welcome to bbc news. it's six o'clock — we're live at westminster as mp5 prepare to give their opinion on leaving the eu without a formal deal. the day after the prime minister's deal was heavily defeated mps are set to vote on a no—deal brexit on 29th march as mrs may insists an agreement is still possible. i want to leave the european union with a good deal. i believe we have a good deal. yes, no deal is better than a bad deal but i want us to leave on the 29th of march and leave with a good deal. but for labour, jeremy corbyn accused the prime minister of plunging the country into chaos and he called again for a general election. the prime minister's deal has failed. she no longer has the ability to lead. this is a rudderless government in the face of a huge national crisis.

meanwhile the eu's chief negotiator insists that the deal negotiated by mrs may is the only deal available. again, the house of commons says what it doesn't want. now this impasse can only be solved in the uk. in the event of a no—deal brexit ministers say that tariffs would be cut on a range of imports from outside the eu and there'd be no new checks at the irish border. good evening and welcome to this bbc news special from westminster. it's another important night in the house of commons. this time mps will be voting on whether they want to block the uk from leaving the eu without an agreement on 29th march. it is a free vote for conservative

mps, and given the prime minister is voting in favour of the government motion, we expect no deal to be taken off the table — for now. but, as the government motion says, no deal will still remain the default option unless the house and the eu ratify an agreement. and yes that means the theresa may's deal is still alive and kicking. though today the chancellor philip hammond called for a cross—party consensus on brexit which seemed to cut across the pm's desire to bring the deal back for a third vote. to be frank, last night's events mean we are not where i hoped we would be today. i'm economy is

fundamentally robust but the uncertainty i hope to lift less eight still hangs over it. we cannot allow that to continue. it is damaging our economy and it is damaging our economy and it is damaging our economy and it is damaging ourstanding damaging our economy and it is damaging our standing and reputation in the world. —— it is damaging our economy. tonight we have a choice of removing the date of an imminent no deal exit hanging over our country. tomorrow we have the opportunity to map away forward towards building a consensus across this house for a deal we can support two exit the eu in an orderly way. let's show you the attorney general making his points this evening. the vote will be just after seven o'clock, andrew neill will be here with a special programme to take you through the results. we would take to the closing comments in the debate. let's just recap how we got here

and what's up next. theresa may's withdrawal deal was last night rejected by an overwhelming majority for a second time. 2a2 mps backed her agreement with brussels but 391 voted against it so the deal was defeated by a landslide 149 votes. tonight as discussed mps are voting on whether, having rejected the may deal, we should leave the eu without a deal on the 29th of march. if, as looks likely, mps vote against a no—deal exit on the 29th of march then they will vote tomorrow evening on delaying brexit by extending article 50 — that's the legal process that takes the uk out of the eu. and what after that? who knows but we should remind you that while it is in the power of the government to request an extension. it is the eu, that will decide whether to grant it, for how long and with what conditions. there is one amendment to the government's motion being voted on tonight. this amendment is the so—called malthouse compromise. if passed, the government would have to seek an extension to article 50 —

the mechanism of the uk leaving the eu — until the 22nd of may... and seek proposed ‘mutual standstill agreements‘ between the uk and eu until the end of 2021 — including payments to the eu. while still guaranteeing the rights of european citizens living in the uk. it seems pretty certain there is a majority to take no deal off the table in the next couple of weeks, but the eu's chief negotiator michel barnier says the risk of britain leaving without a deal has ‘never been higher‘. there is a possibility of another amendment tonight which was put forward by dame caroline spelman. that would reject a no—deal brexit at any time and under any circumstances, but it‘s understood

that she‘s no longer backing her amendment, and will not be pushing it to a vote. so now let‘s hear from michael gove — who stood in for the prime minister this afternoon to open the debate. this house voted to give the people of this country a choice over whether or not we were to remain or leave the european union. 17.4 million people, a clear majority voted to leave. it is a mandate we must respect and an instruction we must deliver. it is also the case... just a second. it is also the case that at the last general election both principal parties stood on manifestos which pledge them to deliver our departure from the european union. it is vitally important that we honour that manifesto promise, those instructions and our democracy. those outside this house who sent us

here to act on their will and to deliver that mandate will take a very very dim view of those who seek to frustrate, deny or dilute the mandate that we were given. michael gove, speaking earlier this afternoon, standing in for the prime minister. standing in for the prime minister. the shadow brexit secretary sir keir starmer responded for labour he called for mps to give the strongest possible sign that the house rejects no—deal. on the state of the house, we have never accepted there should be abated choice between the prime minister‘s deal or no deal. between very bad or even worse is not a meaningful choice and it would be a very sorry end end to the negotiations. yesterday the house overwhelmingly voted to reject the

first of those options, the prime minister‘s deal. today we have the chance to reject the second. we should do so with as big a majority as possible. the mantra that my deal 01’ as possible. the mantra that my deal or no deal needs to be dead and buried tonight. with me now are the editor of politico‘s london playbook — jack blanchard and anne mcelvoy assistant editor of the economist. lovely to see you both. just because the house indicates this evening they want to take no deal of the table, but does not mean no deal will be taken off the table? table, but does not mean no deal will be taken off the table ?m table, but does not mean no deal will be taken off the table? it has no powerful it is a show of force against the idea of no deal. it certainly clarifies the matter but itself it does not advance is very much. which is why we are questioning the extension and the vote tomorrow which would advance

what happens next in the process. let us suppose, and it is obvious this is what is going to happen, they will extend article 50 tomorrow, what is the legal instrument that does that? believe date of march 2090 set in law so the need pass a law? that is correct. firstly you have to make a new agreement with the eu. it cannot be extended by the uk unilaterally. men might like to go back to brussels and cut a deal with all 27 other eu leaders as to the length of the extension. if any disagree, the extension. if any disagree, the extension will not happen. so this is not a foregone conclusion. extension will not happen. so this is not a foregone conclusionlj foresee is not a foregone conclusion.” foresee that when she returns from brussels, for that then because i wrote about how long the extension is and what it does? exactly. as

jack says, it is not a foregone conclusion. i will predict that there is an appetite for an extension in the eu. it does seem thatis extension in the eu. it does seem that is an understanding of the need foran that is an understanding of the need for an extension but it cannot interfere with the european parliament election searcher coming up. that suggests a shorter extension, towards the end of may. anything more competitive than that will mean another very difficult process and it would be harder to get the 27 on board for that. my guess is the almighty row you are talking about will happen here before she goes to brussels. in the eu there is an expectation that britain will notjust eu there is an expectation that britain will not just turn up at the summit and ask for an extension, they want to hear a plan for how long it will be. that is what parliament will have two decide,

what is the purpose of extending article 30? it maybe the vote will be tagged on to the motion tomorrow, we wa nt be tagged on to the motion tomorrow, we want a delay for this purpose, whatever that is, it is not really an indicative vote because of theresa may‘s deal is still the elephant in the room, presumably they will win against those options which are put on the table? things need to be broken down. admittedly, it is pretty secure that the outcome will go a certain way but i would see, if you look at what happens next, it is evident to me, the whole implosion of the theresa may‘s vote on tuesday, largely down to the advice of her attorney general. he is in talks about his own form of

words. this gets very convoluted but she could see that to put something out there on the table, that would be the substance even be going back to the eu with. you would see this all went wrong at a vice moment, can we clarify and do in a different way? it won‘t move their hardliners but it might move a few over to the side of the prime minister. so i would not place out a return on the jaded theresa may‘s deal. would not place out a return on the jaded theresa may's dealm would not place out a return on the jaded theresa may's deal. it never ends. when we have these foods tomorrow and parliament votes read different kinds of exit, a customs union or a second referendum. when she has been given instruction to return to brussels and asked for that extension on those terms, others to brexiteers who voted against her deal will think it is more attractive. after she says i am going to brussels to do this, unless

you would like me to bring back my deal for one more vote, it is possible that she mightjust deal for one more vote, it is possible that she might just sweep it through. i was fine that third episodes are the best. there is a cabinet meeting this evening, what are they talking about? —— i always find. as ever there is a massive row going on between the two sides of the cabinet. the chancellor cut across the idea of bringing it back for a third for it. exactly. then we saw the deputy of the chancellors think the opposite of what he had just told the commons. disagreeing on the same departments. exactly. right across government, the cabinet, parliament and the country. this is the most divided britain has been on an issue in some time. you mentioned the customs union, i think there are still those who want the

customs union to come back in some form. it is taken as something which can break apart this fragile conservative party, certainly a lot of people would not be able to carry ona of people would not be able to carry on a flat where the case. when we talk about the deal or a second referendum, i would talk about the deal or a second referendum, iwould not talk about the deal or a second referendum, i would not neglect the fight we could go back to what it should mean to deal with the eu after brexit. lots of questions. see with eyes. —— stay with us. let‘s turn to how europe is reacting to all this now michel barnier, the eu‘s chief negotiator, said the bloc "cannot go any further" in trying to persuade mps to back the agreed terms of exit and it was down to the uk to sort out. the french president emmanuel macron has said: "the solution to the current impasse is in london. europe needs to keep moving forward, the european citizens in the 27 other countries have decided to stay in europe and to move forward, to act and we can‘t lose any time because the world won‘t wait for us."

and earlier today the president of european council donald tusk put this picture on instagram. it's a note from a six—year—old girl called sophie — it reads ‘dear mr tusk — i live in britain. i know we are leaving the eu. but i think we should be friends. please may i have a signed photo of you for my europe book.‘ at the bottom there‘s a picture of a unicorn donald tusk captioned the photo with ‘we will always be friends‘. joining us from strasbourg now — our europe editor katya adler. reporting today from angela merkel that britain might want to return to the european union in 20 years‘

time. i right in supposing there is a bit ofa time. i right in supposing there is a bit of a split between the european commission and the european council? much harder attitude towards this delay from the 27 metres. one thing you are not right about, iam metres. one thing you are not right about, i am in brussels.” metres. one thing you are not right about, i am in brussels. i beg your pardon. i cannot keep track. we believe in accuracy. is there a difference? yes. there‘s a temptation to say there are splits, i would not go far but i with the much maligned brussels bureaucrats who are here inside european commission, actually, yes, they have been more open minded and flexible in these negotiations. when we came to the eu summit, and we have one

coming up next week, theresa may will meet all 27 metres, they are the ones who had taken a harsher line with emmanuel macron right in front place there. when it comes to this deal, this theresa may deal rejected again, this technical discussion here at peter grant level, those of each and end. if the eu were to move now, that would have to come at a political level and could only come from the leaders of the eu countries. but emmanuel macron, and he is not alone in this, eu leaders say negotiations on this deal are over. the uk has to provide its own solution and its own way forward. whether mps unite over another deal or a general election ora another deal or a general election or a no—deal brexit, they have to decide and only once they have decided whether eu be open to the

idea of extending the leaving process in order to meet those options possible. so the eu is sending tough tonight, mostly they are frustrated that at this late stage in the brexit process, they see factions of mps chasing after their ideal brexit or ideal way forward , their ideal brexit or ideal way forward, provoking article 30 or the second referendum. the eu think they have to be realistic, you need to unite about —— around the most whole rouble with forward. after brexit, don‘t forget, then the trade negotiations begin in the future relationship between the eu and the uk is formed. we will discuss that later, get out now. do not change the unicorns, now is not the time. thank you for that update. we can speak to our chief political correspondent vicki young.

what is the latest? i am worried about unicorns, everyone is talking about unicorns, everyone is talking about them. there will be the government motion tonight which says we do not want to leave on the 29th of march without a deal. but in law, the default position is to leave without a deal unless you can replace it with a deal. at the moment, theresa may is not getting the backing for that. other people have other ideas about what happens next, there are many ideas about that. let us find out about one of them, you are backing the multi is compromise and we need to explain it to people. what is it? basically it pushes the date of her departure back at it, not very far, to me the

22nd. it extends the transition period until december 2021 so the intention is that is more time for no deal planning if that is the final outcome and more time to settle ideal. it commits to an ongoing relationship with europe. it secures everyone living here who is worried about whether we are about to remain, all of that is secured by this proposal. it says stuff about tariffs but that has already been announced by the government so in a way this has something for everyone. levers should be satisfied and remainers should be satisfied that the concerns of people who voted no differently for the referendum, their concerns will be taken seriously. michel barnier has already said no to this clearly. he said there was no transition deal without a withdrawal agreement, you still need a backstop so what will you do about that? it sounds like saying we will millions to leave but we‘re kind of staying. saying we will millions to leave but we're kind of staying. this is the same michel barnier who said no to

everything else. if he's serious about negotiating and not leaving on no deal terms he has to stop saying no deal terms he has to stop saying no and say yes. if he isjust going to dismiss things with a cavalier pressure behind then i suspect it will be the european union which is the loser rather than this country. opinions will harden around no deal rather than around something else. that is a matter for him. he has also been complaining over quite appear of time that they do not know what it is we want. tonight we are trying to make it clear and for the first time, it has the dup, the erg led byjacob first time, it has the dup, the erg led by jacob rees—mogg, first time, it has the dup, the erg led byjacob rees—mogg, people like me voted remain and want to see the referendum on out, for once we have

all these people who up to now have not agreed on anything are agreeing on this so if michel barnierjust says no to this, that is not showing good faith. do you think the prime minister has control of this process ? minister has control of this process? it does not feel like it. she cannot get her deals through. isn‘t any chance she can get her deals through? i have been told voted three is coming the track. deals through? i have been told voted three is coming the trackm is likely. this is a complex and lengthy negotiation and the idea it was always going to be smooth until the last moment was not reasonable. it never has been a reasonable expectation. the fact she is having to move to the left and then the right to try and get this through parliament should not be a cause for concern. parliament should not be a cause for concern. to all intents and purposes, there is still a chance of

the deal succeeding because of the other options are falling away. my amendment was voted down tonight. if the spelman amendment. as another road lost. so pretty soon it will be either no brexit and it is abandoned or we support the deal in whatever form it is which is where we are very close to cumming. thank you. there is talk about indicative votes rolling out all those options and trying to find out what parliament is in favour of rather than what it is in favour of rather than what it is against. thank you, we‘re going to to strasbourg. with me now is mairead mcguinness — mep for the irish party fine gael and vice president of the european parliament. good to have you with us. it seems to be in present westminster and the uk that the eu would grant an extension, at least in the short term but all the cards with the european union, what demands will they put with that extension?”

think we‘re going to eat what happens for the rest of this week because a lot can unfold in the next 48 hours. when it comes to an extension, the message has been widely extension has been required and how long the uk needs to last. there had been different views on this from the uk site and the european parliament. some part —— some colleagues think a short extension will be all right up to the european elections, others suggest that would be too short to resolve difficulties and that a longer period will be required. that is also coming from the uk side so it depends how this is framed. if the vote tonight on a no deal and we have a rejection of that as an option, legislation has to go through that commons and we may hear tomorrow about an extension and how

long that is required for. i think the leaders will listen carefully because everyone wants an orderly brexit. we spent many days and months trying to get to that place where we thierry audel you brexit happen. we are just not there yet. some in this house are questioning whether there should be an extension. those of us who understand the impact of a no—deal brexit on our citizens and hope that is not the case and hope the house of commons. in that option tonight, those implications will be so and we don‘t want to see that. there is a lot of talk and discussion to be had when we knew the outcome of events in the house of commons in the next 48 hours. there has been a suggestion today that if the european union wanted to force this deal through, they could use that short—term extension to stay you can haveit

short—term extension to stay you can have it as long as you ratify this deal or revoke article 50 so you could almost force a decision of the uk parliament? i think we are not in a nyway uk parliament? i think we are not in anyway able to control what happens in the house of commons so the prime minister herself has said, there is a risk of no brexit. if this deal is not accepted. i think in good faith we have negotiated with the united kingdom and additional flexibilities and reassurances were provided on monday, clearly that has been rejected again by the house of commons. reality is that our different reasons why people are voting down agreement, some dislike the backstop and want a hard brexit, others because they want to remain in the eu or want a soft brexit. there needs to be a mechanism to try and get his forces not to join there needs to be a mechanism to try

and get his forces not tojoin up and get his forces not tojoin up and vote down a withdrawal agreement but i am and vote down a withdrawal agreement butiama and vote down a withdrawal agreement but i am a feed around the whole brexit debate over many months, we are speaking about a very divisive issue in the united kingdom, dividing parties in the house of commons on dividing the house of commons. i am going to ask you about the tariff schedule published today by the government. there would be no ta riffs by the government. there would be no tariffs for goods coming across—the—board from southern ireland into northern ireland but there would be tariffs from northern ireland into the republic because the uk would be treated like a third country. but with businesses in northern ireland at a disadvantage, given there would be some tariffs on beef and given there would be some tariffs on beefand lamb, given there would be some tariffs on beef and lamb, irish farmers would beef and lamb, irish farmers would be heavily penalised in the event of ano be heavily penalised in the event of a no deal. indeed and that has been a no deal. indeed and that has been a big discussion in ireland. our farmers are already under pressure because the beef market is so difficult. they are very sensitive to this question of tariffs on their

meat going into the uk and indeed on daily products. uk consumers consume a lot of cheddar cheese for example and ida spieth. so this is a sensitive issue and anything which increases the price to the uk consumer will impact on demand and consumption. —— and irish beef. that will be a sensitive issue politically so none of us will come out of that arrangement looking very good. forfarmers on out of that arrangement looking very good. for farmers on the ground out of that arrangement looking very good. forfarmers on the ground in

my country and i think uk farmers are concerned, this is a very difficult issue. there is real sensitivity around this because we have long supplied approaches into the uk and your consumers value the produce we send to the market. it is also an issue for the european union because any disruption to the irish market with impact on the wider european union market so we are looking at how we can handle that andindeed looking at how we can handle that and indeed what measures and supports may be necessary in order to avoid a really disproportionate disruption of the marketplace. equally in the uk questions will arise regarding demand and consumption and also at the uk looks for other supplies of beef, it is ha rd to for other supplies of beef, it is hard to replace what is currently on the marketplace in terms of safety and quality as we are part of the european union and we produced a very high standards. that is why many will say the vote tonight is very important. thank you very much for your thoughts. we can speak to our chief political correspondent vicki young. one amendment per density was by caroline spelman. wanting to take no deal off the table permanently. he had decided not to push it to a vote, why? it is because the government notion offers to take no deal of the table by the 29th of

march which was the objective of our amendment. by the government proposing to do that, with the support of the opposition parties, you can review the two extent of the majority of parliament for no to no deal. what about those who see it does not remove it but keeps it on there for future months? in january we we re there for future months? in january we were against a no—deal brexit, we won a majority. there is not a majority in the house of commons for no deal, not now or ever over the weeks and months to come. the great task starting tomorrow is for parliament to come together around a better deal which works for britain. the principles make deal has been rejected and we need to make significant progress as quickly as

possible. we represent constituencies with strong manufacturing bases, for then it is absolutely key, thousands ofjobs are on the line if we do not get it right so an overwhelming majority tonight saying no to no deal. i have spoken to pro—brexit and they say this is meaningless because it is not in the law. the government will introduce primary legislation to remove the date of march the 29th from the act. that is an undertaking from the act. that is an undertaking from the act. that is an undertaking from the dispatch box that legislation will underpin the decision that we are going to leave the european union without a deal. that doesn't mean we are not going to leave, it just that doesn't mean we are not going to leave, itjust means we do need a deal when we actually do leave. we heard from the dispatch box today from michael gove, that the

government may enable some indicative votes in parliament, so we can establish where the consensus lies. this is an indication of moving forward together on a cross—party basis in the national interest. parliament has to decide what it is in favour of. they may not be in favour of anything and looking ahead tomorrow there might bea looking ahead tomorrow there might be a vote on extending article 50, delaying brexit, do you think parliament will vote for that? yes i do. tomorrow, no to no deal and then tomorrow extend the timetable beyond the 29th of march so therefore no falling off a cliff. then the day after tomorrow start the process of agreeing a deal that will work. there‘s no point extending if it is not for a reason? precisely. no one is suggesting we let things drift because our economy is getting into

difficulty and so manyjobs depend on it. we need to work across party to achieve that the objective of node two no deal and then we need to work cross—party to craft a deal that will work for britain. that is what the people of great britain expect from us. caroline, where does the compromise lie? you have voted for the prime minister‘s deal but does it need to become something else? the prime minister improved on her deal and she got a few more votes because of improvements to the backstop. it's not impossible that with goodwill from the other 27 countries, they may provide us with improvements on the things that are important to my labour colleagues on workers' rights and environmental protections. there is scope to improve it and if we work together across the parties we can build the consensus behind an improved deal that works for britain. there was some uncertainty on whether there could be a vote on the amendment?m

is possible somebody else could put my amendment, but the key point is the true majority in parliament, the full extent of the majority opposed toa full extent of the majority opposed to a no—deal brexit will be revealed by parliamentarians voting for the government motion which takes it off the table. thank you. it is possible we get those three votes at 7pm and lotta people will be looking around to find out what mps are in favour of. my two guests, editor of politico‘s london playbook, jack blanchard, and anne mcelvoy, assistant editor, the economist. caroline spelman put down her amendment to the motion last night and then decided she didn‘t want to move it. but she was told by the speaker, you have put in and it is me who decides if it goes forward. could someone else, another

signatory and that amendment put it forward that would put no deal off the table permanently? they could and it we will find out in the next half an hour if that happens. yvette cooper has just half an hour if that happens. yvette cooper hasjust said half an hour if that happens. yvette cooper has just said in the commons she wants to listen and hear what liam fox, the government minister who will be summing up this debate in the next few minutes, has to say before she decides if she will move that amendment on behalf of caroline spelman. there will be pressure on the government to make it clear exactly what it is going to do if its own motion passes to convince these backbenchers not to take matters out of their own hands. these comments will be important because potentially the government could lose control of this tonight? exactly and that has always been the danger of this. and the psychology, promising the free vote at the last minute, it was always going to be difficult. you cannot predict how these amendments fall, but it does

affect the mood of the house and that has been the problem, theresa may, she cannot communicate well with the house at the moment because of her sore throat, that is the bit thatis of her sore throat, that is the bit that is the danger, it looks like it has gone out of the government's hands even more so than yesterday. we felt they were rallying and they had some things to say, but this afternoon, less more so. if the amendment goes to about 7pm it will be very tight which way it goes. it is not clear cut. caroline spelman herself isn‘t going to vote for it. it is going to be on a knife edge. if the government motion is allowed to come instead, we will see a big majority. with the government voting for it and labour allowing it to pass. has to may been defeated or has her own motion got through with

the big majority. with the defeat she got yesterday, the last thing she got yesterday, the last thing she needs is another defeat. i told you we will be bringing another blockbuster tonight and there it is. thank you both very much indeed. so, one of the most contentious issues is the so—called irish backstop, designed to prevent a hard border between north and south. joining me now is our ireland correspondent chris page. i was just saying to mairead mcguinness, the competitive disadvantage northern ireland businesses would be put under, under this tariff schedule of the government has set out today, which puts the dup in a difficult position? that is right. the proposals the government put out today are unlike anything that has been tried pretty much anywhere in the world. the idea is, goods coming into northern ireland from the irish republic would not be subject to ta riffs republic would not be subject to tariffs but goods moving from the irish republic into england, scotla nd irish republic into england, scotland or wales would be subject to tariffs. it begs the question

what happens to goods moving between northern ireland and the rest of the uk? the dup and numerous other opponents of the current brexit deal said they couldn‘t contemplate any trade barriers between northern ireland and the rest of the uk. the government says even though there won‘t be any checks on the land border under plans it unveiled today there won‘t be any need for checks between northern ireland and the rest of the uk either. they won‘t be a border on the irish sea, instead the customs regime will be enforced on an intelligence led basis. in other words if there are suspicions some exporters are breaking the rules, goods would be specifically targeted and inspected in those company‘s premises. the dup has said they think the government has made sensible suggestions. northern ireland businesses have raised concerns and say they are at a competitive disadvantage because they can export across the border

into northern ireland but northern ireland businesses could not send goods the other way to the irish republic without incurring import taxes. the dup have said the government suggestions are sensible, but they have said it is now up to the eu and ireland to reciprocate, to follow suit and say no goods coming from northern ireland would be subject to tariffs when they go into the republic of ireland and the eu. the irish government themselves, as may read mcguinness alluded to, looking at the proposals in detail. there would be a bad affect, particularly on agricultural businesses in the irish republic if ta riffs businesses in the irish republic if tariffs kicked in. the government would have to respond appropriately and it would. chris page in belfast, thank you. we are 20 minutes away from what may be a series of votes this evening in the house of commons. there may be two, possibly three if they do move the caroline

spelman amendment, let‘s go back to vicki young in the lobby. this was a vote. on the prime minister about taking no deal off the table, at least for the end of march. it‘s not something she wanted to do. many felt it was better to keep the option of walking away. many argue the eu never took it seriously that we were prepared to walk away and that has what has brought us brought us here. i am joined by the health minister. when it comes to taking no deal of the table, where do you stand on that? i don‘t want to leave without a deal, let‘s be clear on that. the prime

minister said last night that there we re minister said last night that there were consequences the house of commons voting against their withdrawal agreement. what you are seeing playing out is part of those consequences. as michael gove said, there is no way we are in a position to leave at the end of march with no withdrawal agreement. it is about the withdrawal agreement and not the deal. we are not in a position to do that, it would not be in the national interest to do that. so the prime minister‘s motion today makes it clear we would rule out leaving with no deal at the end of march but is not government policy to rule out no dealfor ever. which is why is not government policy to rule out no deal for ever. which is why the caroline spelman amendment cannot be allowed to pass because then we will move allowed to pass because then we will m ove o nto allowed to pass because then we will move onto the next stage. depending on what parliament decides tomorrow, when we have another debate to decide whether we want to seek an extension. people outside will be thinking, we were supposed to be leaving and now it looks like we might not be. it is a bit of a failure of the political class, isn‘t it? failure of the political class, isn't it? people are probably bemused. people inside are bemused as well. we, as a government, have a

clear position we want to leave with a negotiated settlement with the european union. the prime minister, for all of the criticism, she has agreed a deal with 27 other states and the british cabinet. i think it is remarkable she got as far as she did with the vote injanuary. i voted for it then. she brought it back last night, which is improved and more than good enough for me, i am disappointed the house did not vote for it. a lot of people are looking long and hard this morning and thinking, did i miss the chance to get the brexit i wanted. 17.5 million voted to leave and they expect it to be delivered. but it has to be done in a safe way. of course we can leave without an agreement, but we don‘t want to. course we can leave without an agreement, but we don't want to. the message to those colleagues of yours who did vote against her deal last night, no deal, bit bumpy but it

will be fine in the long run.” night, no deal, bit bumpy but it will be fine in the long run. i am inside government and i see what no deal looks like on a daily basis. we are at the front of the queue in the department of health for these preparations and we will be fine if we left without the withdrawal agreement, but we don‘t need to. my message to colleagues, as it was yesterday, yes the majority didn‘t get through last night but we will have to leave with a deal at some point. i do believe parliament has any majority, as it is about to show tonight, to leave without one. whether it is at the end of march, the end of may or the end ofjune. my the end of may or the end ofjune. my message is, you won the referendum and we accept that and people who voted remain, we accept that. i am the one who keeps voting to leave with an agreement. my messages, take the prize the shelf. otherwise the prize might disappear. thank you very much indeed and a lot

of people feel like that, a lot of mps who voted remain are voting to leave the eu and are looking at collea g u es leave the eu and are looking at colleagues who campaigned the other way and not following them. this is the dilemma parliament has got itself into. with me now isjill rutte from the institute for government, and anand menon from the research group, uk in a changing europe. i watched pmqs this afternoon and theresa may struggling with her voice and jeremy corbyn, i did not detect any move for compromise, even after the vote last night? very contrast. as well what the chancellor said at the end of his spring statement. in the end tomorrow might be the start of a process to reach a compromise. then it was picked up in the opening of the debate when michael gove was standing infor the debate when michael gove was standing in for the prime minister, when her voice finally gave up. whether that is the sign of a split

between hammond, michael gove and the prime minister. maybe we need the prime minister. maybe we need the initiative to see if there is a majority for something in the house of commons. people might scream at the television and say, why won‘t she compromise on this deal? if she reaches across and tries to do a deal with labour, she risks losing half of her party? also from the view from the tory front bench, compromise is different. why doesn't jeremy corbyn compromise? the tory front bench will say essentially the deal with the backstop is very, very close to what jeremy corbyn seems to be calling for. if the labour party would recognise that, we would have something to work with. that was the real head scratcher, keir starmer said, the legal text from the attorney general says we will be trapped in a customs union

permanently and i thought, isn‘t that what labour wants? absolutely. that has been the interesting debate throughout and people who are closest to the government‘s position, is the official position of the labour party and the legal definition doesn‘t give them what they want but it is compatible with they want but it is compatible with the spectrum of options they want. but they don‘t want the prime minister being the prime minister when we move into those discussions on the future relationship. but labour doesn‘t have a substantive government on the withdrawal agreement. the uncertainty and the downgrading of the economic forecast the chancellor said today should make them think twice. they are both putting party before country. neither wants to move. lets talk about the malthouse compromise. it

is to buy transition and then maybe a majority that backs this and the majority of conservative mps. i was under the impression michelle barnier had ruled out the buying of any transition. i think the sole purpose for the malthouse compromise is to make the conservatives feel good and united. after the brady amendment, the malthouse group came together, different wings of the conservative party talking together in the same room. the bread a sense of unity that had not been there. the european union, won'tjust not give usa the european union, won'tjust not give us a transition without a withdrawal agreement, they cannot because they don't have any legal position to do it on. michelle barnier last week said door is open to discuss. are they saying now if we close down the negotiation, maybe

we close down the negotiation, maybe we can focus attention in westminster. do you get there has been a subtle change? if you are frustrated because they thought by monday night they had something, they had given the prime minister something. they moved a bit and gave the prime minister something that she assured them would make her deal pass. that was torpedoed yesterday morning by the attorney general‘s legal advice which meant that the erg did cross and go into the lobby. that‘s why you hear them saying the solution isn‘t in brussels anymore, it is london. what apostles might try to do is when it is asked for an extension, if we get no deal taken off the table for the 29th of march tonight and then get parliament

voting for the extension tomorrow, it might start laying down conditions. i don‘t think the eu is keen the last three months look like the next three months.” keen the last three months look like the next three months. i get the impression they say, you can have an extension, but it is either this deal or you revoke article 50. the other way of doing it is give us the extension and then say, this is absolutely it unless the alternative at the end is you signed the deal, have a general election or a referendum. they can crystallise the choice early on or they can crystallise the choice late on. either way, the 29th of may will be crunch time and that will be a meaningful vote that is meaningful because there won't be any scope to extend. there was a tweet, european elections will be hijacked by brexiteers and brexit issues. britain should not take part in any eu elections weather in may or at a

later date with a longer extension. that there is a question for the people who think the uk does need a longer extension and is there some way round it? that is something they all agree, there is zero appetite here for taking part in those elections. the question is, is there a workaround by extending the terms like nigel farage and existing meps? the eu has found ways before for accession states to send people to the european parliament without having elections. is there a way of getting around it? would you be the list is in the parlour? he wouldn't get any significant committee chairmanships. it is not up to keep the half stat because if we are a

member state we will be in the election. also nigel farage will ta ke election. also nigel farage will take the case to the european court ofjustice after take the case to the european court of justice after having take the case to the european court ofjustice after having his democratic rights taken away from him. for those comments to go both ways, because the danger for the eu if they were thinking of refusing as an extension, is the european elections in the north of france, amsterdam and belgium might be dominated by brexit because i know deal brexit would affect those regions badly and they are regions where the populace might seek to prey upon this. it is in the eu's interest not to have no deal outcome before they have had the european elections. so many questions about where we go from here. i want to bring you breaking news before we focus on brexit. donald trump has said the us federal aviation authority will ground the seven 337 max8. they had said previously there

had been no problem and they held that while other countries had banned it flying over their airspace. donald trump was speaking from the white house in the last few minutes. we had a more detailed group of people working on 737 max eight and the 737 max nine airlines. we will have a prohibition to ground the 737 max eight and the nine and plains associated with that line. the white house are leaning on the faa, some concern the faa was too close to boeing. the civil aviation authority in the uk and aviation authorities within europe had banned the 737 max eight from flying in european airspace and now the

americans following suit. so the ball is back in boeing‘s court. breaking news from the united states. let‘s remind you about the vote we are confident will go ahead in westminster. the so—called malthouse compromise amendment. the government would have to seek an extension to article 50. the mechanism of the uk leaving the eu, until the 22nd of may. they would demand the government seek mutual standpoints agreements between the uk and the eu until 2021, in other words buying transition from the eu. and they are also demanding that the uk government guarantee the rights of european citizens are living in the uk. that would be the malthouse amendment and we might get someone moving the caroline spelman amendment to take no deal off the table altogether and then we will

get a motion itself. andrew neil will be with you for special programme at the top of the programme at the top of the programme but lets go into the house of commons and here at liam fox, the international trade secretary speaking. the labour leader did not wa nt speaking. the labour leader did not want another referendum and now he does want another referendum, despite the fact the shadow foreign secretary says it is telling labour voters they are stupid. the shadow brexit secretary once a referendum but won‘t put down an amendment. labour said they wanted to end free movement of people, now they want to be part of the single movement all over again. they said they want an independent trade policy but what they have is legally impossible because the european union rules do not allow a third country to have an influence on eu trade policy. mr speaker... i have made clear that in the nine minutes which i accepted to give other members time and i will not be giving way. mr speaker, for

much of this debate i did not recognise the country that was being described as the country that i live in. a country that is seen by many as isolated, inept, intimidated by its own future. i believe in the future of this country. we are not passengers in our own destiny, we are able to control our own future. it isa are able to control our own future. it is a country with exports at record levels, a country which, last year when globalforeign record levels, a country which, last year when global foreign direct investment fell 40%, it went up 20% in the united kingdom. a country with employment at an all—time high, more consecutive quarters of growth than any other g7 country and a country which is producing these results under good conservative management. and nor did i understand the picture painted about the preparation already made for no deal. we have spent a great deal of

time and our civil service has spent a great deal of time on the mitigations. pharmaceutical companies ensuring adequate stocks, increased air freight capacity. we have set a new tariff policies for day one, liberalising the economy so 87% of our imports will be tariff free. setting up a trade remedy is authority to protect the steel industry and the ceramics. the eu has also made its own preparations. we need to keep some balance in this debate. i am we need to keep some balance in this debate. iam not we need to keep some balance in this debate. i am not giving way.” we need to keep some balance in this debate. i am not giving way. i am not giving way. order! the member for rushcliffe is seeking to intervene... it is for the secretary of state to decide. as i understand that he is aware of the intended intervention but does not wish to ta ke intervention but does not wish to

take it. i want to answer the direct question asked of me earlier. i want to a nswer question asked of me earlier. i want to answer a direct question asked by the right honourable memberfor normanton pontefract castleford. is the of this vote that the default position is that we will not leave the eu on the 29th of march without a withdrawal agreement? that is the result of the motion that we are debating tonight. what i have to say to the right honourable lady, the only way to take no deal off the table in the longer term is to have a negotiated deal. unless we are to revoke article 50 and have no brexit. there is no worse outcome for this house and this country and our democracy than to have no

brexit. we have been given a clear instruction by the people of britain. in the days of head, we in this house must decide... that is the international trade secretary closing the debate on the half of the government making the point that if the house approves the government‘s motion this evening. they will take no deal off the table for the march 29 departure. but that doesn‘t mean it will be coming off the table altogether. it is an indication of where the house stands. the only way, he says, to ta ke stands. the only way, he says, to take no deal off the table is to vote through a negotiated deal or to revoke article 50. in other words, no brexit. we expect the house will approve the government motion only because the prime minister, sitting next to liam fox, is going to vote

for the motion. but we will find out in the company of andrew neil who will take you through the next hour on our bbc news special and bbc two viewers will bejoining on our bbc news special and bbc two viewers will be joining us for that. you join us live from the heart of westminster, across the nation on bbc two and the bbc news channel, and from across the globe on bbc world news on another crucial night for brexit, the future of the uk, and the european union. last night, the house of commons again rejected prime minister theresa may‘s deal for leaving the eu, again by a huge majority. tonight, mps are voting on whether we now leave the eu on march 29th with no deal, currently the legal default position now the commons has rejected theresa may‘s deal. the vote is about to take place, john bercow now. i thank her for her

courtesy in telling me in the house, but i am advised that the signatory, the right honourable lady, does.” do welcome the assurances that the minister... i welcome the clarity. she wishes... don‘t tell me it is not moved! order! i know perfectly well what i am doing! the amendment is in the ownership of the house, the right honourable lady has decided she does not wish to move it, another member does, it is really a very simple point for an experienced parliamentarian. the question is that amendment a be made, as many as are of that opinion say aye! aye! of the contrary, no! no! division, clear the