what is we will explain exec to what is going on in what all the analysis means. but let's just listening to what the speaker has to say. i formally move an amendment a, mr speaker. the question is that an element a be made. as many as are of the opinion, say "aye". to the contrary, "no".. division! clearly will be! so, first, let's have a look at what votes to expect. the labour amendment which requires the government to either give mps a meaningful vote on future uk—eu relations by february 27th, or make a statement saying there is no longer an agreement, in principle, with brussels and so allow mps to vote on and amend its planned next steps. the snp seeks to postpone the brexit date by at least three months.

and, conservative backbencher and remain—supporting mp anna soubry‘s amendment instructs the government to publish within seven days "the most recent official briefing document relating to business and trade on the implications of a no—deal brexit presented to cabinet." what we have heard from will—mac is that she has deferred that amendment but reserves the right to put that forward in two weeks' time on the 27th of february when the government brings back its mission. so we will see women like does follow through on that. —— anna soubry.

we are going to wait for that result. we will go to the key young in central lobby who will have a reaction for us. to guide us through the developments in the house of commons today is georgina wright from the institute for government. and, anand menon — director of the independent research thinktank, the uk in a changing europe. an hour, let me start with you doug —— anna. the notion of being put down tonight. they don't like the fa ct down tonight. they don't like the fact that it could take no—deal of the table, if they were to vote against it and the comet mission goes down, would it have any legal

implications? it has no legal implication. if this bill goes through, it doesn't take no—deal of the table, it reaffirms that parliament doesn't like no—deal and that's about it. ultimately, the thicket of the table had to vote for something else, there seems to be no sign of that. it would be embarrassing for the government, it isa embarrassing for the government, it is a powerful signal from the eurogroup that we are willing to ship this sink. georgina, i've heard that the drg will abstain this evening, does that mean the government will be heading for defeat this evening? presumably. thinking back what is the real question right now, how the eu are looking at this. obviously, how the erg votes. what happens here in westminster and then how the eu response to that will be critical in

the signals that they send to their owfi the signals that they send to their own populist parties back home. that is the point because the eu is looking at theirs and wondering whether to bring all—weather to insert something into the withdrawal agreement, does it take a cue from what it this evening? some people are arguing that if the government loses the vote, the eu will say, she promised us that she could get her parliament behind us if we gave some concessions, it looks like they can. i don't think that's what will happen. i think the eu knows that when the deal comes back, the voting in parliament will be very different. it is a political embarrassment, the prime minister is getting used to those these days. i think all eyes on the route ahead to the 27th of february when a lot of the 27th of february when a lot of the amendments we haven't seen today will come forward. it is the first of the parliamentary crunch point. we should probably explain what the

problem is in the motion for eurosceptics, basically what the motion says is that it supports the sta nce motion says is that it supports the stance that the house took on the 29th of january. that was an amendment by graham brady which sent the common back to the withdrawal agreement. there is also this amendment which would have taken no—deal of the table, but that was non—binding? no—deal of the table, but that was non-binding? correct. the idea today was at how parliament would instruct the government in its next steps if it can't bring anything back from brussels. so, it is that bit that the erg don't like. we will see if they do abstain in the latter part of this hour. this is all leading up to that vote on the government motion, this house welcomes the prime ministers statement. the point i am making about that,

just to double underline, is that it is non—binding. i am wondering why the erg are sticking their heels in on this if it is not incumbent on the government to take no—deal of the government to take no—deal of the table. because everybody is playing the long game here, posturing, shadow boxing. the drg are saying and do not think that we will allow party loyalty to overcome what we think about brexit when the votes really matter. on the other side, people are keeping their powder dry, everyone is now waiting and signalling their intent before the vote in a two time to people this week, i think, have decided this week, i think, have decided this is the moment of truth. we could be in for a somewhat dramatic evening or a damp squib, it really depends on how people vote. but it

really has no real bearing on the withdrawal agreement. let's go to the key young in the central lobby. it would have annoyed the remains within the party, this is the problem for theresa may, she is co nsta ntly problem for theresa may, she is constantly trying to balance the two sides. you could see that in the house of commons, steve barclay having to do exactly that, those on the domain side when he kept saying, no—deal is still on the table despite that but here a couple of weeks ago. it is an ongoing problem for the government. we are hearing that anna soubry seems to have suggested and hinted that she will withdraw her amendment, possibly after some reassurance from the minister saying that he will listen to her, meet her, and they might publish some of the documents that she wanted to publish. the other significant thing about that is that if her and it had gone through, we

would not have got to a vote, but slightly controversial and difficult but for the government on the main motion. if it is withdrawn, we will have that vote. i am joined by andrey morris. you are on the pro—brexit side of the argument. how will you vote when comes to the government's mission?|j will you vote when comes to the government's mission? i will vote against it, as i did last time when we we re against it, as i did last time when we were in the same position. i don't like the withdrawal agreement, it doesn't represent brexit even with the backstop in it. this current motion says, what was agreed last time round, which was the emotion that aside we agree provided you take out the backstop. provided that we also rule out no—deal. i do not accept either of those, relating the backstop isn't enough. as far as i'm concerned, without no—deal, you don't have strength to go away to bargain. also, you force yourself to

accepting a budget deal. what happened to, if it is a bad deal, it isa happened to, if it is a bad deal, it is a no—deal. for me, it is a very bad deal. so much preparation has already been made. a lot of the stories, fear stories, that we aren't prepared. frankly, we are prepared and we are good to go. i'm not saying it won't be bumpy but i will say that we are more prepared for this than anything else. we are much safer going for no—deal. for this than anything else. we are much safer going for no-deal. many people don't agree with that, particularly businesses who say we are not ready, preparations have not been made. people do say that it will be bumpy but they don't ever say it will be specific, you're talking about may be peoples jobs aren't you? as the end of the day, they are not come people losing theirjobs. if you talk to the business community, you will find that most of the bigger organisations have already assumed that they will have to prepare for

no—deal, that is good business sense. they are prepared and are in a position to be ready. for smaller businesses, for many of them, they don't actually export at the moment. it is not such an issue. the real challenge is not that we are not prepared but that the government has not done what it means to do in terms of communicating to businesses and explaining what needs to happen. that is something that could be done very quickly. if things go as i would expect them to go, that we actually get to a position, the wto, is the end of the month, the comet actually redouble is its effort to explain exactly what we do now because there is a path. what you say to the government, do we say you had to get behind to may and go for a deal? the problem is, the deal sheet is talking about do not include anything which looked even vaguely like brexit. one of the

things that we had put forward was the potential for a things that we had put forward was the potentialfor a brokered deal between the levers and the remainders we actually look like something like a trade deal. there are also conversation, i didn't like it, extending the transition by an extra yea r. it, extending the transition by an extra year. that was about free trade. if theresa may comes back and it is we will have a free trade deal, for me, but will be fantastic. it will retain the zero rate tariff. for me, that is exactly where we need to be. we will be any much stronger position to know negotiate a good deal on the other side of brexit. thank you very much indeed. we will see what happened the night with this is in the next hour or so. asi with this is in the next hour or so. as i was suggesting, anna soubry was inferring that she will pull her amendment, indeed she has. he has tweeted. that really does indicate that the

27th of february will be height known. i think everybody will be looking to that date, how it will insert how the government of the act. now wejust insert how the government of the act. now we just have two enigmas in the nation. i think the real crunch point will be february 27. in the eu is issues, you look at the government potential been defeated, all these amendments coming through on the 27th of savoury. what incentive is there for them to act before then? i think the eu has to respond to downing street about this. the 27th is very important, but quite high noon because we're not putting on the deal yet, just another emotion. what we expect another emotion. what we expect another mission to be put forward by cooper and oliver... as an amendment which would force the government to extend article 50. the government wants the threat of radio on the table to force people to vote for it

deal. if that animate goes through, the government is saying it is in danger of going through, it strategy will lie in tatters. will the government author is timetable because of the prospect of that amendment? maybe the government will say we need to get an amendment before the 27th of favourite because it will be too late after. before the 27th of favourite because it will be too late afterlj understand that. the party come back to is that there is no incentive for the eu to do that. the eu have a set of conditions around extension, not just because the uk would have requested, they would automatically granted. you hear that they do not wa nt granted. you hear that they do not want a no—deal and they will try to help theresa may as much as possible. here is the result, let's listen n. altar settlement order. the eyes to the right, 306, and the

knows who left 322. the eyes-mac to the right, 306. the nose—mac to the left, 322. so the nose have it. order. i now invite the right honourable member for ross guy and love a re honourable member for ross guy and love are about to move an amendment i which stands in his name, mr ina blackford. the question is that the amendment! blackford. the question is that the amendment i the made. parliament division! clear at the lobby. plus

one request an extension of article 50 by at least three months. it does have the support of the liberal democrats as well. to remind you, the first labour amendment was defeated by 16, save 322 against 361i. one of those signatories is lord hannay — the uk's permanent representative to the european economic community between 1985—1990. what was the purpose of the letter, what would you hoping to achieve by it? several of us are independent members of the house of lords. we collectively feel very worried about the way things are going, its implications for britain's influence

in the world. also worried about the constitutional situation in this country. since we are of one mind, without it might be useful to speak up, but that is all it is. we have no role in government or opposition. you will be aware that some people reading it would say, you're hardly impartial because you helped build the eu. i work for a lot of british prime ministers from macmillan to blair, which is quite a long time. everything one of them believe that oui’ everything one of them believe that our places in the european community. i worked loyally for them, and! community. i worked loyally for them, and i have my views which i am now expressing. you say, collectively in the letter, there is no possible deal that would be a sensible alternative to the privilege one that we currently have today in the eu, inside the single market at the customs union. it will also be aware that many on the other side to say, trade with the rest of

the world is growing and our trade with the eu is shrinking — why couldn't we cut it as an independent trading nation when we were looking to the rest of the world? we are an independent trading nation inside the eu and we benefit from the eu's trade policy, which hasjust brought about free trade with the fourth biggest country in the world — japan. it is now negotiating with australia, new zealand, quite a lot of the countries in latin america, and so on. so we believe that the eu's and so on. so we believe that the eu's trade policy produces great benefits for great britain. the fact we don't take full advantage of them... look at germany and china, for example. german does about four times as much trade with china than we do. is it because germany is in the eu? i do not think so. i think

we are able to get a good deal and by influencing that trade policy, particularly in a period when open trading and liberal trade rules are under real threat from people like president trump, that is the place to be. our trade with the eu may not be grow as fast as with other countries but look at the relative size. 44% of our exports go to the eu, anda size. 44% of our exports go to the eu, and a lot of our service exports to which is about 80% of our community. whereas exports to countries around the world are importing and growing, will continue to grow if we stay in the eu. therefore, they are incomparable. a lot of my colleagues have done studies that show that if we got trade agreements with a whole range of countries around the world, it would not compensate the loss of trade from leaving the eu. you

mentioned donald trump, there is an interesting line any later when you say we are leaving the eu at a time when our other pillar of foreign policy, may suspect namely the transatlantic agreement with the usa, but he has offered the uk a trade deal. it will be a special trade deal. it will be a special trade deal. it will be a special trade deal he says. except that he subsequently said when he saw the deal that theresa may had done with the eu that he did not think it would cut it. i do not think that we could really count on that. the remark you quoted there is notjust about trade. british foreign policy for about the last 50 years has rested on two pillars. our influence in shaping policy in brussels and the other our influence and trying to talk to us presidents in

successive occasions. at the moment, we are doing extremely badly on influencing american foreign policy. just look at the recent decision is taken, pulling just look at the recent decision is ta ken, pulling out just look at the recent decision is taken, pulling out of the imf, pulling out of the agreement with iran. think the embassy in a rare. all of these things are pretty bad. where we consulted? no. did we have any influence on the decisions taken by president trump? no. so do not go around saying that we are great at influencing washington brussels, we have shared your opinion policy for yea rs have shared your opinion policy for years and we will not be denied after the 29th of march if we left on that day. have you had any response from number ten incidentally? no, i don't think that they will respond and i would expect them to. let's take a look at in

detail the amendment currently being voted on. the snp and amendment put forward by in blackford. this amendment is backed by the liberal democrats and the snp mps as well. it shouldn't be long before we get a result from that. now we know that when the nike has decided not to press her name it, that means this lobby will go straight for a vote on the government motion —— were nine. a number of pro—brexit mps have decided to abstain, meaning we are not prepared to back the government motion. they are upset because they feel that it takes no—deal of the table, that is why they have decided to not get behind it. i'm joined by robert ogden. the so—called erg are a party within a party, or in today? some say they are dictating the

policy of this government. some say they are dictating the policy of this governmentlj some say they are dictating the policy of this government. i do not think so. there are many of us with different views. while some of my friends and colleagues belong to that group have a strong view about this mission, there are plenty others of us with different views. the important thing is how to manage that. we saw a real sense of coming together a few weeks ago to try and help reform or allow the prime minister a platform to negotiate in the weeks ahead. the trouble is, it hasn't lasted. tonight, the government could get defeated on its future plans. we know it is symbolic but it does not send a positive message to rosso slight theresa may knows what this parliaments want. message to rosso slight theresa may knows what this parliaments wantm isa knows what this parliaments wantm is a take note motion, it has no legally binding status. yes, it would be better if the government won it. but the important work to be

done is in the next ten days to two weeks, which is to negotiate with our european partners on the details of the backstop. the strands of work being done by my colleagues, the attorney general, this will come to a head and give the pm a clear platform for that all—importa nt a head and give the pm a clear platform for that all—important mini film that which must come soon. platform for that all—important mini film that which must come soonm does show how difficult it will be given that the slightest annoyance and treason may loses her majority. the issue of europe has divided my party, this is an issue which cuts across either visceral divide that cuts across party politics and we are not in usual times. i think we must just accept that. we are not in usual times. i think we mustjust accept that. we must are not in usual times. i think we must just accept that. we must try to be positive and actually come together on the issues that actually do unite us in the common interest. i want to make sure that this country these are the eu with a deal, i think i know they would be

chaotic for the country. my friends in the pub to things like bricks it will be delayed. by understanding them, i think we can come together and do something constructive. obviously we have heard a lot from conservative mps, some think they will not be purchased by and allow a new scenario to happen. do you think the premise there is repair to take the premise there is repair to take the country to a no—deal brexit in just a few weeks' time? i think the policy is clear, we are seeking a deal. we have all spoken in government about our concerns of a new deal. what that means for supply chains and other issues relating to our security for example. the policy of the government is to seek a deal. the idea that we are sitting there to run down the clock is wrong. there is a lot of work going on to make sure we can go to the eu with a constructive series of suggestions

to get that all—important deal across the table. so, this vote on the s&p nation. they would like to revoke article 50, they do not want brexit to go ahead at all. mps mp5 get around eight minutes, most of them are filing back in. the s&p nation seeks to postpone the brexit day by at least three months. the first amendment by labour was defeated. you are watching the house of commons where voting is under way on a number of amendments put forward by mps a number of amendments put forward by mp5 on the government nation on the withdrawal agreement. if you are just joining the withdrawal agreement. if you are justjoining us, we are currently waiting the result of an amendment

put forward by the snp, which calls for suspension of article 50 by three months. refresh our minds on what the withdrawal agreement is. we are talking about the way that the uk actually separates from the eu, primarily through the legally binding withdrawal agreement. the divorce bill, it's got the money and there, potentially £39 billion. there is also a big section and are about eu citizens in the uk and eu citizens in jet out there is a protocol on ireland and northern ireland, the arrangements on the irish border. the only land border

between the uk and the eu after brexit, the contentious backstop arrangements which tory tricksters on theresa may's backbenchers want to get rid of. the eu said that it can be clarified but not up for negotiation. attached to that is the non—binding declaration that sets out the future relationship. yes, much of between 20 and 30 pages. it does begin to switch out what the future looks like. in the end, that is what everybody wants to know. separation is a detail which needs to be gone through. it includes a transition period which is crucial for many companies that want a smooth move from being inside the eu to being outside. it is really what that long—term situation is going to look like. it has been suggested it is open to adding more detail into the political declaration if you could help persuade a few more mind and the house of commons. so far,

what we have heard suggest that might not be enough. order. the ayes to the right, 93. the noes to the left, 315. the ayes to divide, 93. the noes to the left, 315. the noes have it. the noes have eight. on lock. order. i understood from the right honourable member... the right honourable lady was not minded on this occasion to move her amendment. that is to say amendment

e. amendment. that is to say amendment e, is my understanding correct? amendment. that is to say amendment e, is my understanding correct7m is on this occasion but i'm sure that we can sort it all out. thank you. in that case, colleagues, we come now to the main motion as on the order paper. the question is the main motion as on the order paper. as many as are of the opinion, say "aye". to the contrary, "no". division! clearly lobby! anna soubry of the backbenches was going to put forward an amendment calling for the government to set out what a no—deal brexit with me for the uk. she has come to an agreement with the comment that will be published in the next week or so. so she is receiving the right on that amendment which few will bring back on the 27. she is not satisfied but

she has suspended it for now. they will now vote on the main motion itself, the government motion. this house, reiterated support for the approach to leaving the eu, expressed by the house on the 29th of january, that was the amended motion and notes that discussions between the uk and the eu on the northern ireland backstop are ongoing. i've set out what the emotion as, you can you explain to us emotion as, you can you explain to us to our viewers who have just joined us why the eurosceptics have a problem with its? is a really good question. this is going to direct the way the government approaches the way the government approaches the next phase of negotiations. they have a problem with its because they are not sure that they can trust the government to actually bring back something from brussels. they fair that they don't want to in some way ta ke that they don't want to in some way take no deal of the table, that is

where they are standing. attached to those most from the 29th of january was the amendment put forward by... which was a non—binding motion demanding the government to get off the table. arg are saying if you do that, there is no negotiation because there is no leveraged. if they abstain as we think they will tonight, the government will be defeated, what will that mean? tonight, the government will be defeated, what will that mean7m means the government will be embarrassed, but legally it doesn't mean anything at all. the government will continue, they'll come back on the 27th. losing votes isn't a good look in parliament for the prime minister but practically, it is of very limited significance. but the erg, two weeks ago were confidently saying the spelman amendment is not legally binding, it doesn't make any difference. but now they are voting against the motion because the amendment. they were whipped to vote against it. it is what they are saying, two weeks ago they were told not to vote for it, tonight they are being told they have to vote for it.

yes, but nevertheless, this is essentially symbolic. what they are trying to do is signal to number ten, we are padelli happily to vote against you. don't believe for a moment that the rare outbreaks of party unity we have seen are enough to get you over the line. unless we get the brexit we once, we will vote against our own government. a few minutes ago, it's probably incumbent on the government now to start speeding up this timetable, if they wa nt to speeding up this timetable, if they want to get their deal through, because come the 27th of february, when a flood the next time this motion comes to parliament things might be taken out of their hands. yes. the government should take this very seriously. they are going to instruct the way government has to approach the final crucial weeks, because what we shouldn't forget is that the uk is leaving in march 2019. the government has said it wa nts to 2019. the government has said it wants to leave with a deal and it has also said it would start

discussions in brussels and trying to reopen that withdrawal agreement change, make changes to the backstop. but the big question is how will the eu response? they are going to have conditions. can you make sure that whatever we managed to change will be sufficient to get a bill through parliament? it doesn't look like at the moment the prime minister or the government consider a majority for anything. nobody would be confident in that. stay with us if you would. we are going to cross to brussels and speak to our correspondence. yesterday we saw pictures of michelle barnier, meeting with donald tusk and although there is still no progress, why are they meeting?” although there is still no progress, why are they meeting? i think it was a regular update. barnier had had dinner with the brexit secretary, and the. i think it was just a chance for michelle barnier to convey what had happened and if donald tusk was my tweet is anything

to go, he didn't have much to convey, because it did by the has been doing is starting a process of talking to the eu, starting the talking to the eu, starting the talking but not necessarily putting anything particularly detailed on the table. as we have just heard from the coverage in the last 20 minutes or so, that's because the government are still working on as three options. alternative arrangements to the backstop. essential legal changes, legally binding language to the backstop as well and this outreach that has been done to the labour party as well which has been carried out. those three strands approach which doesn't sound like it has borne enough fruits domestically in the uk for the government to bring over to the eu to put on the table, here in brussels. there have been some parliamentary moments for everyone in brussels and across the eu, they have been glued to the results and is not convinced tonight is one of them. in terms of what the government, they are not going to be compelled to do anything by the votes that take place tonight and what the eu once as government

positions laid out on the table, specific asks that the eu can work on, respond to and can perhaps result in some actual paperwork that could be attached to the deal. we we re could be attached to the deal. we were just discussing here, could be attached to the deal. we werejust discussing here, whether the government might try to speed up the government might try to speed up the timetable in the next two weeks given there is this flood of amendment is likely to come on the 27th of february. do you think the eu would be in any mode to help them with that? there is a bit of a division in the eu about this. some people think the eu has already done, a council, a european union, a letter from done, a council, a european union, a letterfrom president done, a council, a european union, a letter from president tusk and some people think actually, those two things were done too early in the process and they could have been more effective if there had been held back until now held back until even later so there is a big argument on the eu side that actually, there is not really worth

doing anything more now until things settle down in parliament. what is really interesting about science and the clues about what is happening in parliament is that one of the big argument made by the uk to the eu side is, the government can get a majority in parliament that has made up majority in parliament that has made up of the tory backbenchers, including the erg, they have been quite rebellious and quite tough and the government and the dup who help the government and the dup who help the government and the dup who help the government to govern, and some labour supporters of the deal who would sign up to the final deal when it is the dilemma presented. the uk's argument is the stable majority we can provide and demonstrate to you the eu. if you are the eu and you the eu. if you are the eu and you are watching this and you are seeing the fact that there is not a unity amongst this group of people on display in parliament tonight, if you, the eu, would you agree with what the government are saying about this majority is trying to build up or is the eu just going to stick with its position which is that there may needs to create a much

more cross—party coalition of votes in parliament that will get the deal through and will also see the government through the next phase of the brexit negotiations? i think the eu will look at what is happening and listen to these beaches. this majority that the government is promising us might not be there at all. just a small bit of nose for you, i'm hearing that the brexit secretary is probably going to call michelle barnier, tonight or tomorrow morning to explain what is happening and even further than that, he is intending to be back in brussels to see the eu side at the start early next week. we should know what the tenure of that conversation is about in a few minutes. thank you very much. still with me here you couldn't hear what he was saying there but he was basically making the point is that they are not convinced that the prime minister has a stable majority and maybe she needs to reach across to labour and form a more broad

parliamentary majority for a plan. the difficulty of that of course is that she splits her party,. absolutely, what we can hear is brexit is a divisive issue. we can hear it behind us right now, but absolutely the eu are watching this very closely. they are trying to see what the games government are trying, where it is positioning itself, who it can align itself with. they will be looking at that. we have jeremy with. they will be looking at that. we havejeremy corbyn's letter to the prime minister, labour's vision and what brexit the uk should go for, but of course, there is no sickness from governments that they would be supportive of that. everything lies on the next two weeks. we put a lot of focus on the conservative party. but we have seen this afternoon in the house of commons the splits that are starting to emerge and come to the fore now for the labour party as well. front—page news today, that ten

frontbenchers were to resign if the second referendum is not on the table. calls for a split in the party was summed up in a different way. is it coming to the nub for carrot didn't like jeremy way. is it coming to the nub for carrot didn't likejeremy corbyn now? it is coming to the lab for jeremy corbyn, because it is not just. there is foreign policy, the anti—semitism row, but what we have heard is that the next two weeks are going to be crucial if he doesn't shift in brexit, there are rumours mps are going tojump ship. it is the curious mirror image. a number of ministers have said but if by the end of the month the government is heading towards no dell, they are willing to resign as well. it's one of the reasons are so much hinges on theirs. we will see if these people are all willing to put their money where their mouths are, because up to this point the ig have been willing to carry through on that threats rather than the remain side. we are going to go back to the lobby. i have a guest. we are

waiting for the result of this vote but we will have a quick word. what do you make of today? is a weird situation to be honest. everyone is looking forward towards the end of february. interesting, theresa may hasjust kept february. interesting, theresa may has just kept kicking february. interesting, theresa may hasjust kept kicking the can down the road. it's what she has done at every turn. she does not have a plan. she doesn't have any confidence that she is going to be able to assemble a majority and if anything, the votes today show that is the case. of course, no responsible public servant should really even be contemplating a no—deal brexit with all the catastrophic impacts that would bring on our country both for economy and for security. it increasingly clear to me, the way out of this is to have a people's vote, to put theresa may's delta the people and say, after the result in 2016, we've negotiated brexit and this is what it looks like, do you still want to do that? or do we have a better deal as members of the eu? how do you get to that point? there are not a lot of mps in the house of

commons that will be willing to get behind that. we are due to leave in the next few weeks. it feels like that campaign is running out of stea m u nless that campaign is running out of steam unless you can persuadejeremy corbyn to get labour mps behind it and it is not looking likely. you are absolutely right. jeremy corbyn has no word of theirs, his entire lack of leadership over brexit is something betraying his own members, his own voters and indeed our country. but, iwould say his own voters and indeed our country. but, i would say about a people's votes, when the lib dems started talking about this, we were the only voices arguing for it and i didn't but highly our chances of success being able to achieve it. a lot of teams in that time in terms of public opinion and the support for a people's that putting this decision back to the people. we have some labour mps, some conservative mps, obviously the snp are supporting that now, the greens and of course the liberal democrats. we have a much stronger coalition supporting the public having a final say and we saw the 700,000 people on the streets of london, so this is a crunch point. we have got 43 days

until we are supposed to leave but brexit still can't be stopped. it's for people who feel strongly about that to also get in touch with their mps tojoin that to also get in touch with their mps to join that that to also get in touch with their mps tojoin that campaign, that to also get in touch with their mps to join that campaign, because that's the way to change minds and whether that ends up being the labour front bench or even that the conservatives decide that the only way they might even get their deal through as if they put it to the people, because they feel so strongly confident that it's a great deal, they can let the people vote for it or not and i was certainly argue very strongly we should stay in the eu. but that is the path. some would sayjeremy corbyn is respecting the vote of the referendum by not... order. recount. we will try again. or do. the ayes

to the right, 258, the noes to the 303. the ayes to the right, 258, the noes to the left 303, so the noes have it, the noes have it. unlock. thank you mr speaker. on a point of order, tonight's vote shows there is no majority for the prime minister was a course of action in dealing with brexit. yet again, how government

has been defeated. the government cannot keep on ignoring parliament orare cannot keep on ignoring parliament or are on cannot keep on ignoring parliament orare on to cannot keep on ignoring parliament or are on to was the 29th of march without a coherent plan. she cannot keep onjust without a coherent plan. she cannot keep on just running without a coherent plan. she cannot keep onjust running down without a coherent plan. she cannot keep on just running down the clock and hoping that something will turn up and hoping that something will turn up that will save her day and save herface. so, it is surprising up that will save her day and save her face. so, it is surprising that the prime minister is not even hear to hear the results of this vote. so, mr speaker, iwas to hear the results of this vote. so, mr speaker, i was going to ask her to come to the dispatch box now and admit that her strategy has failed. and come forward, bring forward to the house a coherent plan. a coherent plan that can deal with the stresses and anxieties that so many people all over this country are feeling, that can be brought to this house so that we can make some

progress forward together to bring people together and prevent the catastrophe of a no—deal exit on the 29th of march. it's surprising, the prime minister is not here. is there some way by which you can encourage her to return to dispatch box and tell her, tell us what a plan actually is? i it is not obligatory for the prime minister to be present on this occasion. other representatives of the treasury bench art here and if the secretary of state for exiting the european union wants to take to the dispatch box. he is not obliged to do so. the people along to the box, he is welcome to do so but he has declined

to do so. it is not incumbent upon them. they are not obliged to do so. we come now to a point of order. point of order. thank you mr speaker, this is a significant defeat for the government. the prime minister should be here to accept her responsibilities on the back of this government defeat. where is she? i wonder, this government defeat. where is she? iwonder, given this government defeat. where is she? i wonder, given the significance of this defeat, what powers are open to us, to force the government to bring forward its meaningful vote for the next week. people in the united kingdom want certainty, and when the lake and i thank those members that have the courage to vote with us tonight to extend article 50, members of all parties but i want to ask the question well was the front bench of the labour party on extending article 50? in responding to the

right honourable gentleman, i am seeking to be helpful to people interested in our proceedings who are not members of the house and therefore i will, if i may, as i hoped he would expect, treat of the factual enquiry that the leader of the scottish national party in this house puts to me, what can be done as he put it to bring forward or to expedite the meaningful vote? the short answer to that is that it is not within the gift of the church to do so and it is not for members of members of this house who were not pa rt of members of this house who were not part of the executive branch to do so, the meaningful vote is brought about as a result of statute and in accordance with statute and the statute decrees that it be done by a minister. so that will happen when a minister. so that will happen when a minister is ready to bring forward that vote. however, the right

honourable gentleman knows there are various times, other opportunities for debate and votes and the right honourable gentleman is not an innocent in these matters. he is well versed in parliamentary procedure and he will know the opportunities open to him and two other colleagues across the house. other members in other parts of house, will similarly be so conscious. we will leave it there for now. point of order.” conscious. we will leave it there for now. point of order. i suspect that if the secretary of state in opening this debate had said that he was going to honour once parliament voted for on the 29th of january, in other words, rolling out no deal, he may well have won less vote this evening, but he didn't. so, can you advise the house in what way can we as members of parliament who have already voted to rule out no deal, can ensure the government listened to that and respond appropriately?

well, a member from to that and respond appropriately? well, a memberfrom ealing, who to that and respond appropriately? well, a member from ealing, who will be well known to colleagues has just chanted in the background that is beyond even the speaker's power. what is right honourable gentleman has raised is an extremely important matter, that it is a matter of politics and the politics will play out and i use that term in a non—pejorative and neutral sense in the days and weeks ahead and we should have to see where we get. i think the right honourable gentleman is mainly concerned, i think i understand incorrectly, he was mainly concerned to put his point on the record. ithat mainly concerned to put his point on the record. i that there wasn't really a?, that. but if there was, i'm not able to an offensive answer now. we will return to these. points of order. what we do know tonight as there is a majority in this house for replacing the backstop with alternative arrangements. and that

what rests upon that majority is what's known as is there any way to put on the government they should adopt that compromise and enjoy a majority for ed? the honourable gentleman is a county colleague of mine. that is a truly monstrous abuse of the points of order procedure as the grin on the face of the honourable gentleman demonstrates he is perfectly well aware. he has made his own points, found his own salvation and the point was also made of course by colleagues of like mind to him in the course of the debate, he has now given ita the course of the debate, he has now given it a prominence with which i rather suspect he is satisfied. we we re rather suspect he is satisfied. we were living there for now. i hope there are no points of order. there is an arsenal match on television

very soon. several mps using points of order to try and get their particular point of view across. lots of complaints the prime minister was not there to see that pretty hefty defeat. the government defeated by 303 votes— 258 and i think quite striking if you had looked at the front bench, that on the government's side, not that many cabinet ministers there. they are trying to play the stand. they will say this is a symbolic defeat, but of course, it also does show the problem theresa may has within her own party and steve baker there from the pro brexit‘s wing of the conservative party making the point as others have done that actually there were some abstentions from the other wing of the tory party as well. quite a lot of unhappiness within the conservative party. let's get a reaction to that. you of course want another referendum, but what do you think that defeat tells us what do you think that defeat tells us about where the government is

goingof all, the government cannot command supports for theresa may's deal. she won't listen to the house of commons. she keeps bringing back her deal which is part of the emotion, parliament keeps rejecting it. we only have 44 days to go until the scheduled date of exit which is why it is imperative that we get an extension to this article 50 process, notjust because we need the time to get all the legislation through, even if there was agreement for her deal, but we need the time for her deal, but we need the time for parliament to its consensus on a way forward. that is why i voted for the snp's amendment to the government's motion providing for that three month extensions. unfortunately there wasn't more support for that and that didn't pass. beyond that, it is hard to see how you resolve the impasse here in the house of commons unless you refer that back to the people. while there may not be the numbers right now to go immediately to a people's vote as it were, i think at the end of this process, you are not left with really any other option than

that, to resolve the disagreement here in the house of commons. but as you say, the numbers are not there. more importantly, your own leader seems incredibly reluctant to go down that route. we are now 44 days to go, it does not like he is going to go, it does not like he is going to move. that is not happening. there doesn't seem to be any cross— party there doesn't seem to be any cross—party genuine attempt by the prime minister to come forward to it labour's position. what can you do to forcejeremy labour's position. what can you do to force jeremy corbyn's hand? there is disappointment amongst us, that the spirit of the labour party's governance policy which was to exhaust the avenues towards a general election and if that was not possible, to move towards a people's vote. that is what the spirit of the labour party conference motion is. that is used as appointment that has not been complied with as i have had members resign. i have had people e—mailing me from all over the country, from other constituencies saying they have taught up their labour party membership cards, because what they thought had been agreed as being reversed. i don't

wa nt agreed as being reversed. i don't want anything to do with the facilitation of any kind of tory brexit, or any brexit at all. that is where the majority of the labour party's members are. over the next 44 days, everybody is hoping for a change in position, to be truly... but if it does not come because mighti but if it does not come because might i ask you again, what can you do about ithave to keep arguing and we have got to make the case.” have... right at the beginning of this parliament, not even that, to provide for the labour party to sign up provide for the labour party to sign up to be part of the single market and a customs union. this is a leader who is on record as being against the european union and having supported the uk's exit from the european union for a long time. i suspect that the still very much his view. the difference between then and now is that he leads a party which in the... for the uk to remaina part

party which in the... for the uk to remain a part of the eu and certainly doesn't want to be pressing on with facilitating a conservative brexit which is trying to deliver on promises that were made by leaf campaigners in the cabinet during that 2016 referendum which have proved absolutely impossible to deliver. people did not vote labour to get a tory brexit. but some of your colleagues are talking about maybe even leaving the labour party. that is something i have been here and here the past few days. that is raw unhappiness. do you think they are about to add and would you be willing to do that? everybody has to come to their own decision on this. there is disappointment on theirs. we keep arguing, we keep campaigning, but ultimately, whether people leave the party or there are any splits in either of the party or there are any splits in eitherof the main party or there are any splits in either of the main parties is an issue for the leadership. i am not the leader of the labour party. it is not for me to keep the labour party together, that is the job of the elected leader of the labour party, jeremy corbyn, and that is what he must do. to fulfil the

promise. which is i'm going to take account... compliant with the spirit of labour's governance policy which is if we can't exhaust the avenues to get a general election, let's move to what the people's vote and we would be campaigning to keep the current deal as a member of the european union and transform and change our country from within. thank you very much. i'm going to bring any vice chairman of the conservative party just to bring any vice chairman of the conservative partyjust to get bring any vice chairman of the conservative party just to get some government reaction to that defeat. what does that tell us? it shows that theresa may cannot be confident ofa that theresa may cannot be confident of a majority in the house of commons for the way that she wants to go with brexit. i think what we learnt from the vote this evening is not very much, actually. the more significant vote is where the votes we had last month, which showed that the house didn't agree with the first draft of withdrawal agreement, made the point that the backstop was where the difficulty lay and that if you are able to make amendments

around the backstop that is something that would probably, not definitely but probably, command a majority of the house of commons. we have at that very much more from tonight's vote. the prime minister will continue to negotiate with the eu to try and get some changes, get through the house, so we can live on the 29th of march in good order. but all it does show is that something was agreed two weeks ago, just two weeks ago, they can't agree on what they agreed on two weeks ago. it shows they are grouping within your party will stop the pro—brexit group holds a great sway and when they don't vote with the government, you get defeated. the lesson that we really learnt was last month. which was there was no majority in the house for that first version of the withdrawal agreement and it had to change. that motion, also showed we don't want to leave with no deal. and yet the government seems to be ignoring that. the motion of the house of commons cannot overturn

primary legislation. us living on the 29th of march is written into primary legislation. the house is that it doesn't want to live without a deal. we know that, we know that before. the vast majority of people i speak before. the vast majority of people ispeakto, before. the vast majority of people i speak to, they say they definitely wa nt i speak to, they say they definitely want to leave the european union, but they want to leave with a deal. and keep the economy growing. that is not news, that is what the prime minister is working towards. is not news, that is what the prime minister is working towardsm there any sign that brussels is listening to that? the early messages that we are getting back from brussels what is positive, but thatis from brussels what is positive, but that isjust the pattern from brussels what is positive, but that is just the pattern that we have seen over the last couple of years. i don't, have seen over the last couple of years. idon't, i'm have seen over the last couple of years. i don't, i'm not involved in negotiations directly, i do believe that in the pragmatism of our negotiating partners, they are not village people. they know that it is best for britain, best for the european union, if we leave with a deal. if we leave in an agreement, it keeps our economy growing, keeps the economy is going, their fragile

economies at the moment. economic growth is wobbling in the eurozone. the last thing they want is a bum in the eurozone. the last thing they wa nt the eurozone. the last thing they want is above get a deal. thank you very much. really, the action moving to the 27th of february and of course, that clock ticking towards the departure date. thank you very much. how many times have we said that before? this was the eighth defeat by our accounting for the government, no illegal consequences to that tonight. as another humiliation for theresa may's government. a if aif i'm christian fraser live at westminster — where the governement has suffered another defeat over over its brexit strategy. theresa may's motion asked mps to agree that they supported its approach to leaving the eu — it was defeated by 45 votes. a labour amendment which called on the government to allow the commons to vote on a new brexit plan by wednesday,

27th february has been rejected. mps have also rejected an snp amendment which called for the uk's departure from the eu to be delayed by three months. the government cannot keep on ignoring parliament and upon on without a coherent plan. mps have also rejected an snp amendment which called for the uk's departure from the eu to be delayed by three months.