welcome to bbc news. the next i'm christian fraser if that fails, clearly, the next step will be considering whether we live at westminster. the headlines at 8pm. have a people's vote or a general election to resolve the matter. mps have approved a government getting a general election, as you motion on delaying brexit. it's a victory for the prime know, is tricky. you have tried and minister, who will hold another vote on her deal. failed. why have you been so relu cta nt to failed. why have you been so reluctant to move to that policy of having another referendum because there are now two options left— mike there are so many mps in your one is to vote for the deal, own party desperate for you to get get it through and leave behind it, and if you did, it might behind it, and if you did, it might in an orderly way and be something that could go through the second is a long delay. the house of commons. we've laid out but the last few days have also a staged approach to this, the first put a responsibility on the prime minister. step was to stop no deal which was first, to publicly accept such a disaster for step was to stop no deal which was such a disasterfor our step was to stop no deal which was such a disaster for our country, step was to stop no deal which was such a disasterfor our country, the second thing was to defer article 50 that her deal and no deal are no and now we want to try to see whether there is a majority for any longer viable options. deal because if there were a referendum, you would have to have a deal to put to it. referendum, you would have to have a dealto put to it. but referendum, you would have to have a deal to put to it. but you are mps narrowly rejected an amendment leaving it quite late, aren't you? you are saying you are working proposed by labour mp hilary benn, towards it but at what point do you which would have given parliament actually move to it? actually, we control of the brexit process. already have moved it in the house of commons, as a matter of fact. but you've not voted for it, you had the chance to vote for it and you abstain. we did not vote for it

tonight because the amendment which was put down prevented all the other options being considered and we could not vote for that, we did not vote against it, we abstained and thatis vote against it, we abstained and that is the position, we are trying to get a sensible, mature approach to get a sensible, mature approach to this. the house of commons as everybody knows, the business is decided by the prime minister, we are the opposition, this is not a crisis for labour, it is a crisis for the tory party in an absolutely catastrophic position, putting jobs in the future of the country at sta ke. in the future of the country at stake. some people think this is a crisis for parliament. it is a crisis for parliament. it is a crisis for parliament. it is a crisis for the whole house of commons, and actually, you could all work together and come up with something you can agree on?” work together and come up with something you can agree on? i would agree with that, we have proposed negotiating guidelines. we believe we know they are acceptable as a basis for conversations with the eu because they have told us that. the thing which remains is, can we show there is a majority for something which is not mrs may's deal? it has gone down by two massive majorities on two separate occasions. jon trickett, thank you, the view from

labour that we will find out more about what they are proposing in the coming weeks tomorrow. —— there, and we will find out. thank you to vicki young and your guest in a central lobby. it has been dramatic and it has kept the crowds interested outside parliament. let's have a look. there they are, representing all kinds of strands of opinion around this debate. we have the familiar you get fun and the familiar eu ban and the unionjack fun and the familiar eu ban and the union jack and all fun and the familiar eu ban and the unionjack and all kinds of flags but really representing the various people who, and let'sjust but really representing the various people who, and let's just reflect on this, nearly three years after the referendum that took place in 2016, they are outside the palace of westminster, still arguing about the merits, the pros and cons of brexit and the prime minister has gone away. she will ask for an extension to the process when she goes to that summit next week. that is all from me and the team here. plenty more coverage right now on the bbc news channel and bbc world news with my

colleague christian fraser. goodbye for now. good evening. another historic night in the house of commons. we will be bringing you plenty of reaction in the next few hours, to the results of tonight's votes. and there is plenty to talk about. if you arejustjoining us, a quick reminder that mps have tonight approved the government's motion to delay brexit, beyond the 29th march. the motion was backed by 412 mps — with 202 voting against the motion. the motion set out two scenarios, either a short extension untiljune 30th to give the house time to approve the negotiated withdrawal agreement and get all the necessary legislation through. or in the absence of an agreement

on the prime minister's deal, the likelihood of a much longer extension, with the prospect of the uk taking part in the european elections in may. this was the moment the speaker announced the result. this was the moment the speaker announced the result. the ayes to the right, 412. the noes to the left, 202. thank you. the ayes to the right, 412. the noes to the left, 202. so the ayes have it, the ayes have it. unlock. a slightly better evening for the government than last night. with me now is dia chakravarty, brexit editor at the telegraph. i understand it was a right old ding—dong in the cabinet today after everything that happened yesterday

that the prime minister will be reassured with how things went today? it seems a little bit like that. it seems like only 85 people voted for a second referendum, which has taken the steam out of the remains a little bit. an extension is going to happen until the 30th ofjune, provided that mps vote for her deal. it puts the arg types in a tight place, putting the pressure on them. one factor that we must remember is whether she can bring in the meaningful vote for the third time to this parliament depends a lot on the speaker. whether the speaker deems it substantially changed in order to put it in front of the parliament. there is every chance that he won't see it substantially changed to put it in front of parliament and that hurdle remains. the other thing would be the legal point, which is given that

parliament has not been able to provide us with a solution, if not theresa may's deal, the legal date remains the 29th of march because it's hasn't been taken off the statute books yet. it has been a slightly better evening, but they are still very much ina evening, but they are still very much in a tight spot here with several brexiteers and eurosceptics voting against it, even with some legal tinkering. absolutely. you were talking about these bigger because it was interesting today. he did play a role in not selecting an amendment which would have ruled out a people's vote moving forward. he selected a different one, which might have allowed a second referendum. so when you started by saying there was a ding—dong i thought you were going to mention the ding—dong happening between tory mps and the speaker when an amendment which i think a board of cross—party mps

which was put in front of the spigot saying that we are not going to have a second referendum, the speaker didn't select that. the speaker was saying it did have the breadth of opinion, but nobody was quite sure what he meant given the cross—party support. it has been an exhausting day. at the end of an exhausting week. stay with me because we will cross over to the lobby and speak to achieve political correspondent. bear with us. a bit of noise by maker were a bit of a row. lets get reaction today to what has been going on in the house of commons.

the reality is that brexit could still be delayed. it is still possible to deliver brexit on the 29th of march with a deal. the time is obviously very short and it will be extremely difficult, but that is what we are trying to do. what happened tonight was that a second referendum was emphatically rejected with a majority of mps against that, also, the idea that the labour party's proposals were defeated. and the motion that passed allowed for delivering the deal, but of course we need a meaningful vote and a majority of mps in favour of that. you are a long way off that. how do you propose may be by next week to persuade those people in your party to get behind a deal that they absolutely hate?

the truth is there are fewer options and one of the problem so far has been that there have been lots of different options on the table but not a majority for any of them. the house has increasingly made clear what it does not support, a second referendum. last night despite my vote in the other way, the has made it clear that leaving without a deal is unacceptable. that narrows down the options and there are two left — one is to vote for the deal, get it through and leave in an orderly way. the second is a long delay. i think that would be a disaster. i am emphatically against that because it wouldn't solve anything and what is clearly in the national interest is to vote for the deal and to implement the deal and then get on with all the other things we want to do to make this country a great place to live. how will you persuade the dup for

example, there are rumours that the attorney general might have some more legal advice up his sleeve. is that the plan? i don't know about that and i haven't had that discussion with the attorney general 01’ discussion with the attorney general or indeed the dup, not least because running the health service is my day job and takes up most of my time. what i do know is that the number of options is reducing, and that forces people to really think and do people really think that a long delay would bea really think that a long delay would be a good idea? emphatically not. i think we should get on with it. that is the strong sense i have, that people want, broadly, of the options that are left on the table? i think it went much more smoothly for you tonight, but the repercussions for your party and government. we've heard the way that conservative mps are speaking about each other and the argument is

a p pa re ntly each other and the argument is apparently at cabinet today. how can you carry on as a functioning government in any meaningful way when that is going on? i entirely understand the very strong feelings that this subject inspires, both in the public and the nation and of course here in the house of commons because we broadly reflect the nation. was there a row in cabinet? actually, if anything it was cathartic. people were frank but it was done in very much a spirit where in the end we readable our resolve to get this through and to deliver on what i very strongly believe is the national interest. people have strong views, of course they do, and people want politicians to have strong views. my very strong view is the prime ministers deal is the best way to deliver on the referendum result and i want to deliver on it by the 29th of march. that is what i

wa nt to by the 29th of march. that is what i want to see and i very much hope thatis want to see and i very much hope that is going to be the option we get to vote on next week. i very much hope we get another meaningful vote and i very much hope it carries and then we can get on with all the other stuff. thank you very much indeed. we will have to see how many of matt hancock's colleagues agree with him that will be the way forward. another of those eurosceptics on the backbenches today saying they would not vote with this deal, come what may. they want substantial changes to it. now there were a series of other votes tonight on proposed amendments to the government's motion. the first, put forward by sarah wolloston of the independent group, called for a delay, to allow time for a second referendum. that was overwhelmingly defeated by 249 votes. only 85 mps voting for it. the second was an amendment put forward by the chair of the brexit committee hilary benn, would have set aside time for a debate on the alternative ways forward.

controversial, because it would have wrested control and the business of the house away from the government — but that too was defeated. albeit narrowly, by two votes. 314-312. i should say that david lidington indicated this afternoon that if theresa may's deal is defeated in the coming weeks, then the government will itself create time in the parliamentary calendar, two weeks after the eu summit, to discuss those alternatives. which perhaps explains why the third amendment, put forward by labour, which demanded pretty much the same thing was defeated 318 to 302. with me now is dia is still here with me and we arejoined by faiza shaheen — director of class think tank. i'm joined by the bbc‘s reality check correspondent chris morris. the government has ‘s motion set out a couple of motions. a short delay to get through the legislation needed with that and also the longer delay. the government said there was a longer delay we would have to take

pa rt longer delay we would have to take part in the european elections in may. he was something that perhaps the government and the european commission agreed. they say we would have to take part in the elections, not least because they would argue that a new european parliament would essentially not be constituted validly if it began sitting injuly and there hadn't been elections in every member state. interestingly, the legal opinion is divided. the european parliament's and legal service, a controversial opinion, says quite the opposite. it would be 0k. the uk says quite the opposite. it would be ok. the uk would be breaching its obligations under the treaty but is that such a big deal? for a country trying to leave anyway? there are illegal officials out there, notably a leading britishjudge, who said today, there are ways that can be found of the political will is there for a longer extension, well past those european elections, ways can be found to produce a legal

mechanism which will mean parliament is fine. the argument is it is not about holding elections, it is about the uk having representation. what might the options be? would you keep the mps in situ or would you re—elect them? i spoke to someone that said article 50 doesn't mean transition at all, but it could have a transition period. that seems like there could bea period. that seems like there could be a precedent the other possibility, is what happens when a country comes into the eu and sometimes countries her prom in halfway through a parliamentary term. the national mps, certainly

people from this place, then get appointed for specific times to represent their country in the european parliament. then critically there would be uk representation that there wouldn't be election. but this is all uncharted legal territory. that would be an aberration for people who voted for brexit and eurosceptic mps across the road. there would be a legal challenge wouldn't there, if the government tried to take the uk towards these elections or find a way to wound it? you can imagine a star chamber like a sort of panel. you talk about the lawyers who work for the european research group. you talk about the lawyers who work for the european research groupm was interesting to hear about the eu a lwa ys was interesting to hear about the eu always managing to find a way of working out a legal solution to political problems. this is exactly what geoffrey cox's team the eu could be plus a little bit further to make the withdrawal agreement a bit more palatable to the mps here. cani bit more palatable to the mps here. can i add one other thing. we were

talking about how much of the government's task is done in one complication is also faces is even if all the er gp bought now all vote for the third version of the deal —— all erg people. that's after is the speaker allows it. if you then convinces all bcolleagues, five or six by my count, she will need 25 labour mps to vote for it. if the deal comes back, she might have some collea g u es deal comes back, she might have some colleagues to vote for it, but some labour mps will not want to be part of it. what is going on at the moment, there are reports that the attorney general geoffrey cox is tweaking his legal advice, presumably with those on the conservative benches who proposed the deal. in which direction might he tweak it? who knows? frankly.

does he have the legal backbone? he is an independent lawyer and the certainly does. he said these are my best endeavours, here's what i think. there's talk about does the vienna convention allow treaties to be overridden under certain circumstances? that is one possible outcome he could look at. he could possibly tweak it a bit but it seems to me that earlier in the week... lawyer and not a politician. yes, and feelings are pretty entrenched. there are a group of people, and steve baker said this, the mp in parliament clearly, come what may, we will not vote for this deal. marcus fysh, another of the hardliners, said i'd rather say in the eu for another 21 month than lead with this deal. the status quo is better. there are gradations of opinion in the european research

group. it's no means a done deal evenif group. it's no means a done deal even if it's moved the corners. thank you both very much for the moment. i should say arlene foster is, the leader of the dup from northern ireland said today the legal test for her is whether there is any change to the constitutional integrity of the united kingdom, can just be cox, the attorney—general, convince her and bring her to be governmentside? let's go back to the lobby to achieve political correspondent vicki young. the government will be pretty relieved. there are many who thought they would win the vote and that hasn't happened for a while. it's worth remembering that the government are going to ask the eu for a delay to brexit, so their plans in that sense are not on track at all. let's speak to the snp mp stephen gethins who is

with me now, where does this leave leave us now? the idea of mps taking control has failed, does this mean theresa may can try again? we are almost 1000 days after the eu referendum, almost the year is on, and we see chaos and confusion at the heart of the governor but also the heart of the governor but also the labour party as well. although i think and extension is a step in the direction because the government has brought this together after all this time, we need to find a way through this. the snp is working with our colleagues, the lib dems, but greens, like and some labour members for the people's vote, but when you have a government party that is so divided, a labour party that continues to sit on its hands 16 days out from brexit, that's a sorry & state of affairs. this is a parliament in crisis and we need to find a way forward. the idea of another referendum for you, tap and

u nless another referendum for you, tap and unless jeremy corbyn another referendum for you, tap and unlessjeremy corbyn gets behind it and he won't do that as we saw tonight, so your idea was absolutely rejected? labour didn't get behind it. this is meant to be labour party policy, it was passed by a labour party conference and again we have seen the labour party let the tories off the hook. we had years of this. but this is serious. tonight we are talking about process and getting through this but let's not forget we know from the government's own analysis that a no—deal brexit, that theresa may's deal, will costjobs, hurt public services and take away opportunities and rights from uk citizens. we know that from the government's own analysis watches why it is critical we do all we can to offset the worst excesses of brexit, find a way through it and thatis brexit, find a way through it and that is why we are proposing with collea g u es that is why we are proposing with colleagues in other parties to give asa colleagues in other parties to give as a final say on this. if that doesn't happen, d government has said they will give mps a chance to

have the so cool indicative vote to find a way through, it what happens if the numbers stay the same? in the end they will have to be a deal of some kind or all of the house of commons will inflict no deal on the country? we voted to end a half yea rs country? we voted to end a half years ago. to enter half years ago, the scottish government put together a panel of colleagues from other parties, experts from the european court ofjustice, to find a way through, the uk government didn't even engage. we are in a parliament whereby the uk government only seems to be involving the dup, a minority evenin to be involving the dup, a minority even in northern ireland, and what one conservative party described as a head—banger wing of the conservative party. that is no way to do this issue, she should have reached out to other parties. but theresa may has been driven to the extreme. i can update to make my constituents poorer and less well

off, to take away rights and opportunities i myself have had. we must work with colleagues from other parties but we must not forget, scotla nd parties but we must not forget, scotland voted to remain and one way 01’ scotland voted to remain and one way or another we need the option to remain part of the eu as we were told by our voters in scotland. thank you. that is the view from the snp. let's have a reminder of the debate earlier which came just before all those folks happened. we can hearfrom before all those folks happened. we can hear from both before all those folks happened. we can hearfrom both the labour side and the government. in her closing remarks yesterday the prime minister said the house needed to say not what it didn't want, but what it did want. and it is a fair point. but the problem we face is due to her refusal to give us that opportunity at the start of the process. and she herself went to the eu 27 not with clarity with what she wanted, but red lines on what she didn't want.

red lines that forced her into a corner and produced this damaging deal that damages the country, and has been rejected twice by historic margins. so what is her reaction, mr speaker? try again. it was my right honourable friend who coined the phrase "meaningful vote" when seeking to ensure that parliament had a role in this process. it is a phrase that the pime minister has embraced, we've had meaningful votes one and two. but can meaningful vote three be meaningful in any sense of the word? on 26 february, the prime minister set out the process for this week, vote on her deal, vote on no deal, then vote on an extension. and she set out the options to be considered at that stage. her deal, no deal, another deal, or a public vote?

mr speaker, this week, we have ruled out two of those options, so we should now be looking at the other two, and seeing what consensus can be built as honourable members have pointed out... mr speaker, the chancellor was right when he reminded the nation that this morning on the radio, the 2016 referendum decision was carried by a narrow margin. a painfully narrow margin, not the overwhelming mandate that some opposite claim. it was tony blair who said that the way to stop brexit was first to vote against the prime minister's deal, then to vote against no deal, then to seek a long extension.

it is votes on tuesday, wednesday to tonight, this is the precise script followed by the leader of the opposition. perhaps he should share with us whether it was tony or peter or alistair who wrote it for him? how proud they must be with his late conversion to the cause. his approach has become more davos than don valley. they will remember the painting from banksy that went through the shredder. indeed, one member had on his christmas card. the reality is in his approach this week, he is shredding the votes of 17.4 million people in this country, with his turning his back on the referendum. going back on his word from his own manifesto, failing to listen even to his own front bench, the member for ashton—under— lyme was saying just last night that it would be disastrous for us

to go back to the people, the very issue that others in his party are campaigning for. mr speaker, this is a time for responsibility, yet we have a motion from the leader of the opposition that ducks the choice, the time, the clarity, and any sense of national responsibility. it is time for this house to act in the national interest, it is time to put forward an extension that is realistic. i commend the motion put forward by the government to the house. stephen barclay, the brexit secretary speaking just before the vote. with me faiza shaheen, the director of the class think tank. have you with us. lots of people scratch their heads this evening, there was a very honest second referendum, is labour party policy and yet no labour mps voted for it? political tactics, that is what is happening right now. it seems above my pay grade! essentially the

sequences really important. even alistair campbell, who is not a fan ofjeremy corbyn, said today is not the day for a people's vote. what we needed to do today was have extended and unfortunately with the amendment by hilary benn that failed to put forward some other ideas, to listen to parliament and see if there is something we can coalesce around. but what the numbers revealed on the second referendum is there is not majority right now will there ever bea majority right now will there ever be a majority or has this vote but the nail in the common coffin? it's this deal or the referendum and a lot of people will say that we will prefer lot of people will say that we will p refer to lot of people will say that we will prefer to go back to the people, it isa prefer to go back to the people, it is a bad deal. jeremy corbyn talked about the need for compromise, for mps to coalesce around something. again and again, people have said this deal is did the divorce. everything is you pay for with the

political declaration, i know there is not much compromise from the conservatives, we will talk about that separately, but why is there no, most from labourfront that separately, but why is there no, most from labour front bench? the compromise is the permanent customs union plan. there is a lot of pressure from within jeremy kerley microbe the labour party membership for gorban for a second referendum —— for corbyn to go forward with a second vote. her vote has gone twice, historically badly, yet she puts her handover her ears and says i don't wa nt to handover her ears and says i don't want to hear of any other solution to this problem right now that should upset everyone because our mps are not representing us, their voices are not being here right now. —— our voices are not being heard. mps have voted to extend article 50 be on the 29 march deadline, the motion was approved for 12, two 202. a slightly better evening for

theresa may, all motions were defeated but the government still very much in a tight spot. stay with us very much in a tight spot. stay with us for this bbc news special. welcome to bbc news — i'm christian fraser live at westminster. ayes to the right 412. noes to the left 202. mps have approved a government motion on delaying brexit — this result means the prime minister can continue to deliver her version of brexit and hold another meaningful vote. there are now two options left— one is to vote for the deal, get it through and leave in an orderly way and the second is a long delay. but the last few days have also put a responsibility on the prime minister. first, to publicly accept

that her deal and no deal are no longer viable options. mps have rejected an amendment proposed by labour mp hilary benn, which would have given parliament control of the brexit process. parliamentarians vote by a large margin not to hold a second referendum on the uk's membership of the european union. good evening and welcome to westminster. it's been another historic night in the house of commons. we will be bringing you plenty of reaction in the next few hours, to the results of tonight's votes. if you arejustjoining us, a quick reminder that mp‘s have tonight approved the government's motion to delay brexit beyond the 29th march by 412 votes to 202. the motion sets out two scenarios, either a short extension untiljune 30th to give the house time to approve the negotiated withdrawal agreement and get all the necessary legislation through.

or in the absence of an agreement on the prime minister's deal, the likelihood, says the government, of a much longer extension, with the prospect of the uk taking part in the european elections in may. this was the moment the speaker announced the result. ayes to the right, 412. noes to the left, 202. ayes to the right, 412. noes to the left, 202. the ayes have it. unlock. we can cross to brussels and speak to our europe editor katya adler. they would have been watching in brussels. do they take away from tonight vote that there still isn't really a ny tonight vote that there still isn't really any consensus on anything?

notjust tonight's really any consensus on anything? not just tonight's but yesterday... to the eu it seems that parliament is in to the eu it seems that parliament isina to the eu it seems that parliament is in a maelstrom of division and throughout the brexit process we have heard from the eu is chief brexit negotiator saying that it is no good you telling us that what you don't want in brexit, you have to start telling us what you do want. there is frustration and irritation and fatigue amongst leaders of these factions amongst government, chasing their ideal— whether it is the ideal brexit or the ideal to stay in the eu or have another vote on membership in the uk. they say we have to put this aside and unite around one idea. either a negotiated deal that we made with theresa may all you have to come up with a realistic alternative. as for the extensions, with all of the sound and fury that we've had in westminster this week, when it comes

to that extension, it is eu leaders who have the final say. they could say yes or no, how long, and what conditions could be attached. we are told today that donald tusk is going to be touring europe over the next few days, urging eu leaders to opt for a longer extension. you could see that two ways— he is trying to focus minds in the commons as to what might happen if they don't pass the deal, or if you are a brexiteer, this might be the european union thinking if we extend it for a long time, brexit might go away. ican away. i can assure you he is not going to be urging fora i can assure you he is not going to be urging for a longer extension if theresa may appears that she will get the negotiated deal with the eu over the line. if she holds this other meaningful vote on the deal and she gets it through, she almost gets it through, then when she has

ahead of her meeting with eu leaders at the eu summit a week from now, she might say she can do this with a short extension, get it over the line. to be honest, there is not an appetite in the eu to have a long extension because it is going to overs ha d ow extension because it is going to overshadow not just the extension because it is going to overshadow notjust the european shadow elections in may, whether or not the uk takes part in them, but also all sorts of other business. there will always be the question of brexit. and you have government departments dedicated to it, european and uk businesses that continue to exist in a sea of uncertainty. the eu wants to put an end to this and the idea that they might have a long extension resulting in a general election perhaps or a second referendum, a result that could also prove inconclusive, that is a nightmare scenario. that said, eu leaders don't want a no—deal brexit for their own economic and political

reasons s0 however their own economic and political reasons so however frustrated they are, they are likely to say yes to a long extension if it means that there won't be a no—deal brexit. i'm joined by chuka umunna from the independent group of mps. welcome. let's talk about the amendment put forward by sarah wollaston on the people vote, the second referendum. it was defeated very heavily. only 85 mps voting for it. does that mean it's dead? no way! the labour party has put forward its alternative deal and it has been defeated pretty heavily. the prime minister as you have been reporting has been defeated heavily twice on her deal so we are not going to be making the argument and every possible opportunity putting forward amendments so that this can be put forward to the people so they can resolve this mess. you have got the leadership of the two main parties conniving to stop people from having

their say on the form of brexit that we follow. until one of those leadership votes for their thing, it can't happen. some would say it wasn't politically astute because alastair campbell, among others, who support a people's vote, said this was not the time. on the other hand you just have shown up the other hand you just have shown up the labour party who didn't vote for it at all. the labour party needs to abide by the spirit of its conference motion which was, having exhausted the possibility of having a general election, putting its own deal to the house of commons, the labour party said it would support a people vote. despite the valiant effort of many mps who supported it, they cannot seem to move the leadership. we have to make a decision as mps and alistair campbell, with all respect, is not a member of parliament. for us to kind of pull up

parliament. for us to kind of pull up stumps and not actually make an argument for what should happen in the house of commons, we might as well pack up and go home. so we are saying we are going to keep on making the argument that a principal way of resolving this is through a people vote. tens of thousands of people vote. tens of thousands of people have gone onto the website to explain they want to see an alternative and they are supporting what we are doing. that is what democracy is about. what i would say to all of those who say the time is not quite right, we are less than 20 days away from brexit. if not now, when? i don't actually have any more time to waste on this. the extraordinary thing was having not supported the amendment this evening in the house of commons, jeremy corbyn then gets on the dispatch box and says he does support a people's vote. if you support it, vote for it. what about the other amendment this evening? an attempt by backbench mps and hilary benn to wrest back

control from the government. it also failed, albeit narrowly. the government said it will set out a mechanism in a few weeks' time to do that. how would it work and how do you think it will evolve? i had you think it will evolve? ihad an you think it will evolve? i had an exchange with the de facto prime minister david leavitt in turn —— david led england. i asked prime minister david leavitt in turn —— david led england. iasked him what he meant when they said they would allow for this process and they are saying that in the two weeks after the european council which starts next week, then the two weeks after, there will be some kind of indicative vote process where the different options are laid out before the house of commons and we vote on them to determine where the majority lies. we have been saying in the independent group that they should have been done ages ago. the leadership of the established parties like to keep kicking the can down the road. basically for party political reasons. actually

parliament needs to make a decision 110w parliament needs to make a decision now so parliament needs to make a decision now so it seems we parliament needs to make a decision now so it seems we are parliament needs to make a decision now so it seems we are going to have an indicative vote process and i heard your entry to this piece, not such a bad day for the prime minister. don't forget, she went down to a huge defeat on tuesday and 110w down to a huge defeat on tuesday and now is faced with a situation where she is happy to extend article 50 so that we have more time to resolve this, which wasn't what i think she wanted. i also said she is still in a tight spot. lovely to see you. thanks for joining us. now there were a series of other votes tonight on proposed amendments to the government's motion. the first, put forward by sarah wolloston of the independent group, called for a delay, to allow time for a second referendum. the second an amendment put forward by the chair of the brexit committee hilary benn, would have set aside time for a debate on the alternative ways forward. controversial, because it would have wrested control

and the business of the house away from the government — but that too was defeated. the government motion went through. as we were saying. by 412—202. we can cross to our chief political correspondent vicki young who is in the central lobby of the houses of parliament. iam sure i am sure we will get to some guests ina minute. i am sure we will get to some guests in a minute. everyone reflecting on what is going on here and the big picture away from all of the parliamentary detail is that after everything has happened, we are now ina everything has happened, we are now in a position where if the eu agree, brexit will be delayed. we just don't know how long for and what the circumstances will be. very clear from the government and theresa may and ministers that they are going to have another go with her deal. what changes she can get to that is unclear. there are rumours about a

change in legal advice, something to do with that from geoffrey cox before next week. there are does technically need to be a change before it is put to a vote again. still looking very difficult for the prime minister. it will be very difficult for her to get it through. the hope is that there are those in her own party saying the idea of a long delay is not something they wa nt long delay is not something they want and they hate their deal but they are going to have to get behind it because they don't know what the alternatives might be. those alternatives might be. those alternatives could be mps trying to ta ke alternatives could be mps trying to take control in some kind of way further down the track and no one knows where it will lead. the glimmer of hope to the prime minister is people like david davies, the man who resigned as brexit secretary and left the cabinet because he hated what she was doing so much, he did vote for it. alongside him some other brexiteers as well. that will be something the prime minister will be able to seize on and say, if people

like him realise this is the best way forward they can persuade other ones as well. a couple of other tory mps tonight listening to what is going on in there. it was defeated tonight but it wasn't so close that they do know the numbers are almost there and itjust takes a couple more people in orderfor that to be the case, that mps could then seize control. it was only a narrow defeat. with me now is henry newman, the director of open europe think tank and former labour adviser ayesha hazarika. nice to see you both. aisha, tonight labour will be disappointed that they weren't able to take control of they weren't able to take control of the process. push the government towards some of these indicative votes. it was very tight, just two votes in it. it wasn't just it was very tight, just two votes in it. it wasn'tjust hilary benn, it was a cross—party delegation. they we re was a cross—party delegation. they were trying to push the prime minister into notjust negotiating

with the erg but actually negotiating with the house. it could help strike out things that parliament didn't like and narrow down the choices where a consensus could be reached. i think in some ways this strengthens her arm a little bit when it comes back to that meaningful vote but remember, the tories are still very divided and many conservatives voted against and many conservatives voted against an extension. many in her cabinet as well. andrea leadsom, liz truss. the tragedy about where we might end up as we may end up being bullied, parliament might end up being bullied into a vote it doesn't want. that is not what the brexit dream is all about. when you look at some of the comments over the last 24 hours, tension is again being focused on theresa may's deal. i'm looking at those who say they are not going to vote for it come what may. andrea jenkins, mark francois. they are not

going to move without a substantial change to the deal. that is not up for a vote. it is done and the options are narrowing. david davis literally resigned over the prime minister is checkers policy and he is backing the deal. again voting for an extension tonight. some brexiteers are realising that the brexit they might have preferred is not on offer. some are voting against the brexit policy and some labour supporters of a second referendum were not voting for the second referendum tonight. the prime minister has retained control tonight very, very narrowly. just two votes in it that he has stayed in control. it is crucial. it is clear that if she doesn't get her deal through fast, they will take control away from her and anything could happen. i was going to say, i

have heard speculation they might even be a fourth vote on tuesday. then you bring in the speaker and the narrow defeat, it's very likely the third vote is the last? it surely has to be. hilary benn made a point of order at the end, saying we will be coming back on the 25th of march and the government will bring back an amendable motion and hilary benn will come back. i suspect this time he will. if we haven't made substantial progress. but the big question is what will happen with the extension now? are we going to have a short technical extension or are we going to be in the territory of having to go to the eu and then say to us, general election or a second referendum, you keep paying into the eu and taking our rules, and! into the eu and taking our rules, and i think all hell will break loose at that point. asked about this indicative vote process. there have been interesting reports today about how it would take place, it can even be a secret ballot that mps

would write on pieces of paper? which way they want to take the country? and there will be no gaming yet, it would be a free vote across the house. and indicative vote as been cooked up for some time, mps from across the house have been coming together on this idea since november last year, and they thought it secret ballot would be the easiest way to do it. people being truthful about what they wanted. they did it as an idea of getting stf in parliament. as i said earlier, the problem with theresa may is she is negotiating with the eu and the erg but not the bulk of the house. —— a steer in parliament. this would give us a sense of what the house is inclined towards.|j this would give us a sense of what the house is inclined towards. i can hear brexiteers screaming at the tv at home, saying we voted to leave, we know what we want, you are writing options that you like. the party ca n writing options that you like. the party can coalesce and a majority that isn't negotiable with the eu. but the official vote leave campaign

that won the referendum was clear, their mandate was for a deal. they said we leave part of a free—trade area that stretches from iceland to the russian border, and some leaders from the eu campaign said because we get the deal we know there won't be economic damage. they need to recognise that when goes to europe in 27 and begs for the extension, they will offer her a short extension if he gets it done. even if the brexiteers tried to pivot for a long extension thinking we could get a general election and make this work and get to know deal, that will disappear, it's a completely vanishing option. parliament will coalesce around a much softer brexit. the danger here is ultimately we are talking about an argument over the future and we all accept the binding bits of the divorce deal, no one is arguing about that. you say that. people are, narsingh —— people are coalescing around a customs union. even the business secretary said i'd be prepared to

have more discussions around the more specific about a customs union. even though we may fudge a deal through in this house because we are bullied into it, theresa may may say brexit delay, brexit denied, don't think people will be popular about this, even people like nigel farage are raging about this deal that it is brexit in name only. he's wrong. but for a lot of people its face not facts. i don't think —— face not facts. i don't think this will settle. to get a clear exit, we are bullied into a deal that parliament has rejected twice, is not satisfactory. what the panellist are one on monday night in christ but guarantees that you couldn't —— what the prime minister won on —— monday night was the backstop cannot be used like that. mps should have the

reassurance you know if we are able to put forward workable solutions to what we can get out of the backstop, ta ke what we can get out of the backstop, take control of the trade policy and deliver the brexit that brexiteers voted for. but they said they would bea voted for. but they said they would be a risk we are trapped. you very nicely deed up and axed guest. —— you nicely. ready for our next guest. we will speak to martin how. the labour leader jeremy corbyn spoke immediately after the result — let's listen to wat he say, i have said. after the last few days of government chaos and defeats. all of us government chaos and defeats. all of us have the responsibility to work together to find a solution to the crisis facing this country where the government has so dramatically failed to do so. we have begun to hold meetings with members across the house. to find a consensus and a

compromise that meets the needs of this country. but the last few days have also put a responsibility on the prime minister. first, to publicly accept that both her deal and no deal are simply no longer viable options. and secondly, to bring forward the necessary legislation to amend the exit date of 29 march. tonight i reiterate our conviction that a deal can be agreed based on our alternative plan that can command support across the house. and i also... and i also reiterate our support for a public vote not as a political... not... mr speaker, not as political point scoring but as a realistic option to break the deadlock. the whole

purpose, mr speaker, the whole purpose, mr speaker, the whole purpose ought to be, ought to be protect communities that are stressed and worried. those people are worried about their future of theirjobs and their industries. our job is to try to meet the concerns of the people who sent us here in the first place. jeremy corbyn speaking in the debate a little time ago. before we were listening tojeremy corbyn, we talked about the legal guarantees that the eu is trying to provide on the withdrawal agreement. with me now is the barrister martin howe qc. he is part of the star chamber. you are advising the eurosceptics within the european research group on the conservative benches. the reporting todayis conservative benches. the reporting today is that the attorney—general geoffrey cox is trying to change his legal advice and put more flesh on the bones. have you see in the draft offers legal advice? i have seen

three extra paragraphs which were not in either his original advice to the cabinet or his advice on tuesday. we completely disagree with them. because these suggestions in it are invoking a vienna convention concept or unforeseeable circumstances. fundamental change of unforeseeable circumstances i get up for the backstop. i don't agree with it. ! as a get out. we consulted experts who said this doctrine is only capable of being invoked in the most extreme circumstances. i think this is simply a distraction exercise. the point is you would never advise a client to sign a contract where getting out of it depends on some fancy legal doctrine. this is very important, let's clarify this for one second. jacob rees—mogg asked a question in the house the other day that the

vienna convention which oversees international treaties, good invalidate the backstop —— could invalidate the backstop —— could invalidate the backstop if there is a change in circumstances, you go to msa that is the exit clause out of the deal, whatever the deal says. you are saying no. no, these specific changes they are talking about where is the backstop causes disorder in northern ireland and thatis disorder in northern ireland and that is foreseeable under international law, it might be bad but it definitely, i'm sorry, this is just but it definitely, i'm sorry, this isjust an but it definitely, i'm sorry, this is just an absurd invocation of doctrines. this is a very big problem then for theresa may. we have heard from the democratic union is party in northern ireland who say their test is whether it changes the constitutional integrity of the united kingdom. you are saying there was nothing of the new advice that would change the attorney—general‘s original opinion. all your opinion. no, and quite frankly, i don't think this is credible at all. if this is such a good point, why wasn't it in

his original advice to be cabinet? is he being leaned on politically?” don't know what counts to this, i won't comment on that side of that but we have looked at the substance of it and there is no substance. in that regard, it is notjust us looking at it but distinguished lawyers. it's notjust you but nigel dodds of the dup himself is a lawyer and on this panel that is looking at it. is he saying to the dup, this is not something... what he reports to the dup is up to him. let me take in a different direction. today the advocate general of the uk in brussels said, don't know where her office is but anyway, she says a mechanism can be found for the uk to the involved somehow in the european election. i am the involved somehow in the european election. iam presuming the involved somehow in the european election. i am presuming there would bea election. i am presuming there would be a legal challenge to the uk being in those elections? i certainly

know, i'm not involved in it myself but there is a certain legal challenge by the league means leave organisation. the purpose of this is if the extension goes past the due date, to force the elections, so that may well happen —— the leave means leave. i have had discussions with lawyers in europe and elsewhere is this issue is difficult, you would have to bend the rules to try and avoid holding european elections if we go past that stage was not so they would be a legal challenge. this steve baker, a prominent figure in the temple mugger said i quote, "there are some —— in the erg said there are some things we could prevent brexit going through in the time available. " because the legal telling that coat leaving date is set down in statute is saying that there are ways erg could stop secondary legislation that would change that date, whatever happens

this evening. could you spell out how they would do that?” this evening. could you spell out how they would do that? i don't know. because what it requires legally in order to... legally to extend the date requires unanimous consent by every eu member state. you have to get back first. it then requires —— you have to get that first. then requires on our side legislation to go through the resolution in each house of parliament, so there must be a positive vote in need has to do it. —— in each house to do it. positive vote in need has to do it. -- in each house to do it. it would happen before march 29. i therefore presuming is you could filibuster it? i haven't been privy to... but there is a parliamentary hurdle that they put up to stop it. indeed but there was a more fundamental point here what we are being threatened with his a prime minister who seems to have abandoned her commitment

that we should leave on 29 march and she is threatening those who want brexit with a long extension which would mean as not leaving for four and a half years after the referendum, longer than the second world war i think. absolutely ridiculous. but actually, her problem is that that is not nearly as bad as her deal. because ideal would have the same —— her deal would have the same —— her deal would have the same —— her deal would have the same thing dressed up asa would have the same thing dressed up as a transition period, we obey all eu laws and pay money, the big difference is with an extended period, we still have a vote and we would not be subject to the backstop at the far end of it. so actually we are much better off without her deal, even if it leads to a 21 month extension. very interesting to get your thoughts, thank you very much. all eyes turn to next week —

when more mps will be asked to change their minds and back theresa may's deal, along with a short delay to brexit, or face a much longer delay if it's rejected. our deputy political editor john pienaar has been looking at how the next stages of brexit may play out. theresa may never wanted this, but she's been weakened by defeat after defeat in the commons. her aim now, with less than a week till the next eu summit, to somehow win round 75 or more tory brexiteers, democratic unionists, leave—supporting labour mps who want a brexit deal. it's a big ask, so theresa may will be calling another big debate, another big vote before she faces eu leaders and asks for the delay in leaving. time is running out to finally support this battered prime minister or start to thrash out a new plan for brexit. so, aside from mrs may's plan, what are the other options? mps will try to drum up support from behind the scenes. well, some on both sides, including cabinet ministers like amber rudd, would like a brexit closer to the eu, a bit like norway's. sticking with eu market laws

and standards, maybe also the eu customs system. no new trade tariffs or border checks, no problem avoiding stops and checks on the irish border, but it also means no new trade deals around the world. jeremy corbyn and labour want a customs union. he says he can negotiate terms to his liking. then there's another referendum. mps were never likely to back a referendum this evening, but the so—called people's vote campaigners will be back. what will the eu make of it all? in brussels next week, eu leaders must decide whether to grant a brexit delay at all. signs are they will, but there may be strings attached. will france impose conditions? will spain, where elections are on the way, reopen the sovereignty of gibraltar? and crucially, will they insist on a long delay — a year or more till the brits agree on brexit? the prime minister's hoping fear of a long delay, the possibility of being tied to eu

rules, maybe even a referendum, will persuade or scare mps into backing her deal as the best available. some legal guidance from the attorney general that the uk might, just might, be able to legally break with eu rules if britain feels trapped — that might help rebels climb down too. if she wins, it'll be a triumph. britain could begin the even tougher task of discussing the future after brexit, even if many tory mps and ministers are saying quietly that'll be a job for a new prime minister. and mrs may's time may finally be running out. now if you'rejustjoining — we're here at westminster for another historic night in the house of commons. so quick reminder that mp's have tonight approved the government's motion to delay brexit beyond the 29th march. the motion was backed by 412 mps — with 202 voting against the motion.

the motion set out two scenarios, either a short extension untiljune 30th to give the house time to approve the negotiated withdrawal agreement and get all the necessary legislation through. or in the absence of an agreement on the prime minister's deal, the likelihood of a much longer extension, with the prospect of the uk taking part in the european elections in may. this was the moment the speaker announced the result. the ayes to the right, 412. the noes to the left, 202. thank you. the ayes to the right, 412. the noes to the left, 202. so the ayes have it, the ayes have it. unlock. i'm joined by our political correspondent rob watson.

you have a very interesting fact for us. who says that there is no fun ever impacts it, there are never bizarre moments. stephen barclay, who was the brexit secretary, he was the one who wound up the debate for the government and makes that big argument at the end before everyone votes in favour of the government motion to have an extension to article 50. guess which way he voted ? against it? he voted against it, along with several other ministers. this is a fairly boring evening in the sense that the government didn't lose a vote and it didn't break down entirely, these concepts are relative. what do you propose he does to show his brexit credentials too so that he is against a delay and he wants this to go through as quickly as possible? alongside the other large number of conservative mps, including some other cabinet ministers who voted on

that. they feel rather passionately that. they feel rather passionately that people voted to leave. we gave the date of the 29th of march and thatis the date of the 29th of march and that is when we should leave. i understand that... you understand! the cabinet meeting was quite a feisty affair today and the prime minister is of course desperately trying to regain some control. she had a slightly better evening that those in brussels watching this will say that even if she gets her deal through next week, can she get legislation through in time? there is the short term issue about getting it through, which is of course one of the reasons she has asked for this extension and i suspect if she does get the deal passedit suspect if she does get the deal passed it is a massive if. the really big issue for me, and i think you really big issue for me, and i think you were really big issue for me, and i think you were hinting at this, is that it seems to me we have focused perfectly understandable on the short—term — whether she gets the

deal or a softer brexit. it seems to me even if it were to happen, day one is going to be a nightmare because we often forget this phase of brexit is about the withdrawal agreement and that has proved controversial enough but can you imagine the next phase with this government, this divided conservative party, this divided parliament, and then they have to figure out the future relationship with the eu between britain and the eu, given everything that evolves— i was standing in the world, trade policy and economic policy, what kind of country we are. that is a very big if, if she passes the deal. martin has seen the draft paragraphs that the attorney general wa nts to paragraphs that the attorney general wants to add, this is supposed to reassure the democratic unionist party. nigel dodd sits on the same panel as martin and he says it is not going to fly.

i was speeding ahead but you are right. the biggest question for the next ten minutes in dish politics —— in british politics is whether enough members of the conservative party, those on the pro—brexit right of the party, will they think we don't like the deal but we are going to get behind it? i don't know the a nswer to to get behind it? i don't know the answer to that question. we have seen answer to that question. we have seen it and otherjournalists have seen seen it and otherjournalists have seen it and otherjournalists have seen it as well. some conservative mps are going to come around but it is going to be very close. some have said that we are prepared to sit in the house for 21 months and the government will have to revoke article 50. this conservative government is not going to do that. earlier you had henry on the programme saying, dream on. the longer it goes on the less likely brexit becomes. will the government last that long? who knows. after the vote had finished, matt hancock said tonight vote outlined what mps will not

support going forward. he has has made clear that it does not support a second referendum. last night despite my vote in the other way, the house made clear that leaving without a deal is unacceptable. the house has increasingly made clear what it does not support, a second referendum. last night despite my vote in the other way, the house made it clear that leaving without a deal is unacceptable. that narrows down the options and there are two left — one is to vote for the deal, get it through and leave in an orderly way. the second is a long delay. i think that would be a disaster. i am emphatically against that because it wouldn't solve anything and what is clearly in the national interest is to vote for the deal and to implement the deal and then get on with all the other things we want to do to make this country

a great place to live. that was the health secretary matt hancock talking about what was a reasonably good night for the government, but let's talk about the vote and who might have voted against the government tonight. there were a series of... 12 cabinet members who abstained or voted against. with me now is sebastian payne — whitehall correspondent for the financial times and maddy thimont—jack from the institute for government. i should get that right. there were 12 and there was one who voted against it. what happened tonight? it is quite extraordinary that you had all these ministers who came out and said the governments policy was to have a short extension until the end of june, notionally, to surpass the deal. that deal is not making any more signs of getting into law. that is the government policy but we don't really have a functioning government at the moment so it was a free vote. the brexit secretary, the man negotiating brexit, voting

against the governments own brexit policy. gavin williamson, a leading contender. it still went through. theresa may is probably going to come back with a deal on monday or tuesday and if it doesn't pass, it looks like brexit is not going to happen on march 29. but i thought was interesting about the day the day unfolded was the role the speaker played and the amendments he selected. what would you say about that? it is quite interesting because i was a furore about the amendments he selected. the erg were furious that he didn't select one of their amendment that would allow them to go for a second referendum. they could then vote against it and express their opposition in that way. the labour front bench decided to abstain. what i thought was interesting about that vote was that

334 mp5 interesting about that vote was that 334 mps opposed the second referendum, including 80 labour mps. ifi referendum, including 80 labour mps. if i was theresa may i would be looking at those labour mps to look at them getting it over the line, whether that is next week later down the line. we have just been speaking to howe, the lawyer advising the erg and he doesn't like the extra legal advice he is seeing from the attorney general. how many of the erg do you see are general. how many of the erg do you see are definitely not going to vote for this deal? the erg, the main brexit caucus in the houses of commons is quite misunderstood. people think it is this grand unifying body but in fact it isa this grand unifying body but in fact it is a party within a party. we have 24 hard—core erg members who are moving towards a more

compromised brexit who are not going to get on board. there are some who are mulling over whether to endorse the deal. the rest of the group, 60 01’ the deal. the rest of the group, 60 orso, the deal. the rest of the group, 60 01’ so, are the deal. the rest of the group, 60 or so, are mulling it over. erg members have said that they are thinking about this. martin howe, the star chamber, is meeting this weekend to look at the vienna convention on international treaties. he has given it a big thumbs down and says it doesn't fly. this is the latest plan from geoffrey cox to try to get the dup on board because ultimately the erg comes first and the dup come second. i suppose coming back to your point the question is how many of those labour mps think there is enough in this deal and don't like the idea of a longer extension. that is what theresa may is hoping, the prospect of voting down the deal

next week and going to the european council and asking for a longer extension will persuade enough of her backbenchers to get behind the deal and potentially the group of labour mps. it still doesn't look necessarily likely it is going to be the case next week and i think that is the problem with her and labour is the problem with her and labour is labour mps is the problem with her and labour is labourmps are is the problem with her and labour is labour mps are not going to vote with the government if there is any chance they would get the deal over the line because they don't want to throw that away and if the vote is tight and she eventually manages to get the majority which she is hoping for, it is not the end of the process because we still need the withdrawal agreement bill, a very contentious piece of legislation, where they could be many divisions and votes like we have seen tonight and votes like we have seen tonight and she is going to try to keep the majority on side so it is not easy, evenif majority on side so it is not easy, even if mps support the prime ministers deal. meanwhile, the future of theresa may. is it time for a third vote next week? we have heard from freeman today, used to be a loyalist for theresa may but says now she has

to go. does she have to go after the third vote next week? particularly given what happening within the cabinet? my cabinet? my sense is within the cabinet eve ryo ne my sense is within the cabinet everyone thinks she is finished as prime minister. there was a feeling that if she got her deal through, she has managed to finally do the thing everyone said she couldn't do. but she had been so wounded by the votes this week nobody i have spoken to thinks it is the case. but the conservative party can't get rid of her. that is the extraordinary thing because the conservative party by tradition is ruthless when it comes to leadership, and yet they are sticking by her. is there anything in the report that we have seen that maybe her resignation would be tied to, look, iwill take maybe her resignation would be tied to, look, i will take this course andi to, look, i will take this course and i will give you my resignation if you back the deal? so far we know that she won't run for the next general election. we don't know when that election will come and i think there are weapons

at the mps fingertips. they could threaten to vote against her if the labour opposition were to bring forward a vote of no—confidence. at the moment it seems like at this stage i'm not sure many people want to come forward and take up the baton because actually it has clearly been a very challenging process for the prime minister who is in process for the prime minister who isina process for the prime minister who is in a very difficult position and eu saying that they won't go any further on the backstop. do leaders in waiting want to come through at this stage or would they rather wait until after the uk has left the eu and take it forward. quickly on the vote of no—confidence, john mcdonnell the shadow chancellor says they are preserving that and they may bring it forward. i still think the government would ultimately win that because a very small part of the erg would like to bring down the government. the sense is that is not going to happen so i think that theresa may is relatively

safe at the moment. what could really do for her is if the cabinet comes forward and says, thank you so much but you need to make way for someone much but you need to make way for someone else. this is the men and women in grey suits, the grandees who say you can't go on. the one thing that totally unites the conservative party is the low opinion ofjeremy corbyn so whatever happens they will do their utmost to keep you out of office. we will probably get another confidence vote but as long as the dup are on side, the conservatives will be safe in power. interesting. thank you very much indeed. before the vote, the eu's chief negotiator told journalists that throughtout the negotiations there had never been any animosity between the eu and the uk, this is what he had to say. translation: brexit has no added value. it is a negative negotiation. we regret the decision taken by the majority of the uk citizens. and we

respect it. for 18 months, therefore, we kelly mugger i have —— therefore, i have worked in the spirit of these negotiations. there has never been, there isn't, and there never will be, in my attitude, any aggression. there never has been, there isn't and never will be a spirit of revenge they will not be a spirit of revenge they will not be a spirit of wanting to punish. i'm joined by the conservative mp sam gyimah welcome. good evening. let me talk to you about the assurance that you got today from david liddington at the dispatch box where he said if theresa may's deal does not go through next week then two weeks hence from the european summit, they will find a mechanism in some room

for these indicative rates that i know you want? what assurances have you had? we have had assurances from the dispatch box today and to be absolutely frank, most of us are concerned by assurances from the dispatch box because the government has intended to follow through on its policies. but has made a promise and it is a good start. the problem in the last few months is theresa may's deal has been the only one on the table. the government has not been able or willing to counter it with any other brexit options prattley by minister's. once we get past the point where we voted on it three times and it is defeated, it makes sense parliament is allowed to look at other brexit options, this has been presented in the media as an attempt to frustrate brexit but i think is the right thing to do. if there is deadlocks we look to do next, but we look at the other brexit options that could command a majority in the house of commons, it

is necessary. i know you are discussing what those options might be, where do you think there may be consensus? it is difficult to know why but i know there are some mps who want a permanent customs union. other mps want a norway model, but also on the other side there are other mps who want the malthouse compromise. all of them should be debated on the floor of the house of commons and voted on. to be doing this at the 11th hour which is what the government has proposed, the week of the 25 march, it is shocking. it should have happened two years ago. about the timetable, if you had indicative vote next week before the european union and had found the solution, there could have been a short delay because let's face it, all you would need to change if there was an agreement in one way forward to what would be the political declaration. but if you do it two weeks after the summit when they discuss what kind of extension it will be, it is likely they will

look at a longer extension? which is why i voted today for an amendment that would have enabled that to happen before the summit. you're right, if we look for an extension, the first question is what is the purpose of that extension? in a sense, the government haven't given this assurance, it is still timetable in a way that it is less likely to happen than not. what they wa nt to likely to happen than not. what they want to ultimately do is come back to the house of commons and say it isa to the house of commons and say it is a long delay for theresa may's deal to force them to vote for the deal, in substance the government is still wedded to a deal that keeps getting defeated. so you think there may yet be a third vote and potentially a fourth vote before you get your indicative vote.” potentially a fourth vote before you get your indicative vote. i think thatis get your indicative vote. i think that is the government's plan and the reason why you have mps tabling amendments, trying to take control of the order paper and proceedings in the house of commons is you have the executive which has huge amounts

of control, giving mps artificial choices initially, theresa may's deal or no deal, mps are saying no, that's an artificial choice, we want to create some other options. it is likely it will be too late but i think we will work on it to make sure parliament has a say but is also in the interest of the country because ultimately, the government does not have a majority do deliver the prime minister's plan. thank you. it's been a fast moving few days with many twists and turns as mps have battled over brexit. it's been complicated enough for the political pundits so what do the rest of us think? reeta chakrabarti has spent the day in coventry — which voted to leave in the referendum. i've made a big mistake. it's only bowling, not brexit, but people hear a bit older than him are also holding their heads in their hands. after this week's chaos in

westminster for i after this week's chaos in westminsterfor i think after this week's chaos in westminster for i think it is all a bit of a shambles. ijust westminster for i think it is all a bit of a shambles. i just think that they are acting quite childish in parliament at the moment. i think decisions need to be made and they are not being made. demi is 17 and two young to have voted in the referendum but she questions the process. when we did the referendum and we voted, i don't think we knew what we were voting for. we didn't know much about it. it is basically a question that got thrown out there and we had to answer. as mps voted to reject a second referendum this afternoon, the case was still being made by james, a afternoon, the case was still being made byjames, a customer service manager. it is one of those things where opinions will have changed in three years since we have the referendum, a lot of people didn't know what they were voting for first time around. there was a lot of scaremongering on both sides of the campaign. over at all seasons, a business supplying wholesale

flowers, they don't want a second referendum, they want certainty. because the markets are uncertain, it is affecting our exchange rates so it is affecting our exchange rates so it's pushed the prices of the flowers are, so i think in general the public are a bit uneasy so they are not spending as much money, so therefore that pushes the price of flowers up. so it is tough at the moment because nobody knows where this goes. it should be finishing touches time to the uk finishing the eu, but no sort of arrangement seems to work. we to track so let's recap on how we got to this point. there is the view from coventry and it has been a busy week. let's take you through it and what has happened so you through it and what has happened so far. on tuesday the prime minister brought her withdrawal agreement back to the house of commons for a second time for mps to vote on it. the second meaningful vote on the deal again went against the prime minister, 242 mps voted in favour, 391 voted against, a majority of 149.

then last night in the house of commons, mps voted by 321 to 278 to reject any kind of no—deal brexit, four conservative cabinet ministers were among the 12 ministers who abstained, but despite going against government policy, no—one has been sacked. 0f of course, the government has won the to note that it put forward for a delay to brexit. —— the vote tonight. although stephen barclay, who debate then voted against it. it has been that sort of week. with me now is chris morris, our reality check correspondent. it is quite listening to the various guests it is quite listening to the various gu ests we it is quite listening to the various guests we had tonight, he of course is talking to the european research group and the democratic unionist party about whether they could come and vote for the deal, that doesn't look very healthy. just hearing from sam here who is really hell—bent on

getting those indicative votes, there are spirits all over the health house. -- splits. the how many times have we heard the prime minister say brexit means brexit, we're leaving on the 29 march, now it's not 100% that it looks pretty certain that won't happen, we have been focused on the state for so long in the last two years, we almost certainly not going to leave the eu on the 29 march but what happens after that, because politics is so fractured, nobody can tell you. you gave me an interesting thought earlier off—camera about why the european union are going to want the european union are going to want the longer delay? they have put things in place recently which means that a longer delay for business will be much better. but the problem with a short delay is it kicks the cana with a short delay is it kicks the can a little bit down the road. even though no deal has been essentially

rejected by this parliament, it does in law remain the default position if no deal is done, then you extend by six weeks, you again leave with no deal. business is here, businesses in europe as well, have done a lot of contingency planning for thinking no deal might be a difficult moment but we know it is happening on 29 march. for example, car factories taking their production shutdown, sorting their deduction in april rather than summer, if they do that and now the deadline has changed, we can't then restock those extra stocks we got in or make sure our supply lines will be in the best order we can. we put a tremendous amount of effort in preparing for 29 march, you can't move the goalposts. if there is an extension, kick it further down the road because there are those in you appear then also say, that gives perhaps, time for a different option to emerge. thank you. stay with us,

we will have plenty more here in westminster on this bbc news special. it is set to remain very unsettled to end the week and at the start of the weekend we could be looking at another spell of rain and gales. in the short term we are staying very windy this evening for the first part of the night, further showers or even longer spells of rain putting up of the atlantic. they will be some drier interludes across eastern parts of scotland and eastern england for a while. most of those showers are long spells of rain will be across western areas and these again falling wintry over higher ground in scotland. temperatures close to two or three degrees across central and northern scotland. further south it is milder, 9—11dc. from friday we still have low pressure and to the north of the uk bringing in strong gale force westerly winds and plenty of showers in the forecast. mainly across northern and western areas. could see a bit more cloud across the south—west, outbreaks of rain

and misty and murky conditions throughout the day but elsewhere a bright one with plenty of sunshine. lots of showers, becoming wintry again on the high ground in scotland. going to be a very gusty day, particularly east of the pennines. 40—50 mph. quite mild across the south but a chilly day to come across the north. into the weekend looking to the atlantic for this next area of low pressure. a deepening low as it pushes towards our shores to bring a spell of very wet and in places very windy weather as well. there is a north—south divide with temperatures and across the northern flank of this heavy rain we could see some significant snow affecting central and southern scotland. certainly over the high ground it is going to be one to watch. for england and wales, outbreaks of pretty heavy rain increase the risk of flooding in places and it is going to be very windy across england and wales with gusts of 50 to 60 mph, maybe even more than that in exposed areas. breezy in the north but not quite as windy as it will be further south. a big temperature divide at fives and

sixes across scotland, hence the snow. england and wales 11—13d. that deepening area of low pressure will clear off into the north sea as we head into sunday and it will remain unsettled but not quite as unsettled as saturday is looking like. the big picture for sunday, a lot places seeing some sunshine. a pretty cool run of west, north—west winds across the country. these showers will be wintry across the high ground. the showers will be well scattered i think, with many places staying dry. a bit cooler across the board, including in southern areas.