and she said that the uk doesn‘t want it, the eu doesn‘t want it, and with the other day that ireland said that no matter what any agreement, they would never have any ha rd agreement, they would never have any hard border, so it makes you wonder why it is in the withdrawal agreement at all. but the point i wa nt to agreement at all. but the point i want to make to my honourable friend is this. if the government going down the road towards negotiation is heading towards that point when the backstop will become invoked, does that not genuinely mean that mr macron is right, that we will come under intolerable pressure to agree almost anything to avoid our entry into what my right honourable friend rightly says is something we never wa nt to rightly says is something we never want to be in? i say to my right honourable friend, i do recognise the depth of concern that there has been and remains about some members of the house about this issue of the backstop, but i disagree with him

about the position that would entail. first of all because as i indicated in my statement, and it is largely thanks to my right honourable friend and our right honourable friend and our right honourable friend and our right honourable friend the member for north shropshire that we are in this position of having within that withdrawal agreement the recognition that there could be alternative arrangements to the backstop for the extension of the limitation period that would deliver for the board extension of the limitation period that would deliverfor the board of the northern ireland. but it is right that while i recognise the depth of concern that this is not a situation that the uk wants is to be m, situation that the uk wants is to be in, neither is it a situation that the european union wants us to be m, the european union wants us to be in, and the reason is that strange though it may seem to some members of this house, there are members of the european union who actively think that the backstop would be a good place for the uk, because of its access to the european union markets, without having financial obligations and without free movement. and so that‘s why they don‘t want us to be in the backstop either. neither of us want to invoke

it. the taoiseach has been clear about that. we want to ensure that the future relationship replaces it and delivers our commitment to the people of northern ireland. thank you, mr speaker. the prime minister‘s deal means scotland is to be taken out of the european union against our will, and out of the single market, a market which is around eight times the size of the uk. mr speaker, scotland voted to remain. 0ur rights must be respected. leaving will rip away jobs, living standards and end freedom of movement, something that will make it harderfor our freedom of movement, something that will make it harder for our precious nhs to attract and retain the stuff that we need. migration has been good for scotland. the prime minister talks about queue jumpers from europe, and outrageous slur against eu citizens that come here, but she blatantly disregards the right that we will all lose to live

and work in europe. mr speaker, we are not prepared to give up these rights. the prime minister‘s deal carries no majority in this house, and has split her own benches. it means a blindfold brexit is now certain. there is no long—term agreement on our trading relationship with europe. it is a dealfull of relationship with europe. it is a deal full of ifs and buts. crucially, here we are again with another sell—out to the scottish fishing industry by a tory government. we have been here before, we were sold out by ted heath and we‘ve been sold out repeatedly by tory governments. under this agreement, fishing boats registered in northern ireland would continue to gain zero tariff access to the eu and uk markets, but fishing boats registered in scotland and other parts of the uk would not.

we now know that the eu will start negotiations based on existing quota shares. mr speaker, that is not taking back control of our waters. it is the eu exercising an effective veto. scottish fishing communities have been duped once again by the conservatives. we on these benches will not, we cannot accept this sell—out from the conservatives. i call upon the secretary of state for scotla nd call upon the secretary of state for scotland and the defra secretary, sirjock rogers, because your fingerprints are all over this. —— search your conscience, because your fingerprints are all over this. does the prime minister accept that that means that the uk would almost certainly be in the common fisheries policy with no voting rights for another two years, contrary to what

the scottish secretary said? the prime minister said this deal ends uncertainty. it does not end uncertainty. it does not end uncertainty for scotland‘s fishing sector orfor uncertainty for scotland‘s fishing sector or for the future state of the economy, which faces years of turbulence in a bureaucratic tangle. mr speaker, there is talk of a brexit tv debate. will the prime minister debate with the first minute of scotland ? minister debate with the first minute of scotland? mr speaker, the way scotland‘s interest have been dismissed by the uk government throughout this process demonstrates the real cost of not being an independent country able to take our own decisions, but the day will come where scotland will be an independent country. mr speaker, we on these benches will continue to work across parties to put in place a deal that works for scotland, and we will support another referendum on eu membership. i will address the two main points

the right honourable gentleman gaye most of his comments over the question of fishing but he mentioned the question of migration, i think it is important we deliver op what people voted for at the referendum and they voted for an end to free movement. that is because they felt that it was not right that people had a right to come here, were freely able to move here, based topped country they came from rather than their contribution to the united kingdom. we will be able to put in place a skills based immigration sergeant major system thatis immigration sergeant major system that is based op skills and contribution to the economy. and then, then he devoted the majority of his comments to the whole issue of his comments to the whole issue of the common fisheries policy, he talked about a sell—out of scottish fish american, the real sell out is the snp‘s policy to stay in the common fisheries policy. who is it who has been standing up for scottish fishermen in this house? conservative scottish backbenchers. all the scottish

nationalist party want to do, all the scottish national party want to do, is stay in the common fisheries policy and that indeed would be a sell—out of scottish fishermen. mr david davis. thank you. if the european union really intends in good faith to negotiate a future trade agreement, while can we not make the second half of 39 million payment conditional or delivering it? as my right honourable friend is aware from the early negotiations we held on this particular issue, the 39 billion has been determined in relation to our legal only investigations i think it is important that as a country we are able, we are a country that stands up able, we are a country that stands up to our legal obligation as my right honourable friend will also know, there is a timetable for these payments, spread over a period of time, and of course, a key element of this is ensuring that we are able

to have that implementation period which is so important for businesses, to ensure that they only have to make one set of changing and there is a smooth and orderly withdrawal. thank you mr speaker. by refusing to make choices now, about our future economic relationship with the european union, what the prime minister has done is to put off the moment when we will have to make those choices to a time when the eu will have much greater leverage over this country, because any future trade agreement will require the unanimous an professional of every european member state. how can the prime minister expect the house to vote to put the country in such a wea k vote to put the country in such a weak position, is this not the biggest failure of this negotiation? the right honourable gentleman, i am sure, is very well aware of the position, that the european union

cannot sign a trade agreement with, we are looking for that free trade area being at the heart of our economic partnership for future, the european union is not able to sign that and to develop the legal text for that until we are a third country, until we have withdrawn from the european union, but far from, farfrom not setting out details of our future relationship the political declaration does just that and macing it very clear about makes it very clear that this is, this is the set of, if you like instructions to the negotiators that the future relationship will put into place what is in the political declaration. thank you have much. mr speaker, as it currently stands, the majority of honourable and right honourable members in this place will not vote in favour of the prime minister‘s deal, despite her very best efforts. so she needs plan b. what is the

prime minister‘s plan b? is it norway? plus, the single market, the customs union, which some of us have been arguing forfor over customs union, which some of us have been arguing for for over two—years? iam been arguing for for over two—years? i am tempted to say to my right honourable friend throughout the last 18 months of negotiations, at virtually every stage people have said it was not going to be possible for me to negotiate a deal with the european union, no sooner do i negotiate a deal with the european union then people are saying what is the negotiation thing you are going to do with with the european on your? in all seriousness i say to my right honourable friend this, we will have a number of days of debate in this chamber, prior to the meaningful vote on this deal, i believe it is important that when people look at this deal and come to that vote, they consider the interests of this country, they consider the interests of their constituents and they consider the importance of delivering on brexit. now that the prime minister has

decided to launch a public debate on her plans, should she not move beyond her comfort zone of debating with brexit fellow travellers like the leader of the labour party, and engage with the much larger cross— party engage with the much larger cross—party coalition in fayre of a people‘s vote with option of remaining in the european union? will she not debate with the real opposition? well, can i say to the right honourable gentleman he and his honourable friend have ask me this question about the people‘s vote, the second referendum on a number of occasion and my answer has not changed. i believe it is important, having given the choice to the british people as to whether we stay in the european union, that we stay in the european union, that we now deliver on the choice that the british people made. that is a difference of opinion between myself and him, i recognise that, buti think the majority of the british public want us to get on doing what they asked us to. thank you mr

speaker, does the prime minister appreciate that the withdrawal agreement is incompatible with with the withdrawal act of 2018, which expressly repeals the whole of the european community, the whole of the europeanty communities act 1972, in this event we would truly regrain our laws. does the —— regain. does the prime minister accept that this agreement being only a treaty cannot override the statutory provisionses of the 2018 act, —— provision, and is therefore unlawful. did she seek the legal opinion of the attorney general on this question, in good time before the agreement was signed by her yesterday, as required under the ministerial code. i say to my right honourable friend, i make two point, the first is of course the with, what the withdrawal

act does, is bring european union law into uk law, some there is that smooth and ordinary trap since when we leave the european union, and of course with the drawl agreement will be implemented in legislation through the withdrawal agreement act. mr speaker, the prime minister says in her statement the legal text is now also clear that once the backstop has been supersede it shall seize to a ply. we need accuracy, in page 309 article two of the northern ireland protocol it is a its the backstop can be superseded in whole or in part and shall cease to apply in whole or in part, so we need a ccu ra cy in whole or in part, so we need accuracy here, because it is the legal text that matters and this is what he bind the country, will the prime minister tell us as the chancellor has rightly said, that the backstop is bad for the union, bad for the economy. that is what he sass said. can she tell us what bits are so sass said. can she tell us what bits are so bad for the union? the parts

of the backstop that are bad for the european union, that they consider... 0h, european union, that they consider... oh, sorry. forthe united kingdom? yes, this is what we wa nt to united kingdom? yes, this is what we want to be able to do, is in the future to be able to have our independent trade policy one of the issues in relation to the backstop issues in relation to the backstop is whether or not we would be able do that, that is one of the issues we would not want to see within us continuing to be in the backstop for. mr speaker, i congratulate my right honourable friend on beginning her campaign to sell this deal to the country with the frank admission just now, that it is unsatisfactory, i may say i think that is a bit of an understatement because it very ha rd to an understatement because it very hard to see how this deal can provide certainty, to business or to anyone else, when you have half the cabinet going around reassuring business that the uk‘s effectively going to remain in the customs union

and in the single market, and the prime minister, the prime minister herself continuing to say, that we are going to take back control of our law, vary our tariffs and do real free trade our law, vary our tariffs and do realfree trade deal, our law, vary our tariffs and do real free trade deal, they can‘t both be right. which is it? can i first of all, may i point out what i said in my statement was neither we nor the eu were happy with the backstop arrangements that were put in place i. that is accurate. i have references earlier in answers why the european union are not happy with it. we will be able to, there is, i know e and there is, i recognise, a concern that has been expressed about our ability to have negotiate free trade deals with other countries on the basis of the arrangement we are putting in place with the european on your. we will be able to negotiate the free trade

deals but every member should be wear when the trade deals are being considered, there will be issues that this house will want to consider, which will be nothing do with whether or not we have a particular relationship with the european union, this house will want to consider animal welfare standards, will want to consider environmental standards, these are theissues environmental standards, these are the issues that member of the house will want to consider when they look at the free trade deals but it is clear we will be able to negotiate those free trade deals with the relationship that is being proposed. this isn‘t a dealfor the relationship that is being proposed. this isn‘t a deal for the future relationship that is being proposed. this isn‘t a dealfor the future it is just this isn‘t a dealfor the future it isjust a this isn‘t a dealfor the future it is just a stopgap. we don‘t know whether this means chequers or canada or norway or an endless backstop or worse or a massive security downgrade. we have no idea where this is heading, and other countries are already saying that this gives them more leverage because it reduces our negotiating power. how can she say this is in

the future interest of the country? she used to say nothing was agreed until everything was agreed. when did she change her mind? first of all i would point owl to the right honourable lady what this political declaration does is set out clearly the basis for future relationship we will have on security with the european and it set out clearly that it‘s in the clear intent of parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship. this is not about some other sort of relationship it is about what is in this document. she said is it canada or norway i said at the beginning we should get away from thinking of on the shelf model what is being proposed here and what is acknowledged from the european union isa acknowledged from the european union is a relationship of unprecedented depth which has not been offered to any other major economy, it shows we

are not just another third any other major economy, it shows we are notjust another third country. will she agree this agreement could cost a lot more than 39 billion as there are no cash limits or figures in it, especially if the eu goes as slow on the next phase of the negotiations at the last lot and drag us into permanent transition at enormous costs? can i say to my right honourable friend, that there are as he will know, there are clauses within this withdrawal agreement in relation to the endeavours both sides will make to reach agreement by the end of the implementation period in december 2020 that makes its it clear action can be taken if either sides drags its feet in the way he is talking about. minister is not suggesting that compared with staying in the european union, her brexit proposals would mean that our country would be economically better off, is she? whether... the question as to our

future... no, no, becausei whether... the question as to our future... no, no, because i thinki do believe that we can be economically better off outside the european union, but the problem is, the problem is there are those who think that the only factor that determines how well off we are in the future, is whether or not we are a member of the european union, i differ. 0urfuture is in our hands, it will determine our prosperity for the future. nobody can now doubt that the the prime minister has tried her very best, are we not nonetheless being asked to take a huge gamble here, paying leaving sur roundering our vote and veto without any firm commitment to frictionless trade or the absolute right to dismantle external tariff, it is really wise to trust the future of our economy, to a pledge simply to

use best endeavours? i say to my right honourable friend that the position in relation to the nature of the political declaration is exactly what i set out in response to the question of the eu exit select committee which is that it is not possible for us to sign that legal treaty in terms of a free—trade agreement with the european union until we are outside the european union. the prime minister was told very clearly last november that any backstop would not be tenable and acceptable, and she has carried on with allowing it to be put in. not only is it in in a way that we can‘t get out of it u nless way that we can‘t get out of it unless the eu allows us, isn‘t that really not giving back sovereignty to our country, to the people who voted to leave? as i said in my

statement, the position is very simple. there is no withdrawal agreement without a backstop. without a backstop there is no deal. and that is because of the commitment that both sides wanted to give to the people of northern ireland to ensure there was no hard border between northern ireland and ireland. that is very simple. any other arrangement, agreement on trade with the european union, would have a backstop. the brexit debate has seen false promises made to the public from all sides and from all parties. democracy only works when it can be based on a debate of truth and honesty and fact. how can the prime minister reassure the house that this debate we are about to have now on her deal is based on fa cts have now on her deal is based on facts and evidence and not more false promises to the british people which when broken subsequently will damage trust in our democracy even more? i say to my right honourable

friend that we are committed as a government to publishing analysis of this deal, we will publish analysis of the various aspects of this deal. she is aware, there are others out there looking at the economic aspects as well. i‘m tempted to say this, though. she asks whether this can be based on facts. i think it would be an interesting debate in this house is the extent to which economic forecast can be described as facts. can i thank the prime minister for the efforts that she made personally on behalf of my constituent matthew hedges, who has been released this morning, a bit of good news amidst all this brexit mess, but an brexit, if she is so confident that the public support this deal, why doesn‘t she ask them? i thank the right honourable

gentleman for his earlier remarks about his constituent, but i have talked about this second referendum issue before, and it is very simple. i think it is absolutely right that this house and politicians should see it as a duty to implement the vote that the british people gave to leave the european union. when my right honourable friend describes the functioning of her free trade area, it sounds awfully like a comprehensive customs union. can she just be absolutely clear where we are headed? will we never reach the point of customs declarations? my honourable friend is well aware of the position the government takes, which is that we will be working for frictionless trade. as he will see, the references in the political declaration of an ambitious agreement in relation to the restriction of checks, but my honourable friend were also be aware that there is a balance in terms of

the rights of frictionless access against the obligations, and that is set out quite clearly in the document, as my honourable friend knows, the government set out its position in the summer in the white paper. caroline lucas. the prime minister says a majority of people wa nt minister says a majority of people want her to get on with brexit, but that isn‘t true. it might be an inconvenient fact, but the truth is the majority do want a people‘s vote, so when she is giving her tour around the country... order, order. the honourable lady is entitled to ask a question without being consistently shouted at. i thought we we re consistently shouted at. i thought we were talking about respect in the chamber. try remembering it. maybe somebody who says, were we doesn't ca re somebody who says, were we doesn't care about that, but most of us do, but i want to hear the honourable lady and the response to the

honourable lady. caroline lucas. we have heard that the prime minister is planning to tour the country to sell her bungled deal to the public. why doesn‘t she try listening to the public rather than having a stage—managed opportunity to hear a hollowed of waffle, why can‘t people actually have the chance to have their say in actually have the chance to have theirsay ina actually have the chance to have their say in a people‘s vote? if she really trust them, she would do it. cani really trust them, she would do it. can i say to the honourable lady that i answer the question of the people‘s vote earlier. i do listen to the public, and when i go knocking on doors and listening to people, the overwhelming view is get on with it and do what the vote said. owen paterson. the conservative manifesto at the last election promised to deliver the leave vote by leaving the single market, leaving the customs union and leaving the remit of the ecj. many of us, endorsed by experienced lawyers, believe that this document does not deliver that. it also is a clear breach of the principled consent of the belfast agreement,

and it‘s going to cost us 39 billion. as a majority across the house, including myself, mr speaker, intended to vote against this deal, at this late stage, with the prime minister acknowledged that the obstacle minister acknowledged that the o bsta cle to minister acknowledged that the obstacle to president hurske‘s offer ofa obstacle to president hurske‘s offer of a free—trade deal was the problem of a free—trade deal was the problem of northern ireland border. in her political declaration, he has acknowledged that current techniques and processes can sort that. will she therefore please at this late stage looked a comprehensive free—trade deal with our solution to the northern ireland border?” free—trade deal with our solution to the northern ireland border? i say to my right honourable friend of the heart of this political declaration, at the heart of our future economic partnership, as a conference free—trade deal, it is just a better cobber offensive free—trade deal than canada. angela eagle. in the prime minister‘s lexicon, is smooth and orderly the new strong and

stable? a smooth and orderly exit is what business want and i‘m sure what citizens want up and down this country. mr speaker, prime minister, there is one thing on which we can all agree. that is that when we come to vote on this in two weeks‘ time, this will be about the most important thing that those of us in this house will ever vote upon in our entire lives. the son and the telegraph this morning described it poorly, no sooner is the ink dried on the spanish after gibraltar and the french after our fish. order, order. let me say to members around the right honourable gentleman, including some who fondly imagine they are going to be called to ask a

question, don't sit there heckling your colleague. he has got a right to be heard. if you don't like it, listen with courtesy in silence, and if it's that bad for you, you are welcome to leave the chamber. the right honourable gentleman will be heard. and of subject. mark francois. thank you master speaker. the prime minister and the whole has knows the mathematics. this will never get through. and even if it did, which it won‘t, the dup, on who we rely for a majority, have said they would then review the confidence and supply agreement. so it is as dead as a dodo. prior minister, i plead with you. the house of commons has never surrendered to anybody, and it won‘t start now. i reassure my right honourable friend as i referenced in my statement in relation to gibraltar that the united kingdom has not surrendered in those matters that he has referred to. he talked

about the spanish position on gibraltar. the spanish have always had a position on gibraltar. he talked about the french wanting our fish. as he know, french fishermen have long been wanting to fish in our waters. what they did want to do in the political declaration was to link that access to our waters to our access to markets in relation to trade. we resisted that it continued resisting that, and we resisted it in the document itself. we will continue to resist that and continue on gibraltar to stand by the people of gibraltar. the prime minister deserves some sympathy trying to front up that divided mob behind her, but the fact of the matter is she should use the term in her remarks, it ain‘t going to happen.

she is not going to get a majority in this house for this deal because it would leave the british people worse off, and of growing concern now is many of my constituents want us to assert parliamentary supremacy on this, which she mentioned in her speech, and let us get back into the european union where people will get a better deal at the end of the day. the right honourable gentleman talks about parliamentary supremacy, and it was this parliament decided overwhelmingly to ask the british people their view on our membership of the european union. they gave that view, and it is our duty to on it. mrjacob rees-mogg. thank you, mr speaker. i thank my right honourable friend for making 3—step mr house of commons in ten days, which i think is incredible in its achievement. to an earlier question, the prime minister said that we had a legal obligation to pay £39

million. i wonder if she‘s forgetting the report of the house of lords from march 2070 that said in the event of leaving without a deal, we owed no money at all. therefore, what are we buying with £39 billion of taxpayers‘ money? therefore, what are we buying with £39 billion of taxpayers' money?” assure my honourable friend that i have not forgotten the house of lords report, but there is a different opinion in relation to the house of lords report, and that opinion is that there are legal obligations that this country would hold to the european union in relation to financial payments in any circumstances. as i have said before, i think it is important that we are a country that upholds our legal obligations. tomorrow i will be part of a cross—party group of scottish parliamentarians from the snp, the labour party under scottish green party who are going to the court ofjustice in luxembourg to establish that it would be possible for this parliament to tell the prime minister to revoke her article 50 notice. does she share my sense

of pride that it will be scottish parliamentarians and the scottish courts that will give this parliament a true alternative to her deeply flawed deal? can i say to the honourable lady that i know she has consistently raised this issue of the revocation of article 50, and as she knows, it is not going to happen because it‘s not government policy. the prime minister said in her statement and in various letters that her deal will protectjobs. could i ask are pleased to tell me which region or regions of the united kingdom will be more prosperous with higher productivity and higher gdp per capita than they will on the present arrangements within the eu? can i say to my honourable friend that the answer to that question is the extent to which we are able to enhance the prosperity and the number ofjobs in regions of the united kingdom depends on a whole variety of

decisions that will be taken by this government. it is our good management of the economy that ensures that 3.3 million jobs have already be created, and if my honourable friend remembers the budget that was given in november, he will also have heard and seen the obr's he will also have heard and seen the 0br‘s production at 800,000 jobs will be created over the next period of years in this country. stella creasy. mr speaker, the prime minister has been very clear this afternoon that she doesn‘t think it is right that the public, having had a vote to leave the european union, should have a say on what happens next on the deal that she has done. can she therefore confirmed that if this house votes down her deal, she will not seek to force a second vote on this deal? 0r will not seek to force a second vote on this deal? or will we find that, as the dup have, that it‘s one rule for her and no safer anyone else?” will be working to ensure and

persuade members of this house that this is the deal that is on the table, this is a deal that delivers on the vote of the british people, and it does so while protecting jobs, protecting our security and protecting our united kingdom. sir bernard jenkin. will my right honourable friend recall how much we both hoped so much that i would be able to support whatever the prime minister brought back from her negotiations. can i say how sad i am i cannot possibly support this deal which pays £38 billion simply to kick the can down the road. and how could we possibly agree to an arrangement? at the moment where we have the unilateral right to leave the european union, but we have no such unilateral right to leave these new arrangements which would be subject to an eu veto. that is giving up control, not taking it back. as i set out in my statement

various elements relating to the backstop, which is what my right honourable friend has referred to, of course looking at the future treaty arrangements which will cover security partnerships and the economic partnership, i would expect that as in any trade agreements, there would of course be appropriate arrangements for review and for the question of the potential termination of those relationships. i repeat the point that i have made previously in relation to the £39 billion. i think it would be wrong for this house to believe that there we re for this house to believe that there were no legal obligations to pay money to the european union, that the united kingdom has an leaving. there are legal obligations to pay money to the european union, and i think it is important that we abide by those obligations. the national institute of economic and social research published a report they today that shows that

this deal could make the uk is £00 million worse off. that equates to a thousand pounds per person per year. if the prime minister believes the majority of the uk won‘t that outcome can i politely suggest she is not knocking on enough doors and will she commit to giving the nation a final say on the exact terms of her deal? i say her deal? isayi her deal? i say i have responded on a number of occasions this afternoon and indeedin of occasions this afternoon and indeed in other occasion, on the question of a second referendum. saturday morning, our right honourable friend the chancellor told the today programme that as the uk is split down the middle, over the european i say i have responded ona number of the european i say i have responded on a number of occasions this afternoon and indeed in other occasion, on the question of a second referendum. saturday morning, our right honourable friend the chancellor told the today programme that as the uk is split down the middle, over the european union, and i quote "anything which looks like

one half of the country winning, and the other half losing would be disastrous. in that case, may i ask does the prime minister agree with him, and if so, what was the point of holding the referendum in the first place? asi first place? as i saytor, can i say to my right honourable friend, i think the point isa honourable friend, i think the point is a very simple one, now is the time for this country to come back together again, it is a time for us together again, it is a time for us to recognise that in deliver tong brexit deal that people voted, the leaving, the european union that people voted for, in 2016, we are meeting the instruction we were given by people in that referendum, we are doing nit this deal in a way that protects jobs and livelihoods and our security and our united kingdom, and now is time for the country to come back together, to get behind this deal and to ensure we can build a better future for all. thank you very much mr speaker, last week the prime minister managed to insult and upset over three million european citizens who live and work

in this country. 0ver european citizens who live and work in this country. over 150,000 european citizens who live and work in this country. 0ver150,000 of them, like my german husband, a gp here for over 30 years, felt thrown away when they have spent decades here looking after us when we are ill. will the prime minister take this opportunity perhaps to apologise for her thoughtless and insulting comments? can i say to the honourable lady, i should not have used that language in that speech. i. used that language in that speech. i, the point i was making was a simple one, and i may say to her, right from the beginning i said, i said that citizens‘ right was a key issue i wanted to see adressed. that issue i wanted to see adressed. that is one of thing we put at the top as one of our priorities and we have delivered that, in the withdrawal agreement for people. but can i also say to the honourable lady, that i think there was a point that for the most people here in the united kingdom, they want to see people coming to this country, with the

skills and wanting to make a contribution, her husband has made a contribution, her husband has made a contribution here as a gp, they want people to bejudged contribution here as a gp, they want people to be judged as we will on their skills and contribution to our economy, rather than simply on whether where they come from. thank you mr speaker, does my right honourable friend agree it‘s the easiestening in the world for people to criticise any deal they haven‘t spent time... and it is the easiest thing in the world for people to remain in their entrenched positions they have been in for the last two yea rs ? they have been in for the last two years? but the braver thing and the right thing for this country now is to challenge ourselves on our views of brexit, to step up the plate as elected representatives and to give this deal the scrutiny that it needs, to read carefully the economic forecast the government is going to publish and realise what will cost us more than £39 billion, isa will cost us more than £39 billion, is a no—deal brexit. will cost us more than £39 billion,

is a no-deal brexit. can i say to my right honourable friend, and i think this was a point that was made very well by our right honourable friend the memberfor well by our right honourable friend the member for riley that, well by our right honourable friend the memberfor riley that, this is a very important moment for this country and is woo why when people come to debate this topic and vote on it, i hope they will look as she has said, look at the what is set before them in terms of analysis 5 recall the need to deliver for the british people on the vote of brexit but recall the need for us to consider our constituent‘s jobs and livelihoods for the future, this is, debates in this house are all about serious matter, but this is an historic moment for our country and it is is right we approach it in the right way. does the prime minister accept that should we have to use the backstop, we can only escape if the whole of the rest of the eu gives us permission to do so and they are in a position to demand any ransom to

gain our exit. it is possible to come out of backstop, if it is shown that it can be superseded by the future relationship or by alternative arrangements, that can be put into place. the key is being able to show with are delivers for the people of northern ireland in relation to the border. the prime minister in her statement speaks of the european court of justice and how this deal ends the juice diction of the court of justice so can my right honourable friend give a precise date or year when the uk will no longer be bound or subject to to or have any judgment from the european court of justice she will recall from the one of the elements of the citizens‘ rights section does have a period of time, where it will be possible for

theissues time, where it will be possible for the issues in relation to citizens‘ rights to be considered by the european court offjoust youty, —— of justice, after that european court offjoust youty, —— ofjustice, after that point there will be nojurisdiction ofjustice, after that point there will be no jurisdiction of the european court of justice will be no jurisdiction of the european court ofjustice in the united kingdom, in all other matters there will be no jurisdiction of the court of european justice, prior to that point, there is a limited, a litted range of issues that can be considered in relation to citizens‘ rights during that draw down period, and there are, it will be the case that people will not be able to take cases to the european course court ofjustice in this country, it will be the case that it will be our courts who are determining and interpreting our laws. iam gin interpreting our laws. i am gin winly sorry to say this but through is a stark difference between stoke determination, —— stoic determination and a failure to listen to this house or the people. she has come here today with the same old script. showing telling us

we have to vote for this piece of paper that will make us poorer wea ker less paper that will make us poorer weaker less well—off, less secure and she expecting to get the consent of the house. she says she wants to go to the people. if she wants to go people why is she afraid to put this toa people why is she afraid to put this to a people‘s sleet? people why is she afraid to put this to a people's sleet? can i say to the honourable gentleman, i have a nswered the honourable gentleman, i have answered the question of a people‘s vote on number of occasions and, but i say, say this to the honourable gentleman as well. i believe in delivers on the vote of the british people that took place in 2016, for the reasons i have set out, for those who consider that an second vote of some shape or form would do anything other than divoid this country further, or create more uncertainty, i think they only have to look at what happened during the initial referendum campaign, we asked people to choose, they chose, it is our duty to deliver. so many young people in my

constituency have got work in the car industry whose pinsle market is in europe but car manufacturers warn us that no deal could result 234 ta riffs of us that no deal could result 234 tariffs of 4.5 billion. so can my right honourable friend confirm that her hard—won deal would provide much—needed certainty, continuity and above all, safeguard jobs. cani and above all, safeguard jobs. can i say, i recognise the importance of the automotive industry in her constituency and many others round the country and indeed, the political declaration expressly provides for no tariffs. prime minister, will this agreement that you‘ve sought stop a federal europe, usjoining a federal europe, stop usjoining the europe, usjoining a federal europe, stop us joining the euro and stop the dictates and the stupid laws coming from europe? because the way i see it, we eve got two feet in with one arm out.

i think with one arm out. ithink can with one arm out. i think can give the honourable gentleman comfort, comfort on all of the points we are coming out of the european union so if they choose to go down and push down to a more federal europe we won‘t be part that. we are not a member of the euro, we can are coming out so we will not be not be in the euro and will not be not be in the euro and will make our laws. mr speaker, can she confirm under her leadership this united kingdom will never become a vassal state, but could she also confirm that if naked self—interest on either side of this house prevails over national interest, we could end up as an impoverished state.” interest, we could end up as an impoverished state. i am happy to give my right honourable friend the confirmation on the first point he made, of course the proposals we have put forward in relation to our future economic relationship, it

will be parliament who will determine our laws and everybody in this house when it comes to this vote, should be considering and putting first the national interest and not their own or party political interests. the official note of yesterday‘s council meeting be parliament who will determine our laws and everybody in this house when it comes to this vote, should be considering and putting first the national interest and not their own or party political interests. the official note of yesterday‘s council meeting states and i quote "fisheries agreement is a matter of priority, and should build on inter—alia existing reciprocal access inter—alia existing reciprocal a ccess a n inter—alia existing reciprocal access an quota shares." when you compare that to the prime minister‘s statement today, you can understand mr speaker, why our fishermen are anxious. this situation only arises because the prime minister agreed to include fisheries in the transitional arrangements. with benefit of shined hindsight does she agree that is a mistake. what he is quoting from is the minuter of the meeting at 27 which has that number

of issues which show and because, yes, there are other member states do have concerns in a relation to some of these issues, partly because they were not able to arrive at the position they would have prepered to have in the political declaration we have in the political declaration we have agreed with the european union, because we have resolutely stood up forfishermen. i know my right honourable friend has been working hard in what she sees as the best interests the country and it has been a pretty tha nkless country and it has been a pretty thankless task but i have to say i do worry when i read at the weekend her letter to the british people, which sets out a picture of the future, which seems to me to be a clear variance with any rational analysis of the text in relation to the political declaration. how can we seriously say to people that the northern ireland backstop will notle act adds a fetter on our future

freedom of an shuck unhow can we say we are going to lose the injures duckion of the ucj when it will continue to play a major part in our lives for the foreseeable future. wouldn‘t it be better if we are going to have an informed debate we are completely transparent with the sorts of problems we are going to have to face when we get through the stage, if she succeeds in her motion in 2000 weeks‘ time of leaving the eu on 29th march t truth of the matter is our problems have hardly begun. of course it is the case and i have explained the reason why earlier that we have to negotiate the full legal text of the future economic partnership and the future security partnership. i know he will understand the reason for that but what is important is what we have here in this political declaration is the set of instructions to the

negotiators the on the basis on which that future relationship will be set, and that is one that in trade terms is ambitious and unlike any other and insecurity terms. it is more ambitious closer and a better partnership than any other partnership has. can the prime minister confirm that if we go back to square one, we will retain a seat, a voice and a vote, we will stay in the single market and the customs union, and we will bea and the customs union, and we will be a better place than we would be in the backstop. no, we are leaving the european on your and we no, we are leaving the european on yourand we are no, we are leaving the european on your and we are leaving on 29th march 2019. my my right honourable friend in her a nswer to my right honourable friend in her answer to the member for birkenhead said we could leave the backstop if

it can be shown that we have met the criteria. could i ask who is going to be the arbiter of when it is shown, and who we are accountable to to make sure that they will allow us to make sure that they will allow us to leave? the initial discussion ta kes pla ce to leave? the initial discussion takes place between the two parties of the united kingdom are the european union, but there is a process that goes through the joint committee of the two bodies, but there is also an arbitration panel, an arbitration process which can be brought into operation in relation to that, because throughout the withdrawal agreement in various elements, it refers to the good faith on both sides, and if it is the case that the commitment to northern ireland has been met, i think it will be clear that we would be able to come out of that, come out of the backstop, where it the backstop that had been put in place in the first place. rachel reeves. thank you, mr speaker. 0ne in the first place. rachel reeves. thank you, mr speaker. one of the problem is the prime minister has had to grapple with is that those who campaigned to leave the european

union had no blueprint for what they would do if they won the referendum, but the government are now repeating that mistake. so can the prime minister tell the house what plans are being put in place if as now seems likely the government loses the vote on the 12th of december. what preparations are being put in place for either extending article 50 orfour preparations place for either extending article 50 or four preparations for a people‘s vote to put this question to the country? i have answered both article 50 and the people‘s vote question in response to other questions, and my focus is on this deal and the fact that this is the deal and the fact that this is the deal that is good for the united kingdom, because it delivers on the brexit wrote in a way that protects jobs. if it is indeed true that both the government and the european union believe that this backstop will be temporary, will the prime minister take an opportunity before

the meaningful vote, or indeed accept an amendment to the meaningful vote, to make absolutely clear that if, by the end of the due date of this parliament, we are still held in this backstop, still held in customs arrangements against our will, she will abrogate those parts of the treaty and restore our national sovereignty?” parts of the treaty and restore our national sovereignty? i say to my honourable friend, and i know he has raised the question with me before about the extent to which we are able to pull out of these treaty arrangements, and he and i are corresponding on that particular matter, can i say to him that it is my, not only is it the clear intent of both parties using their best endeavours in good faith in these documents to ensure that we are able to have the future relationship in place by the end of december 2020, and thereafter, should it be the case that an alternative arrangement has to be in place for northern

ireland, it should be only for a temporary period of time, backstop or other arrangement, because it is not a given that that would be the backstop. it is my firm intention... there are a lot of voices saying, but it is not a given that that would be the backstop, but it is my firm intention to ensure that at the end of this parliament we are all able to look at the british people clearly in the eye and say we have delivered an brexit, we have delivered an brexit, we have delivered on what you wanted to ensure, which was an end to free movement, an end to the jurisdiction of the european court, and an end to sending vast sums of money to europe every year. caroline flint. the prime minister has made it very clear that at all costs she wants to avoid a no—deal brexit. my right honourable friend, the leader of her majesty‘s opposition, has also reassured labour mps but that is his priority to avoid a no—deal brexit. given that there are some 80 conservative backbenchers who will vote against any deal come what may,

in the national interest, will the prime minister sit down with my right honourable friend the member for islington north and have a meaningful discussion about how we make sure that when it comes to workers‘ rights, health and safety, we do not fall behind and we secure a sustainable customs arrangement going forward? can i say to the right honourable lady that what we have done in the proposals we put forward in the white paper, what we have done in the political declaration, is to ensure that we do look for that free trade area, that appropriate customs arrangement that is going to deliver on jobs for people, and i‘m interested that she has indicated that her right honourable friend the leader of the opposition is clear that we should leave the european union with a deal, because previously had indicated that he would vote against any deal that the government would back. nobody can fail to acknowledge

the personal commitment and determination and best intentions of the prime minister. if this house does not pass the agreement, could the prime minister confirmed that she has ruled out extending the negotiating period or even purchasing an extension to that period? the extension of the negotiating period will be an extension of article 50. i‘m clear that we will not extend article 50 and that we will leave the eu on the 29th of march next year. thank you, mr speaker. 0n 29th of march next year. thank you, mr speaker. on friday, my constituents got the desperate news of 241 job losses at vauxhall motors, ellesmere port, bringing the total to 900 job losses since the referendum. when this government won‘t even do the basics to help automotive industries like ending the discrimination of business rates, how on earth, mr speaker, are my constituents supposed to trust this government‘s political wish

list about their economic future?” am sorry to hear of the job losses in vauxhall in her constituency, but cani in vauxhall in her constituency, but can i also say to the honourable lady that there are many examples that we have seen in the automotive industry of extra investment going into this country in the automotive industry, there are many examples we have seen. and indeed, she references what the government is doing. government has been working closely with the automotive industry. we are keen to ensure that this country is at the leading edge of the automotive industry in the future, which is exactly what we are doing with autonomous and electric vehicles. sa crest of a joke. this one in the government published —— server christopher chope. the political declaration on the

withdrawal agreement were settled together on the basis that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. in light of my right honourable friend‘s responses to my right honourable friend the sevenoaks right honourable friend the sevenoa ks and horton right honourable friend the sevenoaks and horton bryson howdon, why, if that sentence is correct, does it not mean that the 39 billion is contingent upon our skating agreement on future arrangements? the withdrawal agreement on the political declaration were agreed together, but i repeat the point that i have made to others, that it is the case that in whatever circumstances we find ourselves in relation to leaving the european union, there will be legal obligations of a financial nature that this country has to abide by. theink that this country has to abide by. the ink was hardly dry on this agreement before the french president was saying that he would be using the legally binding provisions of this agreement to leave a further concessions on fishing and other issues on the uk

government, and other states are no doubt thinking the same. does the prime minister not recognise that by signing this legally binding agreement she is handing the eu a cudgel which it will use us to my bus for the second time when it comes to the negotiations on the future arrangements?” comes to the negotiations on the future arrangements? i don't agree, andi future arrangements? i don't agree, and i referenced earlier and am happy to do so again the remarks made by the french president in relation to the backstop in reading relation to the backstop in reading relation to the backstop in reading relation to access to fishing. i repeat the point, a very simple one, which is if the backstop is exercised, we will be outside the common fisheries policy, and it will be the united kingdom that will determine which boats have access to uk waters. stephen crabb. as a party of government, we have a responsibility not just of government, we have a responsibility notjust embody the division that exist in a country on this issue, but to try to bridge

them and to fix them, and to that end, isn‘t it the case that her deal on the table has the overwhelming advantage of it being the only one grounded in reality that gives us a chance to move forward so we don‘t keep going around the same mountain again and again. i say to my right honourable friend, he is absolutely right about the responsibility which members of this house have, and secondly, i say to him, in many circumstances, including in this, people can wish that something was different from what it is, but the reality is as the european union has made clear, there would be no agreement without a backstop, so without a backstop there would be no deal, and that this is the deal, and i believe it is a good dealfor the uk, and the right dealfor the uk. thank you, mr speaker. the prime minister knows fine well that there is no dividend to be had from this withdrawal agreement. under all economic analysis, we will be worse

off for decades to come. is it not time for the prime minister to level with the public and accept that because this decision needs to be taken as a political fix rather than an economically rational decision, it is one that should be put back to the people who started this process backin the people who started this process back in 2016, and we will continue to ask for that until it does so.” am very clear that we should leave the european union because the vote of the british people was to leave the eu. it may be the policy of others, maybe she would rather we stayed in the european union. i do think that would be right. i think that would be betraying the trust that would be betraying the trust that the people put in us. can i urge the prime minister when she hears cries of no surrender as some members of this house want to drag us toa members of this house want to drag us to a no—deal brexit that that would be catastrophic for my

constituents in eddies bree, and can she remind those members of the house of the conservative manifesto made commitments to deepen special partnership of the copper heads of customs arrangement with europe. does this deal deliver on that? i'm happy to tell my honourable friend that this deal does indeed deliver on that manifesto commitment. under this agreement from january 2021, foreign nationals who fly from a third country into dublin then travel on to belfast and from then to the rest of the uk, where will the immigration and border be? the common travel area will continue to exist, that is one of the things thatis exist, that is one of the things that is agreed in the withdrawal agreement. bbc parliament has continuous

coverage of events in the house of commons if you want to continue watching. coming up, the news at 5pm. i was just watching. coming up, the news at 5pm. i wasjust remarking, watching. coming up, the news at 5pm. iwasjust remarking, simon, there are lots of mps getting up. i reckon there are at least 30 who wa nt to reckon there are at least 30 who want to ask questions of their still life in the session yet. we will ta ke life in the session yet. we will take stock at five p: m., life in the session yet. we will take stock at five p:m., reflecting on what is going on. a relentless attack on the prime minister and these plans. just one or two voices being a little more polite, so we will just take stock and then being a little more polite, so we willjust take stock and then go back into the chamber for the end of this statement. but it does not bode well for the parliamentary vote in a few weeks. i am down to rush home. i think you should! now let's get the weather. many others have had a dry day

today. but across eastern costs of scotla nd today. but across eastern costs of scotland and england we have had showers. they have not been moving far inland because there is no wind to push them. through the evening and overnight the showers could get heavier across eastern areas of scotland. some snow in the hills and things could get slippery. it will be chilly, temperatures into low single figures widely. however, with lengthy cloud breaks they could dip below. frost around. there is a band of rain approaching towards the end of rain approaching towards the end of the night. that will make its presence felt across south—west england and wales and northern ireland on tuesday. head of the weather front, cool and dry ireland on tuesday. head of the weatherfront, cool and dry weather. showers across north—eastern news of scotland, but turning milder into the south—west as we go through the day. today at 5pm, we‘re

live at westminster, where theresa may has been under relentless attack from mps over her controversial brexit deal. a day after striking the deal in brussels, theresa may went to parliament to warn that rejecting the deal would cause more uncertainty and division. we can back this deal, deliver on the vote of the referendum and move on to building a brighter future of opportunity and prosperity for all our people, or this house can choose to reject this deal and go back to square one. but the prime minister‘s deal was widely criticised on both sides of the house. this deal does not have the support of either side of this house

or the country as a whole. mr speaker, ploughing on is not stoic, it‘s an act of national self harm.