hello, this is bbc news. the headlines... boris johnson returns from new york to face mps, after the supreme court found he acted unlawfully when he suspended parliament. mrjohnson is due to speak in parliament, which resumed this morning, in the next hour, but the attorney—general has already been making his views known. this parliament is a dead parliament! it should no longer sit. it has no moral right to sit on these green benches.

the white house releases details of the phone call between donald trump and the ukrainian president, as democrats launch an impeachment inquiry. a less listening to the prime minister. three years ago, more people voted to leave the european union that have ever voted for any party or proposition and our history. politicians of all parties promised the public they would honour the result, sadly, many have since done all they could to abandon those promises and to overturn that democratic vote. and after three yea rs of democratic vote. and after three years of denver and a delay, the left has cut this country risk of being locked in the eu, government that i lead has been trying truly to

get us out. and most people, most supporters of the party opposite to muh regardless of how they voted three years ago think the referendum must be respected. they want to brexit done. i want to brexit done and people want us out on october the 31st. and people want us out on october the sist. with and people want us out on october the 31st. with a new deal if possible, but without one if necessary. 64 days ago, i was told that brussels would never reopen their withdrawal agreement. we had are now discussing a reopening of it in the negotiations. i was told that brussels would never consider alternatives to the backstop. the trap they keep the uk effectively in the eu but with no say. we are now discussing those alternatives in the negotiations. i was told brussels

would never consider arrangements that were not permanent. we are now discussing in the negotiations and arrangement that works on the principle of consent and is not permanent. i was told there was no chance of a new deal. but we are discussing a new deal. and this is in spite of the best efforts of the party opposite in this parliament to record negotiations in their attem pts record negotiations in their atte m pts to record negotiations in their attem pts to ta ke record negotiations in their attempts to take you know the off of the table. the truth is that the majority in this parliament come are opposed to the so—called no deal, this parliament does not want brexit to happen at all. and many of those who voted for the surrender act a few weeks ago said and then that their intention was to stop and you know deal brexit. they have said every day since that parliament must

vote against any deal at all. i think the people of this country can see very clearly what is going on. the people at home no order! order! people are yelling wildly. i can scarcely hear the prime minister myself. i wish to hear the statement as other colic should do. the prime minister. the people in this country can see perfectly clearly what is going on. they note that parliament does not want to honour its promises to respect the referendum. people at home know this parliament will keep delaying and keep sabotaging in negotiations. because they do not wa nt negotiations. because they do not want a deal. mr speaker, the truth is that members opposite are living ina is that members opposite are living in a fantasy world. laughter. they really imagine that somehow they are going to cancel... this is what they

wa nt to going to cancel... this is what they want to do. they want to cancel the first referendum, legislate for a second referendum, and parliament will promise that this time, that it really will respect that vote. and they think the public will therefore vote to remain and everybody will forget the last few years. i have to say that is an extraordinary delusion. and a fantasy. a fantasy even greater than the communist fantasies led by the leader of the opposition. it will not happen. the public do not want another referendum. what they want and what they demand is that we honour the promise that we made it to the voters to respect the first referendum. and they also want us to move on. to put brexit behind us and

a focus on the nhs, on violent crimes come on cutting the cost of the living. that is why i brought forward a queen's speech, this government intends to present a programme for life at the brexit. but some of the members of this house could not stand at that either. instead of facing the voters, the opposition turned tail. and they fled from an election. instead of deciding to let the voters decide. they decided to run it to the courts instead. and despite the fact that i follow the exact same process as my predecessors, and calling a queen's speech, the supreme court was asked to intervene in this process for the first time ever. and it is absolutely no disrespect to the judiciary to say i think the court was wrong to print i what is essentially a political question at a time... order! order! whatever the

strength and intensity of feeling in the passions to which these matters give rise, we must hear what he is being set in the chamber. i wish to hear the prime minister. there court was wrong to pronounce on what essentially is a political question ata time essentially is a political question at a time of great national contract for the leovac controversy. we have opposition mps that block and delay everything, running to the courts to block and delay even more. including blocking legislation to improve and invest in the nhs and keeping by the criminals injail thought invest in the nhs and keeping by the criminals in jail thought the invest in the nhs and keeping by the criminals injail thought the i think the people understand outside this house what is happening. they know that nothing can disguise the truth. not just that this know that nothing can disguise the truth. notjust that this parliament is gridlocked and paralysed and refusing to deliver on the priorities of the people. it is not

just unable to move forward. it is worse than that. out of sheer selfishness and political cowardice members opposite are unwilling to move aside! and give the people i say! they see mps demanding that they people should be given a say one week and then running away from the election that would provide the people what they say. worst of all, they see more elaborate legal and political manoeuvres from the party opposite, which is determined absolutely to say we know best and thumb their noses at the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the european union. the leader of the european union. the leader of the opposition and his party do not trust the people. the leader of the opposition party are determined to

throw the referendum result whatever the cost. they don't care! they don't care about the bill for hundreds of millions of pounds that will come with every week of delay. they don't care for end of the year if wasted on arguing about a referendum that happened three years ago! —— if a year plus of that matters to them as an obsessive desire to overrule the referendum result. while we want to take our country up a gear to go forward with a fantastic programme and accelerated programme of investment in infrastructure and health and education and technology, they are throwing on the handbrake. well, mr speaker, we will not betray the people who sent us here! cheering we will not! that is what they want to do! what when i bend in the priorities that matter to the public. and we will continue to challenge those obligations. to

uphold democracy. if honourable and right honourable members opposite so disagree with this government passed my commitment to leaving on october the 31st, they had a very remedy at their disposal, did they not? they could have voted for a general election! i have to confess i was a little shocked to discover the party whose members stood up this week in brighton and repeatedly in the most right in terms demanded an election. i heard them. the very same party whose members are ready twice this month, not once, but twice refused to allow the people to decide on the next government. for two years they have demanded an election, but twice they voted against it. the leader of they voted against it. the leader of the opposition changes his mind so often, i wonder whether he supports an election today or whether the shadow chancellor or the shadow attorney general have overruled him

again. because they know that the voters willjudge them and their ma nifesto for voters willjudge them and their manifesto for what it is. more pointless delay. is he going to demand an election and then vote against it? laughter just demand an election and then vote against it? laughterjust as he said to negotiate a new brexit deal and they both against that too. is he going to vote no confidence in this a government? is he going to dodge a vote of no confidence in me as prime minister in order to escape the verdict of the voters? i wonder no dessie in his heart even want to be prime minister any more? —— does he. he says that i should go to brussels omsk the 17th of october negotiate another pointless delay, but he does not want to go himself. and even if

did, his colleagues would not let him. quite frankly, they recoil at the idea of him negotiating on the peoples behalf. representing this country with the likes of vladimir putin, let alone the eu or the mullahs of tehran. or perhaps that he wants a conservative government, a curious state of affairs indeed. if her majesty's a loyal opposition had every faith in the government of the day. if in fact that the party opposite does not have confidence in the government, they will have a chance to prove it. they have until the house rises... a lesson. -- listen. order! they shouldn't listen, mr speaker. they have until the house rises today to table a motion. —— they should listen. to table a ball of no confidence in the

government. yelling. go on! go on then! and we can have that evoked tomorrow. or if any of the other parties, the smaller parties, fancy a go. they can table that motion. will they have the courage to act or will they refuse to take responsibility and do nothing but differ in delay? why wouldn't they? what are they scared of? it is now well over... if that is what you are scared of... x order! i appeal to the house to have some regard to how our proceedings are viewed by people watching them and the country at large. order! let the remainder of the statement be heard. i'm grateful to the prime minister to his expectations but i want to hear the re st of expectations but i want to hear the rest of the statement and questioning on it. thank you. as i

commend the statement to the house, i say it is time to get brexit done! let brexit then so we can respect the referendum and we can move on. so we can deal with the people p°pped so we can deal with the people normed my so we can deal with the people popped my priorities, the nhs, the cost of living, let's get brexit done so we can reunite this country. —— people's priorities. rather than having another referendum. it is time for this parliament finally to ta ke time for this parliament finally to take response ability for its decisions. we decided to call that referendum. we promised time and again to respected. i think the people of this country have had enough of it. this parliament must either stand aside and let this government get brexit done, or bring a vote of confidence and finally face the day of reckoning with the voters asked! i command this statement to the house! cheering.

jeremy corbyn! cheering. thank you, mr speaker. jeremy corbyn! cheering. thank you, mrspeaker. i jeremy corbyn! cheering. thank you, mr speaker. i think the prime minister for mr speaker. i think the prime ministerforan mr speaker. i think the prime minister for an advance copy of his statement. unfortunately, it was like his ee illegal shutting down of parliament. noel of the noble and should be quashed. cheering. —— the knou should be quashed. cheering. —— the knoll of no effect. in the words of the supreme court. this was ten minutes of a blustar from a dangerous prime minister who thinks he is above the law! but in truth, is not fit for the office that he

holds! mr speaker, i am glad to see so holds! mr speaker, i am glad to see so many colleagues that care doing what they were elected to do. holding the government to account for its failings. whether it is the attempts to shut down democracy, it's a brexit negotiations, it's chaotic and in adequate no deal preparations, its allegations of corruption, its failures on climate change, its failures to step into say thomas kent, this government is failing the people of britain and the people of britain know what! —— thomas cook. yelling. order! i said that the prime minister should not be shouted down. the same goes for

the leader of the opposition. let me say to people bellowing from a certain position, stop it. you will exhaust your vocal chords. you will get nowhere. it will not work. and these proceedings will continue for as long as it is necessary for the chair to be satisfied that proper scrutiny has ta ken chair to be satisfied that proper scrutiny has taken place. it is as simple and in culture multiple as that. jeremy corbyn. —— it is as simple as that. this supreme court verdict yesterday represents an extraordinary and i believe a precarious moment in this country's history. the highest court in this land has found the prime minister broke the law when he tried to...

when he tried to shut down our democratic accountability at a crucial moment in our public life. the judges concluded that there was no reason, and i quote, let alone a good reason for the prime minister to have shut down parliament. after yesterday's ruling, the prime minister should have done the honourable thing. and resigned! yelling. yet, mr speaker, here he is, forced back to this house to rifle face the scrutiny he tried to avoid. with no shred of remorse or

humility and, of course, no substance whatsoever. so let us see if he will answer some questions. does the prime minister agree with his attorney general that the government got it the wrong, or will the leader of the house that the supreme court committed a constitutional coup? this is a vital question about whether the government respects the judiciary or not. the attorney general was also categorical that the government would comply with the eu will draw a number two act. can it be prime minister confirm with that? mr

speaker, two mr speaker, i wanted to pay tribute to those mps from all parties across the house, the lords, and in the scottish parliament and the welsh assembly, who have not only fought so hard to stop a disastrous no deal, but continued to ta ke disastrous no deal, but continued to take the case against prorogation to the courts. the government has failed to silence our democracy. yelling. mr speaker, during a period of on yelling. mr speaker, during a period ofona yelling. mr speaker, during a period of on a lawful prorogation, the government was forced to release their yellow hammer, no deal analysis and plans. no wonder the

prime minister has been a so eager to avoid scrutiny. and so eager to hide the dangers of his brexit plan. the release of those documents leads to many questions the government must now answer that our parliament is back in operation. sol must now answer that our parliament is back in operation. so i would like to start by asking the prime minister why. .. like to start by asking the prime ministerwhy... i like to start by asking the prime minister why... i would like to start by asking the prime minister why the government described leaked documents in august as being out of date. when the documents were later produced in september, they were word for word the same documents. it is clear they have tried to hide

from the people the truth, the real truth of eight no—deal brexit. and tried to hide the fact that their policy would know heap would heap misery on the people of this country. let's take a look at the analysis. chaos and britain possum reports, with months of disruption. people going short of feel and fresh fruit. it a your paper. you wrote it. you try to hide it. cheering. i beg your pardon, mr speaker. i don't hold you responsible for writing a document. disruption of people's a vital medical supplies! rises in

energy prices for every household in the whole country! a hard border for the whole country! a hard border for the people of northern ireland and the people of northern ireland and the republic of ireland! most damning of all, mr speaker, is the passes that simply says, and i quote, low income groups will be disproportionately affected. while there we have it! a simple warranty, a simple truth, that a tory government is going to follow policy they will know will hit the poorest people in our country the hardest. they simply do not care! mr speaker, the damning document that we have already seen is only six pages long. it is only right that their task should expect the more transparency from this government. the government

says they are doing all they can to get a deal before october the 31st. but the truth is that the prime minister has hardly put any effort into negotiations, any progress at all looks at us most generous best to be minimal. only yesterday the european eu again my chief negotiator michelle barnier said that there was there was no reason today for optimism. —— michelle barnier. connect the prime minister why he believes mr barnier has that view? —— cannot act the prime minister. the house and still get to hear any detail of any deal the government seeks to negotiate. we are told the government has distributed papers to brussels outline proposals for a change to the backstop. will the prime

minister publish these papers and allow them to be debated in this house of parliament? for this government to have any credibility with the people, they need to show they have an actionable plan. mr speaker, the prime minister also has questions to answer about his conduct in a public office. and in particular, allegations that he failed to declare an interest in the allocation of public money to a close friend whilst he was mayor of london. it was announced today that the department of culture and sport is reviewing the funds allocated in the light of the sunday times report. did the prime minister

initiate that review? will the prime minister fully co—operate... and that of the great assembly. will he referred himself to the cabinet secretary for investigation? mr speaker, the prime minister, no prime minister is above the law! no one can trust is prime minister. not one can trust is prime minister. not on iran, not on thomas cook, not on climate change, not on brexit! for the good of this country... order! the leader of the opposition is entitled to be hired in this parliament. order! and he will be

heard. idid parliament. order! and he will be heard. i did not mind how long it takes most of these exchanges will ta ke takes most of these exchanges will take place in an orderly matter. be in no doubt about that. jeremy corbyn. thank you mr speaker. quite simply, for the good of this country, he should go. yelling. mr speaker, he says he wants a general election. i want a general election. cheering. it is very simple. if you wa nt cheering. it is very simple. if you want an election, and he wants an election, get an extension and let's have an election! prime minister! mr

speaker, the right honourable gentleman asked you a few questions. i will deal with them in order. on the first point, my attorney general friend may clear this is a judgement in which he disagreed but that we respect thejudgement of in which he disagreed but that we respect the judgement of the supreme court. on the second point, about the ben burt act, i will say what i'm sure he understands, we will of course obey the law and we will come out of the eu on october the 31st. on his point about preparations for a no—deal brexit, i congratulate the right honourable gentleman who just spoke for two hours on this matter. our preparations are very far in advance. i think this country can be entirely confident that we will be ready to deal or no deal fought the finest point about whether we are on the verge of getting a deal or not, it is to that negotiations are difficult. but we are making

progress. all i will say to him into his friends is that they have not been easier by the surrender act that he passed. cheering. and i am very proud by the way to take his next point about everything that i did asa next point about everything that i did as a mayor of london. i may say to the current mayor that he would be better off spending less on press officers and more on police officers in london because we are fighting 20,000 more on our streets and asked for being trusted on iran, this is a man who took the shelling of the mullahs from press tv. i think i was rather sat in a way the labour conference was interrupted by the ruling because i was are struck by some of the things i heard. outlets designed to obscure the analogy of his policy over brexit. he wants to

abolish fee—paying schools and at the cost of £7 million to the taxpayer and he wants a four day working week, cutting the incomes of the lowest paid in this country, he wa nts to the lowest paid in this country, he wants to abolish ofsted and now we hear he wants to abolish all immigration control from the eu but there was a crucial passage missing from his speech. i think something slightly pitiful in a way about the right honourable gentleman. it seems that he actually did want to call an election now. whether it was a passage in a speech calling for an election now, but it was censored by the stasi in the form of the shadow chancellor. laughter. or possibly it was the shadow lord chancellor. mr speaker, the right honourable gentleman is being gagged, he is being muzzled, he is being held captive by his colleagues asked him if they will not let him say what he

wa nts to if they will not let him say what he wants to say! i say free the... cheering. why won't they allow him to have an election? why wont they allow him to unleash his charms on the electorate, is it because they are not only terrified he will lose but also even more terrified by the remaining possibility he might win. he cannot control his own party. he cannot decide if he is relieved or former maine. he is being held captive by his colleagues. the electorate are being held captive by the zombie parliament and the zombie opposition. he wants the entire country to be held captive and the eu after october the 31st at a cost of more than £1 billion. we say no! i say no! let's get brexit done and let's ta ke i say no! let's get brexit done and let's take this country forward.

cheering mr ian duncan smith! mr speaker, mr speaker, can i can readily my right honourable friend the prime minister... order! order! i appeal

to members of the house to calm themselves he is entitled to put his question and the rest of us are entitled to hear him. mr speaker, cani can i congratulate my right honourable friend on his put—down of the shallow leader of the opposition? can i also say i understand his government has changed to the root origin of the term yellow hammer to describe the botched attempt by the leader of the opposition to dispatch his own deputy? and could i ask him, could i ask him, could i ask him... i received and signed my constituency, as others did recently, leaflets

from the labour party calling for a general election now. could he answer me this question? can you give me any reason why we are not having an election at this particular point? does he think for any moment it could be because leader of the opposition fears his own party just leader of the opposition fears his own partyjust as much as he fears us? i think my right honourable friend for his very acute question, mr speaker, and i'm afraid the a nswer mr speaker, and i'm afraid the answer is very simple, that they don't want an election because they did not sure the public would trust them with running this country. i think you are right. and they put the yellow into hammer, mr speaker! mr ian blackford! thank you, mr speaker. can i think the prime minister for speaker. can i think the prime ministerforan speaker. can i think the prime minister for an advance copy of his

statement? i have to say, when i read the first paragraph, and it talks about the supreme court verdict, mr speaker, it wasn't the supreme court verdict, it was the judgement of the supreme court. and perhaps the prime minister might start to show some respect for the judiciary. we are here today because the prime minister was utterly humiliated by the supreme court, by a count of 11—0, and you might have thought that that diatribe that we had, that we might have had some humility, that we might have been able to acknowledge that what we've had is the unlawful shutting down of parliament. mr speaker, sorry is indeed the hardest word for the prime minister. and it was said by the former prime minister, where law

ends commit tyranny begins. while it pains me to say it, the fact the prime ministers still standing here today, he fact does believe he is above the law. mr speaker, he is not, and thanks heavens for the actions brought in the court in scotland and england. and i want to pay tribute to... cheering thank goodness the courts have done their job thank goodness the courts have done theirjob and made sure parliament turns her back where they should be, in this house, holding the governments to court. the supreme court has made it crystal clear. the actions of this government, this prime minister, led to the unlawful prorogation of parliament, delivering the verdict, lady hale stated the purgation was null and void. have you no shame, my

minister? mr speaker, the court concluded the decision was unlawful, because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of parliament to carry out its constitutional conscience without reasonable justification. mr speaker, without reasonable justification, and the prime minister talks about us running off to the courts, but we got the courts to the courts, but we got the courts to do what he failed to do, which was to respect parliamentary sovereignty. frustrating, preventing parliaments, carrying out its constitutional duties, without reasonable justification. constitutional duties, without reasonablejustification. how devastating for a prime minister to have such a judgement! where law ends, tierney begins. yet the prime minister says he did not agree with the court, he only agrees with his cronies in numberten, the court, he only agrees with his cronies in number ten, his brexit obsessed fan club. he cannot pick

and choose when it comes to the law. he must obey the law. that is not leadership. he quite simply is not fit for office. and mr speaker, when i hear of the prime minister talking about the surrender act, how despicable that he refers to members of this house that are doing their duty to protect their constituents, and he uses language such as a surrender, it is language which is not suitable for the prime minister of any country. mr speaker, the prime minister's position is no longer tenable. his failure to resign is an embarrassment. people have had enough of this shambles. mr speaker, we have reached a difficult and dangerous place, notjust... speaker, we have reached a difficult and dangerous place, notjust. .. the right honourable gentlemen leads the third—party in this house. he has a right be heard. he will continue his

contribution and he will be heard, however long it takes. if the message has to be repeated again and again and again, so be it. he will be heard. and of subjects. in blackford. much obliged, mr speaker. we have reached a dark and difficult point of notjust in relation to we have reached a dark and difficult point of not just in relation to the brexit crisis but for the constitutional future of these islands and indeed the future of our democracy. we have a prime minister standing here in parliament that he sought to silence. people across this countries will be reading today about how the prime minister fought the law, but the law one. the prime minister, the head of government, who is responsible for the law, responsible for government, what an example to the public. let me be clear to the prime minister that he should resign. but if he fails to do so, yes, the opposition must unite

to trigger a vote of no—confidence to trigger a vote of no—confidence to bring this chaotic government down. by triggering a vote of no—confidence, will ensure that the act is honoured, as you take no deal off the table by allowing the opposition to instill interim leader to take back control and to protect our economy from the cliff edge. mr speaker, the scottish national party truly supports stopping no—deal. it is our priority. let me be clear to members on these benches for we are not powerless. doing nothing is not an option. this is the time for leadership. once we have removed the prime minister, removed the threat of no—deal, the people must have their say three general election as quickly as is possible. we must unstick this mess and we must trust the people to make their choice. we cannot trust this prime minister. his time must be up. his days of

lying, of cheating, and of undermining the rule of law must be numbered. order! order! order! just for the avoidance of doubt, i am sure the right honourable gentlemen will not state in this house that the per minister has light in the house. he must not do so. order! that is... that is the procedural position. he did not say that but he did refer to lying, and position. he did not say that but he did referto lying, and i position. he did not say that but he did refer to lying, and i know he cannot be referring to it in the context of the exchanges in this house. and a nod of the head to confirm that might interpretation is correct will suffice, and he then can proceed with the rest of his questioning. i am correct, and can proceed with the rest of his questioning. lam correct, and my surmise, i questioning. lam correct, and my surmise, lam questioning. lam correct, and my surmise, i am sure. i have one question to the prime minister for now. do the right thing and do it now. do the right thing and do it now. prime minister, will you now

resign? the prime minister! mr speaker, i think the right honourable gentlemen. we do respect the supreme court, mr speaker, and the supreme court, mr speaker, and the reason that i want the queen's speech and wanted a queen speech is quite frankly because we had to do what we can as a united kingdom to remedy, to remedy the waste and incompetence of the high taxing government of the snp government in scotland. and that is what we are investing in 20,000 more police officers and education funding and funding gigabit broadband across the country, and i hope, and i bet the people of scotland hope, that in spite of the uselessness of the government of scotland of those benefits will be passed on to the people because that is the only obstacle people because that is the only o bsta cle in

people because that is the only obstacle in our way. thank you, mr speaker. the supreme court, mr speaker, mentioned that the prorogation... speaker, mentioned that the prorogation. .. order. i speaker, mentioned that the prorogation... order. i apologise for interrupting the honourable gentlemen. he, too, the honourable gentlemen. he, too, the honourable gentlemen must be heard. i want to hear his question. the answer to it. sir william cassian. the supreme court mentioned the prorogation had an extreme effect upon the fundamentals of our democracy. does my right honourable friend except — — except —— except it is more thanjust an extreme democratic effect for parliament itself tearing up the standing order, as that order...

derives exclusively from the fundamental democracy of the voters of this country in general elections, and to remedy this, they must be given an early general election to decide who governs this parliament. he is of course quite right in the sense that the people of this country can see all kinds of forces of this country owing to critics ordinary lengths, whether judicial or parliamentarian, to prevent brexit from being delivered on october 31. i have to tell my right honourable friend that i'm sure he will agree with me, we are not going to be deterred by such bruises and we are going to get it done. the prime minister is not serious. he needs to understand the actions affect on

have consequent is. even my 5 euros knows that if you do something wrong, you have to say sorry. —— even my five—year—old. if my son can apologise for kicking a football indoors, surely the prime minister can say sorry for misleading the queen, misleading the country and illegally shutting down our democracy? prime minister! mr speaker, one of the actions for which the honourable lady might wish to ta ke which the honourable lady might wish to take responsibility was writing to take responsibility was writing to the president of the european commission, actively encouraging him not to do a deal with this country. as somebody who voted remain, in the referendum, i as somebody who voted remain, in the referendum, lam as somebody who voted remain, in the referendum, i am mindful of the fact that this house of commons voted 6—1

in favour of having the referendum. on two occasions, the prime minister hesitant attended you call a general election which would have taken place on the 15th of october. if the british people, where we get our mandate from, art decided there should have been another prime minister for that occasion, they would have had the opportunity. i was that stopped? my right honourable friend, who speaks with great wisdom and with great experience of this place, but i cannot believe in all his time here, he has ever seen a leader of the opposition actively forgo and turn down, initial view of the british public, the opportunity to have a general election. that is what is happened twice and there can only be one possible explanation, that he doesn't think he can win. thank you,

mr speaker. there will be many people, not least the families of seniorjudges, who were murdered in northern ireland, who will wish the leader of the opposition, when he supported a terrorist organisation that murdered judges, supported a terrorist organisation that murderedjudges, had supported a terrorist organisation that murdered judges, had really put those words into action much, much earlier in his career. and we talk about respect for the rule of law, it should have been rule of law through the decades of the troubles in northern ireland. on brexit, mr speaker, the reality is despite everything, the fundamentals remain unchanged, that we need to deliver on the brexit referendum, but that we must do so with a deal, and we wa nt

we must do so with a deal, and we want to get that deal through this house. so would he agree that the way to do that is to deal with the anti—democratic backstop for the trap he talks about, the issue of consent? but for all the shenanigans in this house undermining the leverage of the prime minister is actually a danger of bringing about the very results that some of who say they don't want a no—deal will actually achieve? i think the right honourable gentlemen delimit —— gentle man, and i... i made that point many times of war. on his point many times of war. on his point about the negotiations, he is, speaks with great maturity on this issue. there is a chance to make progress. it will not be easy. but

it clearly is not helped by the surrender act, but i think neither he nor i come and that's what it is because it would require us to take no—deal off the table, neither he nor i are going to be daunted by that act and i think that our confidence is growing. and we will work flat out to get a deal by october 17 and then, mr speaker, this house will indeed have a chance to pronounce on it, as it was always intended that it should. can i congratulate my right honourable friend on becoming prime minister? i hope he is enjoying doing the job as much as i'm enjoying not doing it. laughter does he agree that those who claim to defend parliament three democracy are in fact putting it at grave risk by alienating a large proportion of the population who fear that this house is trying to block a

democratic referendum result we promised to honour? it is a great pleasure to respond to my right on both friend because i reminded of the many times that he and i shared a platform, and frankly, we spoke absolutely as one, mr speaker, and on that issue. he was right then and he is right now. can i say to the prime minister that those of us who voted for the european union withdrawal number two act, make no apology whatsoever. for having legislated to prevent the prime minister from taking this country out of the european union on the sist out of the european union on the 31st of october, without an agreement, any prime minister can shout as much as he likes from the despatch box, but he cannot hide the fa ct despatch box, but he cannot hide the fact he has no mandate, no majority

and no credibility. now, mr speaker, on the 3rd of september, the from minister told the house that he would bring forward proposals for an alternative to the backstop well before the end of the 30 day deadline set by chancellor merkel. that deadline has not passed. the eu has said no such proposals have been tabled. why not and will he do so was —— when will he do so? -- when will he do so? i think my honourable friend will agree the surrender act... did honourable friend will agree the surrenderact... did indeed honourable friend will agree the surrender act... did indeed have a profound psychological impact on our friends and partners over the channel. and it has had an impact on negotiations. and it has made things more difficult, and i think he, in

all honesty, would concede that. it on the detail of the negotiations at present, mr speaker, i can say is that we have table proposals, as the right honourable gentlemen spoke from the dup benches now, for confirmed. progress is being made. it is not assisted by publishing our proposals today. thank you, mr speaker. prime minister is very keen to point out how to deliver commitments made during an election. he wrote to the one nation group during his election to be party leader that he was not much attracted to prorogation, something that he may reflect on now, and that he would seek to build consensus across the house. what undermines

his negotiation position is that those watching from europe cannot see how the prime minister is going to deliver a majority in this house, for concessions that he will get. can he update the house on the moves he has taken to build consensus?” can, and! he has taken to build consensus?” can, and i think she asks inexorably important question. because i do think come in all intellectual honesty, that members opposite who voted for the surrender act, should voted for the surrender act, should vote for the deal we produce. and i would like to hearfrom vote for the deal we produce. and i would like to hear from them vote for the deal we produce. and i would like to hearfrom them if vote for the deal we produce. and i would like to hear from them if they will, mr speaker. we will, i'm very confident, make good progress towards a deal and i hope it will command their support. earlier today, the attorney general did not just say that he would respect the

supreme court's judgement, he just say that he would respect the supreme court'sjudgement, he also said, we got it wrong. the prime minister has todayjust said the opposite and effectively said he thinks it's ok for a prime minister to cancel parliament for as long as he so chooses in order to answer questions, not to answer questions. many of us have had this agreement with his predecessors, the right honourable member for maidenhead, david cameron, john major, margaret thatcher, but none of them would have done this. none of them would have done this. none of them would have been so chaotic, none of them would have shown such disregard for the rule of law or tried to concentrate power in their own hands by cancelling parliament in this way. why is he so entitled that he

thinks there is one rule for 1% in one for him... i think the historical record will reflect several prime ministers, and i think all prime ministers have had prorogation. john major, for instance, for robed for several weeks in advance of an election. but on her substance of question of the view of my right honourable colleague, the attorney general, about thejudgement colleague, the attorney general, about the judgement yesterday, let's be clear. we are as one in respecting the supreme court and we are as one in thinking that that judgement was wrong. in the general election 2015, during the passage of the referendum bill in this house, during the referendum itself, we the mps would give them

the decision. it would be a final decision and whatever the vote was, we the mps would honour it. the crisis we have is the first time ever the people have not immediately and politely gone along with what the establishment wanted. we have seen the establishment wanted. we have seen the political establishment in this house, the commercial establishment, and now the judicial establishment, and now the judicial establishment go against the will of the people. they are angry, they feel thwarted by the establishment. does the prime minister agree that the only answer is to leave... order! the right honourable gentlemen, he persisted, but he was entitled to be fully heard. i hope he is content. i was trying to help! idid my he is content. i was trying to help! i did my best to help. go on, blurt out the last sentence, men! will the

prime minister agree with me the only way to resolve this crisis is to leave the european union on the sist to leave the european union on the 31st of october, by taking back control, leaving the customs union, leaving the sickle market and leaving the sickle market and leaving the sickle market and leaving the remit of dcj as we promised in our election manifesto? iam very promised in our election manifesto? i am very grateful for you for making sure that last sentence is heard, because i agree with every word of it, and that is exactly that we are going to do. earlier today, parents in all —— parents contact me about a presentation of the prime minister's proposals and brexit that had been broadcast on what had transpired to be 3000 digital notice boards of primary schools around this country without the prior consent of the schools. given the amount of money this government is spending on brexit adverts, can he at least

reassure residents that, in this instance, it wasn't his doing and give his personal pledge that our primary schools will remain brexit propaganda free zones? obviously, i think the honourable lady is bringing the news about the schools in her constituency. what i can tell her, and what i think colleagues wa nt to her, and what i think colleagues want to hear, as we are investing in every primary school! thank you, mr speaker. one of the greatest acts of patriotism shown over the last few years was not by people like myself who voted leave but by those who voted remain and accepted the democratic result. the general public never doubted that we in this place would act on their wishes, thatis place would act on their wishes, that is the trust that they had and i think still have in all of us

here, and this parliament. does my right honourable friend agree that when people trust you in this way, you do not let them down?” when people trust you in this way, you do not let them down? i think my right honourable friend speaks movingly and entirely correctly about our duty to the people of this country. they are watching his proceedings. they do want us to deliver brexit on october 31, and i do urge colleagues around this house to think of the response abilities. thank you very much. mr speaker, having now read the judgement of the learned judges yesterday, and this is the highest court in the land and it was unanimous verdict, and our congratulations go to all those who brought the action to defend this sovereign parliament, it is quite clear that on two matters, important matters, this government did not defend, did not supply evidence, and

thatis defend, did not supply evidence, and that is what you —— he learned judges came to the evidence they did. the evidence of sirjohn major was that normally, a government would prorogue for some five days. that evidence was not challenged by this prime minister and that government. and they offered no evidence as to why it was they sought to prorogation of five weeks and that which led the learned judges, paragraph 56, i am weeks and that which led the learned judges, paragraph 56, lam pleased to see the prime minister is making a note, i hope you will go and read the judgement, i hope a note, i hope you will go and read thejudgement, i hope you a note, i hope you will go and read the judgement, i hope you won't be owning his pole dancing skills instead. but they wrote a paragraph 56, this was not a normal prorogation in the run—up to the queen's speech. it prevented parliament from carrying out its constitutional role eight weeks. and at paragraph 61, they don't want to hear it... but they will hear it, mr

speaker. because this is why the learned judges unanimously concluded there was no reason, let alone a good reason, to advise her majesty to prorogue parliament for five weeks. i came here today notjust your present my constituents, but hoping this prime minister would hope billy —— show humility. when he now apologise, if not to this place, to the country and has he apologised to her majesty the queen? i will not comment on my conversation with her majesty but i think which is sadly in error in her history, to my memory, john major prorogue parliament for 18 days before he even had an election. in

all we were going to lose was for a five sitting days over the party conference period. and she will have ample opportunity after the european summit to debate brexit again as is our privilege and her prerogative andindeed our privilege and her prerogative and indeed her pleasure. it was a lwa ys and indeed her pleasure. it was always intended that she should. whatever policy differences the prime minister may have with others, he may agree that he has an absolute duty to observe and apollo the rule of law. and whatever self justifications he may have advanced today, he may also have to accept that in the matter of provoking this house, he failed to do that. in

those circumstances, what he now like to take the opportunity rather than condemning the number two withdrawal bill as a surrender bill. to assure the house that if the... order! let it be said it was closer clarity to occupants of the treasury bench —— to crystal clarity will stop the right honourable and a learned gentleman will be heard. he will not be shafted down by people from his own adventures. that sort of behaviour is intolerable and it is obviously so to most remotely reasonable people. mr dominic grieve. will he therefore take this opportunity to give an insurance to the house that share the terms of the house that share the terms of the bill apply to him, rather than going to try and die in ditches, that he will observe those terms as

he is duty— bound to that he will observe those terms as he is duty—bound to do? that he will observe those terms as he is duty-bound to do? mr speaker, i repeat the confirmation, i think many times this government observes and will observe the law, but our view i may say to my right honourable man, learned and friend, that our view of the particular matter before the supreme court, it had the support of the master of the roles and the lord chiefjustice, who at the risk of embarrassing my right honourable and learned friend, perhaps even more distinguished in the law than he is. thank you very much, mr speaker. i have been a memberof much, mr speaker. i have been a member of this house for 27 years. and i have never thought i would be present to watch the branches

opposite erupt in applause when a prime minister who has had his political strategy torn to shreds by losing 11 — zero in the supreme court of the land, and being found in the words of the judgement, it is impossible for us to conclude on the evidence which was put before us that there was any reason, let alone a good reason, to advise her majesty to prorogue parliament for five weeks. it follows that the session was unlawful. why do we now find this prime minister leaving a conservative party that feel that it is appropriate to apply that? mr speaker, if i may say, the commentary of the benches in this house was more directed at the

leader of the opposition then perhaps anything i had to say. but my strong view is that the opinion of the supreme court has to be respected. and fulfilled. that is why i am pleased to say we are all here today to listen to the honourable lady. thank you. in 1801, horatio nelson, our nations greatest hero, chose not to see and to retreat. in that spirit, will the prime minister turn a blind eye to the antics of the liberal establishment, and turn a deaf ear to the shrill please of those who seek to boil brexit and frustrate the will of the people? for he must note that the loud and clear cry of

the working people of this country is as straightforward as this. back in brexit and back boris. —— back in brexit, back boris. ithank in brexit and back boris. —— back in brexit, back boris. i thank them. in brexit and back boris. —— back in brexit, back boris. ithank them. i will not only try to imitate horatio nelson, i will ask myself to the mast, figuratively speaking, like odysseus, and stop my ears to the sovereign cries of those opposite who will try to frustrate the will of the people in block brexit. that is what they want. we would not let them do it. could i congratulate the resilience of intent or opposition leaders in the face of the prime minister's incontinent goading? this government will abide by legislation to article 50 unless this house decides otherwise. the supreme court decided that the prime minister did

not prorogue this place in order to deliver a clean speech. but to stymie parliamentary debate. —— deliver a queen suite. i would not impute the honour of the prime minister, but the supreme court clearly does not believe his motives to be, how can i put this, legitimate. in 2004, the prime minister who was then the member of parliament... i'm going to try and be helpful to the honourable gentleman who is a most dedicated and memberof two gentleman who is a most dedicated and member of two year stand in we don't have points of order in the middle of exchanges. i will try to provide a tutorial for the gentleman on another occasion. the honourable lady will not be prevented from asking her question. she is asking a question, she will ask it and it will be heard. the gentleman will sit quietly and listen. in 2004, the

prime minister, the mp for hindley at the time, wrote a column of the telegraph in which he argued that tony blair should be impeached as he andl tony blair should be impeached as he and i quote treated parliament and the public with content. a matter of disclosure of motives, and legal advice from relating to the iraq war. the runnable member even edit a copy to the spectator which called for a player to be impeached. copy to the spectator which called fora playerto be impeached. —— copy to the spectator which called for a player to be impeached. —— the honourable member even wrote a copy for the paper. order! i have protected the honourable lady and rightly so. from inappropriate attempts to cut her off like that but she must ask a question and i hope that she is approaching the end of her question. she really does need to do so. the prime minister at the time also signed a motion for

impeachment which was brought forward by the now leader. they prime minister is surely not a man who would like to look inconsistent. yelling. thus he still believe it to be right and proper to seek to impeach a prime minister who has beenjudged to impeach a prime minister who has been judged to mislead impeach a prime minister who has beenjudged to mislead the public?” already explained once! let me say to the honourable gentleman again and turns that broke up no misunderstanding, now is not the time for points of order! that time will come and if the gentleman is still interested, he will be heard. but he really does need to learn the procedures and these matters. they prime minister. i think the right honourable lady very much for her question. i'm glad she is an assiduous reader of my column. but i

must correct her on two important points and make clear, the first is that the supreme court did not impugn the motives of the government. the second, she should bearin government. the second, she should bear in mind, whales voted to leave. —— a wales voted leave. when it suits politicians, they promise of elections and referendum. indeed in 2008, the liberal democrats promise a referendum on the future out of the european union. thus my runnable friend agree with me that those who shouted the loudest for referendum i now promising rowboat and that is undemocratic as it is undemocratic to be bench blocking and refusing the public the chance to decide to have a government that can be in power, notjust in office? my

honourable friend is entirely right. and the absurdity of the liberal democrats position is only equalled or surpassed by the absurdity of the labour position because they are negotiating a deal with the eu and then campaigning against it. thank you mr speaker. i know they prime minister wants to appear as a strong man. but the strongest thing he could do that when i looked the best to this country at the moment would be to act with some humility and contrition there are many of them but the difference between the prime ministerand but the difference between the prime minister and myself as if the labour party had done this, i would be ashamed. i would party had done this, i would be ashamed. iwould be party had done this, i would be ashamed. i would be sorry that the labour party had been found to do this. and i actually prime minister simply this looks i bring this to the public. and he thinks he speaks

for the people. let me tell you now, it will looks much better if you rose to your feet now and says, i am sorry, i got this wrong, let's try honesty. i am gratefulto sorry, i got this wrong, let's try honesty. i am grateful to the honourable lady and i may say i think... ido honourable lady and i may say i think... i do accept the judgement of the supreme court as i have said many times. but i also may say to her in all candour i think the humblest and most responsible thing we can all do as parliamentarians they show that we respect the judgement of the people. and take this country out on october the sist. this country out on october the 31st. back on the 3rd of september, i actually prime minister given his he then did the chance of a deal had increased. and things were moving.

—— i actually prime minister fossil evidence. i think the prime minister is on fairly malign. i have set face—to—face with him as have many andl face—to—face with him as have many and i know he wants a deal. —— u nfa i rly and i know he wants a deal. —— unfairly maligned. in the like some encouraging noises from human ministers, cassie said in the statement from the eu, can ask him again when he says they are making progress, what that progress looks like because i know he needs to bring together a majority in and across this house in order to get it through and to show that to our eu leaders? i think he is unfairly maligned so what can he put before the house to give us that encouragement? i am gratefulto my honourable friend and i as i said to the house and my opening statement, we have moved a long way off of the idea that the withdrawal agreement was the law and means impairs and ingrained in stone. that is gone. we have moved a long way from the idea of the backstop had to be retained. as he will have heard, jonglei

junker himself said... —— john in concrete terms, that there are areas in which progress is being made are the concept of the alternative arrangements which i know has been discussed at many times in this house and in many honourable and right honourable members have gone over it many times but it is a fruitful area of discussion. the second idea, which is also extremely fruitful is the concept of doing everything we can to maintain the unity of the island of ireland for sanitary and final sanitary reasons. as i am sure my honourable friend who studied these matters plentifully will acknowledge, that is a big concession by the uk government and a big event. it needs to be handled with care. we need to get the balance right. but we think progress can be made in that area. the third

concept, i mentioned it already and my opening remarks, the idea of consent. and i think consent holds the key, because a problem with the backstop as honourable members opposite will recall, i heard some very good speeches against it from the bench as opposite, the problem with the backstop is it does not repose the focus of authority here in the uk. and we need to remedy that. i'm sure he understands that point. mr speaker, i campaign to remain, they prime minister campaign delay. i have always respected as a result of the referendum. to be honest i don't want to work with him more than he would want to work with me. but we both know there are areas where both parties have reached an agreement in those cross party talks. so while he published the areas of agreement from those talks

and will he use them as the basis for a new field so we can stop and no—deal brexit and lead by the 31st of october with a deal?” no—deal brexit and lead by the 31st of october with a deal? i can tell the honourable lady that i certainly admire the way that she is trying to work across party to bring this to a resolution. i will take up her proposal and do what i can to bring it forward over the next few days. i appreciate the time. significant numbers of mps from across the house are coming together to indicate they are coming together to indicate they are mps fora are coming together to indicate they are mps for a deal. one of the prime minister confirm firstly that he is one of us, secondly that he is is working hard for a deal and thoroughly that we will have the opportunity to vote on another deal? ican opportunity to vote on another deal? i can certainly do not make i think

for what she is doing and the member for what she is doing and the member for cheltenham who i think is involved. —— i thank herfor what she is doing. i can absolutely guarantee that if and when we are able to bring back an agreement that i think will work for this house and for this country, on october the 17th and 18th, of course we will put it to parliament and i do hope it will then get a sense. in my naivety, i thought we were coming to hear a statement on the supreme courtjudgement. hear a statement on the supreme court judgement. instead, we hear a statement on the supreme courtjudgement. instead, we have been treated to the sort of a populist rent when expect to hear from the leader of a tinpot dictatorships or perhaps the current president of the states. thus the prime minister appreciate that his display is an anathema to the democratic constitution of the tradition of scotland which was is held in the uk supreme court

yesterday? and i pray to god that he wont yesterday? and i pray to god that he wo nt ta ke yesterday? and i pray to god that he wont take his own country onto the rocks. but if it is intent on doing that, while he first recognised the democratic mandate of the scottish parliament? he spoke about consent to be governed holding the keys? if you must take english on the rocks, will he recognised the democratic mandate of the scottish parliament and agreed the means for a second independence referendum to be held in scotland ? independence referendum to be held in scotland? mr speaker, actually if i may say, i do congratulate the honourable lady for bringing forward that action because she did produce an astonishing result. no doubt. it was a ground—breaking judgement. a noveljudgement. it has had the effect that we can all see before us today. here we are back in this house of commons. but i may say on

her second one, on her second point, the people of scotland voted decisively in 201410 to remain in the united kingdom. a most successful union of nations and history, and they were told it was a once ina history, and they were told it was a once in a generation vote. i think it would be wrong of her now to try and break that promise. when the prime minister eventually wins an overall majority at the next general election, will he make it a priority of his first majority government to repeal the fourth was the ghastly fixed—term parliaments act? repeal the fourth was the ghastly fixed-term parliaments act? mr speaker, i think we will concentrate on winning that over on a majority first. i understand and share his sentiments entirely. thank you mr

speaker. this afternoon, there's beena speaker. this afternoon, there's been a heron this spectacle was that we have a prime minister who has broken the law, and uses dangerous language and betrayal and surrender which sells the vision and worse in the communities that we are sorry. —— karen the spectacle. and we have his mps to clap them for doing so. but what this afternoon has taught us is how important it is that parliament is sitting through these crucial weeks because it is only do parliament sitting that we can hold this government to account. and that is why it is so important and parliament is not dissolved for a general election are prorogue again so we can continue general election are prorogue again so we can continue to hold the government to account because of the prime minister has broken the law once, why should we trust them not to do the same again?” once, why should we trust them not to do the same again? i must respectfully disagree with the honourable lady and her characterisation of the surrender

act. i think... characterisation of the surrender act. ithink... i characterisation of the surrender act. i think... i am afraid it has done damage and was intended to damage this country negotiating position, but i do think it is also right in this context to work are together to get a deal done and to deliver on a mandate of the people. that is what our constituents would wa nt to that is what our constituents would want to see. thank you mr speaker. cani want to see. thank you mr speaker. can i command my honourable friend for his firm stance on this whole argument? cani for his firm stance on this whole argument? can i also ask him that when he comes back possibly with a deal, it does not mirror in any way shape or form the deal that has already been thrown out of this house? i for one and i already been thrown out of this house? ifor one and i believe already been thrown out of this house? i for one and i believe the people of this country do not want to remain shown in a vassal state.

for years to come. let's get this donein for years to come. let's get this done ina for years to come. let's get this done in a leave the eu. my honourable friend is a valiant for truth in this matter and he is right. the problem with the previous agreement is it does keep the uk lock in the eu and tantamount to vassalage and will make sure that the deal that we do bears no resemblance whatever to that predicament. we'll have a deal that i believe he willfully predicament. we'll have a deal that i believe he will fully support. next question, allison mcgovern. thank you mr speaker. the irony is not lost on any of us. that prorogation was nothing to do with brexit. yet here we are talking consta ntly brexit. yet here we are talking constantly with brexit. but it is more serious point about our

political culture that i want to raise with the prime minister. because those of us who constantly rememberourfriend because those of us who constantly remember our friend jo cox need our political culture to change now. it is getting toxic. they prime minister's language and the violent and his government is dysfunctional. so will he promised change, and can i ask so will he promised change, and can iask him, so will he promised change, and can i ask him, just for this session, to ta ke i ask him, just for this session, to take responsibility for his actions? can he accept that he acted u nlawfully can he accept that he acted unlawfully and bearing in mind that this issue is about advice to our modern about what he tell us which of his ministers will resign? -- to our monarch. i agree with the honourable lady that tempers have become very ragged across the country and people feel the fever i brexit, i agree with her, has gone

on for too long. but the best way to sort this out is to get brexit done. that is what we want. i hope she willjoin with us and getting a good dealfor this willjoin with us and getting a good deal for this country and getting it through this house of commons. thank you mr speaker. they prime minister has talked about bringing a deal back to this house, he has also talked about his respect for the law and agreed to make sure that he complies with the law. can i ask them to be absolutely explicit, that if he does bring adele back to this house, and this house does what is right, perhaps underage exit, that he will respect that and also respect the so—called been billed that this house is passed, and then ask for an extension and can ijust say to him that continuing to call our build this house has passed a

surrender bill is deeply disrespectful to this place? and he has said he must respect the supreme court ruling and i was simply asking to respect the decisions of this house as well. i must say to the right honourable lady and my friend who i worked with over many years that actually, i do think the surrender act has done great damage dominic when we try to do dominic i speak as somebody who has to sit and... order! i appeal to speak as somebody who has to sit and... order! i appealto colleagues in all parts of the house to calm down and let us have the exchanges. everybody must speak in terms that he or she thinks is fit and i know we are all conscious of the premium thatis we are all conscious of the premium that is placed by s on moderation

and good humour in the use and parliamentary language. the prime minister. mr speaker, i repeat that the experience of negotiating with our european friends in part over the last few weeks has i'm afraid confirm me in my view that the surrender act has made it two yelling. has made it more difficult for us to get a deal. that is the sad truth. because they hear is a parliament determined notjust to stop a no—deal brexit, that is not their intention fault of their intention is to stop any kind of deal at all. that is what they want to do. i can tell my right honourable friend that we will come out of the european go again on october the 31st and we will not be extended. thank you. i genuinely do

not seek to stifle robust debate, but this evening, they prime minister has continually used majority of the language to describe an act of parliament. —— derogatory labour. i'm sure you would agree mr speaker we should not resort to using offensive dangerous or inflammatory language for legislated that we do not like. we stand here, mr speaker, that we do not like. we stand here, mrspeaker, under that we do not like. we stand here, mr speaker, under the shield of our departed friend who many of us in this place subjected death threats and abuse every single day and let me tell the prime minister that they often quote his words, surrender act, bow trail, traitor, i often quote his words, surrender act, bow trail, traitor, lam often quote his words, surrender act, bow trail, traitor, i am sick of it for one. we must moderate our language. it has to come from the prime minister first. i am interested in hearing his opinion. he should be absolutely ashamed have himself. cheering. ithink... i have

to say, i have never heard such humbug and all my life. the reality is... yelling. this is a bill... yelling. this is a bill... order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! order! yelling. order! ifeel to the house as a whole to debate theseissues to the house as a whole to debate these issues calmly. i can see these these issues calmly. i can see these the stipulation from college and i am not... allow me to respond. i am not unmindful of the purpose of

that. i have reminded colleagues across the house for the very longest precepts in relation to the conduct of the bay. i must simply say that nothing disorderly, nothing disorderly has been said. everything that everybody must make their own judgement as to how to behave in this place and to all members will operate at the level that they think appropriate. if i see there is disorderly behaviour, i will rule accordingly. if i hear this or i will rule them out of order. i want... or! i wanted to hear the honourable member and did so in full. as she absolutely had to be heard. i have listened to the reply. let's try to respect. no assistance

is required. let's try to respect each other. well mr speaker, let me just explain why i call it the surrender act. and thatis why i call it the surrender act. and that is because it obliges us, it would oblige us to stay in the eu for month after month, at a cost of £1 billion per month, it would take away from this country, the ability to decide how long that extension would be, and it would give that power to the eu, it would absolutely undermine our ability to continue to negotiate properly in brussels. it ta kes negotiate properly in brussels. it takes away the fundamental ability ofa takes away the fundamental ability of a country to walk away from the negotiations, and i'm afraid, that is exactly what it does. and the best way, if i may say respectfully to members opposite, they are getting very agitated about this.

the best way, the best way to get rid of the surrender act is not to vote for it in the first place, but to repeal it and to vote for the deal that we are going to do. that is the way forward. hear, hear! ! disgusting, disgusting. element mr speaker, many of my constituents watch parliament to be, and whilst we were away, they watched catch up, including an interesting episode. where most eloquently, the member from east dam berkshire, said that she wanted a referendum, it should be and that a referendum, and people should decide. does my right honourable friend, the prime minister, agree with me that if the liberals were democrats, they should be working for ways to help deliver that referendum... hear, hear!

and hear the divisions, and not create more. here two hear, hear! my right honourable friend is entirely right, and the way forward for this house and for this country is to get brexit done. and i think that's actually, there are people around this country who are watching these proceedings and who will agree very, very profoundly with what i'm saying. get brexit done, and let's ta ke saying. get brexit done, and let's take this country forward. ido take this country forward. i dojust take this country forward. i do just want to emphasise take this country forward. i dojust want to emphasise in take this country forward. i do just want to emphasise in these proceedings, members must say what they think, and they do, and that's right on both sides of the house. and on different sides of this argument. but i would like to emphasise that i am keenly conscious of the fact that there are members on both sides of the house and indeed on both sides of the brexit argument, who have been personally

threatened, and who's families —— whose families have been threatened, and it's incredibly, know about, members on both sides of house, and on both sides of the arguments have been threatened. and i have stated very publicly my revulsion at such behaviour, whether it is affected members on one side or the other. people who are anti—brexit or members who are pro—brexit, whose families have been wrongly threatened, or whose parents have been abused in their presence. and i would simply appeal to responsible colleagues in all parts of the house to weigh their words. that's all i'm saying. i think that is a reasonable request of members in all parts of the house. it is in our wider

interest as a parliament, and it is in the public interest that we respect each other. that is a point which i think shouldn't be difficult to understand. steve double, i beg your pardon. following the events of yesterday, i've had many constituents contact me. some are confused, bewildered, some are frustrated. many of the vast majority of my constituents do not have the funding or the influence of the contacts to pursue matters in the supreme court. but what they do have is a vote, and in june 2016, they gave their vote 64% of my constituency voted to leave, believing that their vote would count, and the results would be honoured. would the prime minister reassure my constituents that the events of yesterday will in no way detract from his determination to honour the referendum, and ensure we leave the eu. i can certainly give my honourable friend that absolute

assurance, and we are working for a deal on october the 17th, but we will come out if we must without a deal on october the 31st. thank you mr speaker. i have never felt so embarrassed to be a member of parliament here this evening. hear, hear! ! we know what the impact of the prime minister's negligent behaviour is having on the people out there in the country, and on us as members of parliament, i alone, the country, and on us as members of parliament, ialone, i the country, and on us as members of parliament, i alone, i alone have seen a parliament, i alone, i alone have seen a huge escalation just today in the abuse on social media. and the language and incitement that he is causing. this has got to stop. hear, hear! so why doesn't he listen to what the court said yesterday, say sorry about that. say sorry, and then let's do the democratic thing and

actually, yes, let's put it back to the people for a final say. hear, hear! mr speaker, i am mindful of what you have said about the surrender act. i must say that i do appreciate, i do appreciate that tensions on this matter are high. but i want to be very clear with the honourable lady opposite. there is only one way to end those tensions in this country, and that is to get brexit over the line. if she thinks that by staying on in the eu, month after month after october the 31st, those tensions, that acrimony, all of that storm on twitter is going to abate. she's got another think coming. let's get this thing done. mr speaker, i'm glad to hear of the prime minister's continuing commitment to getting a deal. it seems to me that that deal would

inevitably be based around alternative arrangements. he mentioned the discussions in brussels. but also, crucial, and this will be discussions in belfast and in dublin. could he give us an update on his meeting with lee ever radtke on monday in new york. did they discuss alternative arrangements, and what is his view? well, i really think my right honourable friend, because he's been put —— played a huge role in developing alternative arrangements, and yes, that played a large part in our conversation in the monday with the taoiseach. i think it would be overoptimistic, mr speaker, to say that that alone can solve the problem. there remain difficult issues, as i'm sure he understands, about customs, and we really must make progress on that issue. caroline lucas. mr speaker, the tone of the prime minister's speech was truly shocking, and if he says that he recognises the tensions are inflamed, and then it is up to him

to not stoke them further. whipping up to not stoke them further. whipping up hatred, and treating parliament with contempt, and dividing our country still further. now this populist rhetoric isn't only unfitting for a prime minister, but it is genuinely seriously dangerous, as our friends across the aisle have just said. so i asked him again a very simple question. if you trust the people as much as he says he does, then why would he not allow them to have a final say on his deal. he says he wants to get this over quickly, that is the quickest way to get a resolution to this crisis. obviously, iwould way to get a resolution to this crisis. obviously, i would like parliament to have a say on the deal that we do, but i think the best way to get the people to have a say is to get the people to have a say is to have a general election. i hope she will support that. mr speaker, one of the presidents quoted by the supreme court yesterday was a 1965 ruling that a government could not deprive individuals or companies of their

assets without fair compensation. what implication is this does my right honourable think might have for a future labour party manifesto? iam for a future labour party manifesto? i am delighted that my right honourable friend has mentioned that with his characteristic acute in his support of property and the rights of people across this country. they are going to be despoiled if the right honourable gentleman never got anywhere near power. he has a, a maduro asked plan to take away private property from great schools across the country, and indeed, to incorporate the taxpayer, to incur the kind that he himself, in ecstasy of hypocrisy, and thereby to incorporate the taxpayer with £7 billion of pointless extra cost to pay for the education of the children concerned. chris bryant. mr speaker, since we are definitely going to be sitting for at least a few more days, wouldn't it make more

sense for the government to bring forward something that the whole house can agree on? two women are killed on average by their domestic partners every week of the year. in this country. the government has a domestic abuse bill, which is ready to go why don't we do second reading of on monday or tuesday? the whole of on monday or tuesday? the whole of the house would agree we would be able to send it off into committee, and if we were eventually to have another queen's speech, then we would be able to have carry over for it. it's time we defended the women of this country. here! hear, hear! is absolutely right. it's one of the reasons i wanted to have a queen's speech that we can bring back the domestic violence bill. thank you, mr speaker. can i draw the prime ministers attention to an e—maili the prime ministers attention to an e—mail i received from ports equipment engineering limited, who

are in my constituency. they say the people voted to leave, and this has to be respected, pushing it back further would certainly cause damage to the local area. please represent us in parliament, and speak of the massive impact this is having, and how it will escalate quickly with further problems. could i urge the prime minister to stick to his guns, deliver on the 31st of october, the port is ready and waiting, and hopefully getting freeport status after we leave. hear, hear! i thought that was cunning, mr speaker. i certainly am gratefulfor his support in my ambition to get brexit done by october the 31st. and apart from anything else, it would not only help to take the sting out of the current conversation, i think home everybody down, but it will... it will deliver the business certainty and confidence that they have been crying out for around the whole united kingdom. lady herman!

thank you very much indeed, mr speaker. i have to tell the prime minister, i was shocked, shocked that he is the prime minister should ta ke that he is the prime minister should take it upon himself, with his arrogance, to declare the judgement of the supreme court as being wrong. it was the supreme courts, the highest court of the land, 11 judges who were unanimous, but the prime minister has declared this evening, that their decision was wrong. he hasn't explained the grounds, but he hasn't explained the grounds, but he has declared them to be wrong. if the prime minister believes that, does the prime minister also believe that it does the prime minister also believe thatitis does the prime minister also believe that it is lawful for him to do does the prime minister also believe that it is lawfulfor him to do —— to call another lengthy prorogation of this parliament? and if he has that on his mind, when is he going to enlighten us as to when that prorogation is going to begin? i'm grateful to the right honourable lady, but what i can tell her is i do think we need a queen's speech. i

do think we need a queen's speech. i do think we need a queen's speech. i do think that we have a dynamic domestic agenda that we need to push forward , domestic agenda that we need to push forward, and i will be informing her as well as the rest of the house as soon we as well as the rest of the house as soon we have assessed to the meaning of thejudgement in soon we have assessed to the meaning of the judgement in its entirety, and when it will be appropriate to do so. we re do so. were restored. thank you, mr speaker. like my right honourable friend, i support a brexit deal, and indeed, i voted for it considerably more frequently than my right honourable friend. but if this great party sounds —— stands for anything, it stands for respect for anything, it stands for respect for parliamentary sovereignty, and the rule of law. and i would respect we say, my right honourable friend is tiptoeing onto a dangerous path. he is pitting brexit against remain, young against old, scotland against england. and people are against the parliament. would my right honourable friend please reflect on the fact that this brexit deal is not a dealjust the fact that this brexit deal is not a deal just for the

the fact that this brexit deal is not a dealjust for the next the fact that this brexit deal is not a deal just for the next five yea rs not a deal just for the next five years it's the foundation of our relationship with europe for the next 40. and that requires us to speak with respect, with moderation, with compassion for our opponents, in order to provide a foundation thatis in order to provide a foundation that is not just in order to provide a foundation that is notjust to appeal to a single narrow fraction, but to every citizen in party in this great country. i think my right honourable friend. i think the juxtaposition actually is between democracy, which we are sticking up for, and the will of the people, and delaying, which is what the party opposite is standing for. that seems to be a very clear dividing line, and i know which side i'm on. thank you, mr speaker. mr speaker, earlier on, the prime minister referenced the... so he must rejoice with me the fact that the countries across eastern europe believe that

their independence and sovereignty is enhanced by their membership of the european union. just as a rule of law is enhanced by that membership. so, if all the criteria are fulfilled by the parliamentary sovereignty and rule of law act, and if he is still prime minister on the 19th of october, will he reassure me, that i don't think he respects the robot any more, reassure me, prove me wrong, tell me he will sign that extension. mr speaker, if he doesn't want to college, what about the humiliation act, will that do any better? because that's what it's intended to do. but onto his substantive point about respecting the rule of law, i made that's, i've made that clear several times to this house, we will of course respect the law.

mr richard graham. element mr speaker, the problem with the build of the prime minister calls of the surrender act is that many of those who supported were not so much against no—deal as against leaving the european union altogether. but there are many of us, on both sides of the house, who support the prime minister's stated goal of coming back with a deal from the european union october counsel, and leaving the eu at the end of october. can i therefore urge my right honourable friend, firstly, to maximise the two weeks negotiating opportunity, and to secondly reach out across the house to all of those on both sides who genuinely want to leave the eu, but in the best possible way. of course, i think my right honourable friend, he is completely right, and we will reach out to members across all sides of the house, and i hope that our overtures will be received ina kindly that our overtures will be received in a kindly spirit. yet helen

goodman. thank you mr speaker. i must say i feel that the prime minister's goading of my colleagues from yorkshire reveals that he has changed little since he was a student burning £50 notes in front of homeless people. i do have a real question, the problem is, this was billed as a statement on the prime minister's update. rather than just talking about vague concepts, could the prime minister tell the house what proposals he has tabled to the european union? mr speaker, the right honourable lady opposite has made an allegation about my conduct asa made an allegation about my conduct as a student, which i'm afraid if it we re as a student, which i'm afraid if it were allowed to stand, would enter the record, she has no evidence for it or whatever, but if it is completely... completely unproved. and i would like you to ask the right honourable lady to withdraw it.

well, i'm most grateful to the prime minister, the honourable lady has said what she said, but of the prime minister... 0 dare! —— order! the prime minister from the dispatch box, and with the full authority of his office, and knowing his own background, and recognising the duty of every memberto background, and recognising the duty of every member to speak the truth in this chamber has exercised his freedom, and quite rightly so. the prime minister i think would readily acknowledge, that in the light of all of that, he doesn't require any additional protection for me. he has put the record straight, and it's there. thank you. bloom echoes on there. thank you. bloom echoes on the record, and i think the right honourable gentlemen. caroline noakes! element mr speaker, what matters is in its place is not just language but also tone. i noted that my right honourable friend, the prime minister, early spoke of the political cowardice. element i wish

to speak to him of political bravery. politics is the art of the possible, i genuinely believe it's possible for him to get a new deal, there does not further, i believe it's possible for it to pass this house. but it would be politically brave not simply to reach across the house, but brave to put his arms around the house. well, i thank my right honourable friend, and i will do my best. i will do my best to do, mr speaker... laughing it's an invitation, and it's clearly not universally welcomed, but i do share her idealism. i do think there isa share her idealism. i do think there is a chance for us now to do our duty by our constituents, and put this matter to rest. and in a way that i think will greatly alleviate the tensions that are now current in our country, and i think it would be a great thing for our country to do that. so i will follow her urgings

and do my best to show the spirit that she asks for. well i think the moment has arrived for the honourable gentlemen member of the kingston upon hull east, who is noise these activities i was remarking upon a number of cities around the world last week. we so often hear him yelling from a signature you position. let's now hear him from a standing position. mrcarl hear him from a standing position. mr carl turner. element thank you very much indeed, mr speaker. i think it really is an absolute disgrace that the prime minister is being dragged here by the most seniorjudges. from the highest court in the land, because the advice that the leader of the house gave to her majesty the queen was held to be unlawful but he comes here laughing and joking and using aggressive language when honourable members on this side make very

serious points. why does he think he can treat the queen and country with such utter contempt! well i can treat the queen and country with such utter contempt! welll have can treat the queen and country with such utter contempt! well i have the utmost respect, not just such utter contempt! well i have the utmost respect, notjust for the courts, but also of course for the honourable gentlemen, and if i may say, the way in which i think we could all show respect to our constituents, and particularly, i think his own constituents, who voted very heavily to leave the eu would be to vote for the deal when we bring it back to you, and i hope you will support us in the lobbies. stephen metcalf. thank you mr speaker, and it's good to see my honourable friend back in his rightful place, little earlier than perhaps he assumed it would be, and i hope he remains there very long time. can he give me some advice that i can share with my constituents, when i try to explain why this parliament refuses to

approve a general election, refuses to vote to leave the eu, refuses to respect the wishes of 17.4 million people, and refuses to honour the views of 73% of my constituents voted to... can he give me some advice? i think my honourable friend, and he is completely right. the way to address the feelings of his constituents, of my constituents, of all of our constituents, of all of our constituents, and frankly, the way to puncture the great poisonous puffball of brexit is just to get on and make sure that the very word, and make sure that the very word, andi and make sure that the very word, and i know that there's a lot of anxiety about language, let's make sure that the very word brexit is never heard in 2020. would not be a fantastic thing? hear, hear! mr speaker, and bitterly disappointed that parliament didn't have the chance to agree to forgo the nearly four weeks of the conference recess so we four weeks of the conference recess so we could spend more time together. but i have to say to the

prime minister, in seeking to prorogue parliaments from i think he's shown a serious lack of judgement. and i only hope that and his tone improves from today. can i ask the prime minister, should he secure ask the prime minister, should he secure and deal at the eu summit in october, will he invite parliament to have a vote to ratify under a meaningful vote on saturday the 19th of november, that deal, and by doing so, meet the terms of the eu withdrawal number two act. prime minister! i'm grateful mr speaker, i think the honourable lady meant to say october, rather than november. what i can certainly tell her, and i think are very much with the sincerity in which she approaches this issue, and clearly i do want to work together with all members of the house of commons to

try to get this thing done. we will, if we can get a deal, at the summit, we will of course be putting it to parliament. mr speaker, i back to remain in the referendum, but my constituency and my country decided otherwise. and so i thought it was my duty as a member of this house to accept those instructions and that mandate and executed faithfully. and my constituents say, after three years, this parliament has achieved nothing! it is a rump parliament, so cani nothing! it is a rump parliament, so can i ask the prime minister, what representations did he have from the minor parties in relation to the confidence vote on election vote, as well as the labour party to bring forward a general election, so that people can have their say and settle this question for good. thank you, i'm afraid my honourable friend is absolutely right. i've yet to hear either from the absolutely right. i've yet to hear eitherfrom the main absolutely right. i've yet to hear either from the main opposition party or indeed any of the

opposition parties if they are willing to take up our democratic challenge, but i want to thank him and to congratulate him for what he has done for dover, where i have been, and been very, very impressed with the level of reparations, and honourable members opposite who are anxious, might educate themselves by going to see what has been done at dover. and i congratulate my honourable friend for the leadership that he has shown. mr speaker mr speaker, tonight the primitive stress made inflammatory comments against presbyterians, and he will be accountable for the consequences of that language. but i want to him about the judicial. in the last 36 hours, we have seen an unprecedented onslaught on the impartiality and integrity of ourjudges. on the impartiality and integrity of our judges. parliamentarians, and particular ministers of the government, have a duty to uphold the independent and integrity of the judges. so will he take the opportunity that he did not take

earlier when asked by the leader of the opposition, and distance himself specifically from the commons of the leader of the house that yesterday's judgement was a constitutional coup? i'm not going to comment on anything that was said by any member of the cabinet, but i can say that it would be totally wrong, there is a risk of serious distortion in the reporting. what i can say, is that the government has five utmost respect for the judiciary, government has five utmost respect for thejudiciary, and government has five utmost respect for the judiciary, and indeed government has five utmost respect for thejudiciary, and indeed for thejudgement, and for thejudiciary, and indeed for the judgement, and that for thejudiciary, and indeed for thejudgement, and that is for thejudiciary, and indeed for the judgement, and that is why we are all here today, and i think it's been to the advantage of the house to hear a little bit about the negotiations, but i think the house will also understand that some of the measures that have been passed by the house, at least one of the measures passed by the house has not made negotiation any easier. i'm just saying that to you in all candour and sincerity, and i think honourable members know that.

mr speaker, excuse me, mr speaker. thank you, mr speaker. my voices are restored. my right honourable friend has talked about a surrender act, which i think is quite accurate. does he recall, as i do, because i was in the house of the time, the 1989 the community charge act, which was described as a poll tax by the opposition to deliberately stoke up angen opposition to deliberately stoke up anger, and opposition in the country. i appreciate the good humour of the honourable gentlemen, and i'm sorry that he was struggling with his throat, but it was suggested to me that he could usefully take an herbal remedy. i thought that was coming, mr speaker. and i think my honourable friend, my right honourable friend, my right honourable friend, my right honourable friend, he makes a very good point. and all i will say again, at the risk of further inflaming my friends opposite, i

must say, that the bill in question, the capitulation act, the quebec act but ua should act has done damage to this country's ability to negotiate. and i think they should reflect on that. it's an international negotiation, it's very important that the uk is able to deploy every possible arsenal, every possible negotiating tool, and i'm afraid that an attempt has been made to wea ken that an attempt has been made to weaken our hand. there's no question on it. thank you so much, mr speaker. mr speaker, hearing from the prime minister words like the humiliation act, the surrender act, the capitulation act, all of these words are suggesting that we, because we disagree with him, we are traitors. we are not patriots. nothing could be further from the truth. now this may be a strategy to set the people

against the establishment. i would like to gently suggest he is the establishment, and we are still people. as for the woman who has taken over a people. as for the woman who has ta ken over a seat people. as for the woman who has taken over a seat that was left by ourdear taken over a seat that was left by our dear friend, jo taken over a seat that was left by our dearfriend, jo cox, taken over a seat that was left by our dear friend, jo cox, can taken over a seat that was left by our dearfriend, jo cox, can i ask him in all honesty, as a human being, please, please, will he, going forward, moderate his language so going forward, moderate his language so that we will all feel secure when we are going about ourjobs? (applause) 0f (applause) of course, there will be an attempt to try and obfuscate the effects of this act and the capitulation act, surrender act, which ever way you wa nt to surrender act, which ever way you want to phrase it. i am sorry but it greatly hinders this governments abilities. but what i will say is that the best way to honour the memory of them and bring this

country together would be, i think, to get brexit done. and i absolutely do and! to get brexit done. and i absolutely do and i think it is the continuing inability of this parliament to get brexit done that is causing the anxiety and the ill feelings that are now rampant in our country and getting it done and we will solve the problem. thank you, mr speaker. but everyone calls the european union withdrawal act number two, is it not a fact that it does not take no deal permanently off the table, it would delay it until the end of january. particularly their only two ways that those are about that permanently is to revoke article 50 with all that implies her democracy for this to the right thing, come together and pass a deal which i have every confidence that they were ta ke have every confidence that they were take into account. i congratulate my

honourable friend because that is exactly the right answer but i feel the best way forward generally is for countries to come together and doa for countries to come together and do a deal and that is what i hope my collea g u es do a deal and that is what i hope my colleagues would do. thank you, mr speaker. the supreme court ruled unanimously that the prime minister and his government tried to unlawfully prorogue this place. the prime minister has not come near with a shred of humility, he has been using divisive language and has failed to offer an apology. soul asking once again, as many members of try to, will he now apologised to the people, my constituency and the wider country for trying to shut down democracy and will he also reassured that he will not attempt to try and prorogue the scouts —— this house again. -- this house again. trying to shut

down democracy and to erode trust in our political institution and failing to leave. that is what we are going to do. there have been some challenges for the prime minister. thank you, mr speaker. order, or the honourable minister. thank you, mr speaker. order, orthe honourable gentlemen, i'm not surprised, but i am very pleased to see that notwithstanding some sedentary haggling. the honourable gentleman still has a smile on his face, that is a good thing. there have been some challenges in recent weeks but is he aware that the bulk of the people my folks on the isle of wight see the obstacles being put in his way whether it's from people from this house or european leaders or others,

the more that they are willing him on, the more that they want him to stick the cork to deliver brexit on the 31st of october and restore trust in our politics. i thank my honourable friend who is a mighty campaigner for the isle of wight and at that is going to ask me about the island deal that we are going to do, but i assure him that we are, do not worry. and he is right, there are obstacles being thrown in our path. the conversations are difficult. but i feel that with goodwill from the other side of this house, we can still do it. mr speaker, the prime minister has proven that if you live behind a wall of armed police officers, you can be as irresponsible as you want with your language because you never have to live with the consequences of the

people up been speaking up to him today with all sincerity. but when it comes to the supreme court case, can you explain something, every other participant in the case provided witness statements that we re provided witness statements that were sworn. why didn't he and why didn't the government? the government provided all the evidence that we were asked to provide and i may say, he talks about... i was london for —— i was the mayor of london for —— i was the mayor of london for —— i was the mayor of london for eight years, i went around, i went around everywhere with the bicycle on a bicycle with no protection whatsoever and i was very proud of it. and believe me, believe me, the best way to ensure that every parliamentarian is properly safe, is if we dialled down

the current anxiety in this country and get brexit done. thank you mr speaker, whether it is preferred to as the humiliation act, or the surrender bill, but my right on a full friend agree with me that it has the same effect of giving up or yielding control of when we leave the eu to the europeans, weakening his hand to get a deal on the first place was white my honourable those who deprecate the description of this bill, the best thing that they could do in my view is repeal it, get rid of it or even better, support us in going for a better deal. no shame and no apology for breaking the law. does the prime

minister understand by many people in this country think he is unfit to be our prime minister?” in this country think he is unfit to be our prime minister? i think that the right honourable judge be our prime minister? i think that the right honourablejudge could easily test that proposition if he had the gumption to go for a general election or a vote of no confidence, which is failing to do. the prime minister secures a deal and i will vote for it, does he agree that the british people are fed up with hearing for three years with this houseis hearing for three years with this house is against and it is high time that it hurt what this house is for? my that it hurt what this house is for? my honourable friend has spoken and he is completely right. that is what this people —— these people want to see, us getting brexit done and then getting on with a dynamic one nation conservative agenda and that is a real going to do. thank you, mr

speaker. in the past two hours in seven minutes, the prime minister has mocked us, belittled us, told us it is his way or nothing, use the language that he knows and cites fear, he'd patronize us, he shows disregard for the law, is try to make us feel that our views of no value when we are trying to represent their constituents. he has done all of this over the most important matter of our times at a time of national crisis, i am not asking him to apologise to us, although i think you should. i am asking them to apologise to my constituents who did not want us to be prorogue in the first place and yesterday, the supreme court said they agreed with it. so i ask them now, will he apologise to the people of bristol west and start taking this house seriously?” of bristol west and start taking this house seriously? i think her, but i do take this house exceptionally serious and i say to her that i certainly do and i think that actually, it is our

constituents, all of them across this whole country who feel that their opinions are being undervalued. because they expressed an opinion three years ago and this house,in an opinion three years ago and this house, in spite of countless promises, has failed to implement that opinion. and i suggest that the best thing we do is go to do it. thank you very much, mr speaker. as vocal as they are, they want to ignore the 2016 result and of another brexit referendum will as if by magic, i could've almost scripted that response. because they are shouting out that the one in scotland, it was not a scotland wide vote. it was a vote by individuals as is any referendum and they also ignored the 2014 referendum and the people of scotland voted to remain

in the united kingdom, who was a member state of the eu, which is leaving the eu. so can the prime minister confirm that only the conservative party in scotland and across the united kingdom are committed to delivering on both of those people's vote to make votes. perfectly right and i have seen it first hand how he is for his constituents and a sharp distinction between him and the scottish nationalist party because he has a plan once we take back control of scotland's extraordinary fisheries to boost that industry wears they will hand it back to brussels and i congratulate him on what he is doing. thank you, mr speaker. the times today said the whole point of conservative government is to provide an executive aware of its limitations and sensitive to the

dangers of overreaching them. a tory believes that the rule of law is a lwa ys believes that the rule of law is always to be preferred to arbitrary power. without these things, what is point of the conservatives. the prime ministerjust told my friend that the best way to honour the memory of my friend is to get the exit done. he has broken the law and he has not apologised for it. constituents of mine, good conservative voters, are asking themselves what on earth is the prime minister done to his party was mac let alone our country? will he now resign? i have the utmost respect for the law and for the judgement of the supreme court and the people of this country want us to do in this parliament, as i've said several times a ready this evening is to deliver on the mandate of the people and that is what we are going to do. mr speaker, a few

minutes ago i asked a question to where he responded sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and i have yet to meet a single constituent who knows that. in the event that the prime minister gets the deal, that i fully support them with, will he ensure that any member of the conservative party benches that does not vote for that deal will lose the right to stand as a conservative candidate in a general election? i have said what i have said to my honourable friend in the past and i see no reason to go over the point again because i believe we all want to do is to go on and get the best deal possible that can be supported across this house and that, i think, supported across this house and that, ithink, is supported across this house and that, i think, is the best decision. it is perfectly clear that they want to stop brexit. mr speaker. the

prime minister and the government maintain that they did not seek the prorogation in order to frustrate parliament talking about brexit. the supreme court ruled 20 that it was not true. of the prime minister still maintains that the court was wrong. will he agree to take a public lie detector test?” wrong. will he agree to take a public lie detector test? i do not know if the honourable question, i will point out that if you read the judgement or listened to the judgement, but the court did not impugn the motives of the government at all. mr speaker, the main constitutional functions of this house are to choose and sustain a government and to legislate. since this parliament seems incapable of

doing either, is the correct constitutional way forward a general election so voters can decide between the conservative government to deliver on the brexit referendum one of the parties opposite to overturn it? my honourable friend is com pletely overturn it? my honourable friend is completely right and it is extraordinary that the so—called party of the people absolutely refuses to trust the people and i urge them once again and there is still time, if they want to go for a no—confidence vote, now is the moment. mr speaker, the prime minister believes himself to be a great statesman. this house in passing the withdrawal two act, simply changed the parameters of the discussions near death of europe. it did not prevent them from having those discussions. if he is the great statement that he is, why can he not ensures that he will come

back with the deal. because mr speaker, he has not answered the question from my honourable friend. what negotiations is he having? what is he put on the table for europe because we are now a month or so to go before he needs to come back with that agreement to this house.” wonder whether she has ever conducted a negotiation which she has agreed on the offset that it must conclude in favour of the other side because if she has, i think she would understand what her side of the argument tried to do, try to do with the surrender capitulation, humiliation, whatever you want to call it. we will not be daunted by this. we will get on and try to get the best deal possible nonetheless, as the honourable lady is advocating. thank you, mr speaker.

what we have seen today in this houseis what we have seen today in this house is more than 17 opposition members who have brought us back here to talk about brexit and scrutinise it when we have actually had three years to talk about brexit in this house and i have not heard a single original point and any member opposite. has the prime minister heard any new argument forward because he does believe that they're interested in what is being said by members opposite or are they interested in what the priorities that he would want to put forward a queen's speech? i think you so much to my honourable friend. i think with the people want to hear is not just that we're going to get brexit done on october the 31st, what you will. they were going to come forward with a one nation conservative agenda to take whole

united kingdom forward and that is what we are going to do and i hope, by the way, that will have the support and i've been listening very carefully a nd support and i've been listening very carefully and watching the expressions on members opposite very carefully, i think there is more support on the opposite for a deal that they might currently admit. i hope they will nurture that feeling because that is the right way forward for our country. the majority of my constituents did not vote for brexit. scotland did not vote for brexit. scotland did not vote for brexit. this government has no mandate in scotland and the prime minister has no mandate in scotland. the fact is, he has no respect for the constitution or rule of law. so why should scotland not vote to leave this union? i would just remind the honourable lady that more people and scotland voted for brexit then voted for the s and p. thank

you, mr speaker. the prime minister has smirked and smeared his way through this statement this evening. dismissing the ruling by the supreme court as novel. when we all know, mr speaker, the country knows that it was an indictment of this prime minister and his abuse of power to try and gag parliament. if he had a shred of decency or integrity, he would apologise to this house, to the country and he would resign. i have no doubt that he's going to do none of those things. he is also steadfast refusing to say that he will not do it again and prorogue at this house once more. so can i ask him again, will he guaranteed that he will try and pull the stunt again

and seek prorogation?” he will try and pull the stunt again and seek prorogation? i think the house in the country does need is queen's speech and we will be seeing exactly how that should be brought forward in this new context. all i can say is that if he wants to remove me from office, which i think is what he said he wanted to do, he should encourage his honourable friends to have a general election. thank you very much, mr speaker. may i wish the prime minister and his tea m i wish the prime minister and his team well in the negotiations as they continue because i am convinced that there is a majority in this house, contrary to what some say for leaving with a good deal and i believe you will bring that to this house. however i believe you will remember a discussion i have with

them earlier this year about freedom of speech. with freedom of speech comes responsibility and sometimes the responsibility means not saying what one may be would like to say. words like surrender, words like betrayal, words like treason. however, i would finally does ask him if he remembers the fable of aesop, both of us being classicists, about the sun and the wind and who it was not the wind that one by blowing the person because he wrapped the code further around himself, it was the son by coming out, banished those clouds and made the man take his coat off and should be the sun king and not the king of wind. i thank my honourable friend

for his, i remind them of the other aesop fable about the man who allowed his hair to be plucked, he had black hair and white hair and he allowed two women i think it was, to pluck out one hair after the other until he was completely bald and i think that is a tale that might be used by the right honourable gentleman opposite because he cannot make up his mind about whether he is in favour of leave or remain in the way to take this country forward is to deliver on the wishes of the people and deliver on the wishes of the people in come out of the eu and thatis the people in come out of the eu and that is the way to dial it down all emotion and all anxiety in this country and as for some of the language that he ascribed to me, i don't think i've ever use those words and i'll be happy to clarify the point. the prime minister's

political hero, winston churchill when threatened with the selection and his constituency in the 1930s said what is the use of parliament? it is not the place where true state m e nts it is not the place where true statements can be brought before the people. he understood the role of the parliament, not simply as delegates to this place but representatives and servants of the people and guardians of the national interest and democracy, parliament, the judiciary, interest and democracy, parliament, thejudiciary, the interest and democracy, parliament, the judiciary, the free interest and democracy, parliament, thejudiciary, the free press and thejudiciary, the free press and the pillars of civil society. does the pillars of civil society. does the prime minister not understand that in the way that he has conducted himself, whether the unlawful prorogation of this parliament, the use his language in the chamber, the way has withdrawn from people behind him who seemingly have more regard for conservative values than he does does he understand that maybe he is a problem and not the solution and if he truly believes in consent, there

are two ways to go back to the people. the first way is to honour the law passed by this house to seek an extension to article 50 and we will gladly go to the lobbies behind him. the other is to put a deal or no deal to the people in a vote. both of those ways will unlock the deadlock, the only question is whether or not he has the courage to do it. to what end? i do not understand why on earth the honourable gentlemen, i know he speaks sense but why on earth would he want to stay in the eu beyond the 3ist? what he want to stay in the eu beyond the 31st? what is his purpose? the people who have spoken, ill another billion pounds a month and i simply failed to understand his logic.” just want to ask the honourable gentlemen, the member for calling him whether he can confirm that he

has been years since 630 without interruption without going into the chamber —— out interruption —— without interruption. thank you very much mr speaker. i was inspired due to the incitement but i want to draw attention to on the 27th of april, asa attention to on the 27th of april, as a humble backbencher, the prime minister visited my constituency and just four or five days later, we won two more council seats. however, the leader of the opposition recently visited my constituency about ten days ago and since then, i got five new members of the party. does the prime minister believe that this net effect might explain the hesitance on the part of the leader of the opposition to try and call a general

election? i remember well that happy afternoon we spent at weather spoons asi afternoon we spent at weather spoons as i said, i seem to recall and i noted the popularity of my honourable friend with his constituents, but i also noted that their determination to get brexit done on october the 31st and as we're going to do it a hope for the support of the benches opposite. the supreme courtjudgement support of the benches opposite. the supreme court judgement yesterday began and i quote, it is important to emphasise that the issue in these appeals does not win and on what terms the uk leaves the european union. without reference to brexit, will the prime minister now apologise to this house and to the people of this country for giving unlawful advice to the queen when he tried to silence this parliament?

for the honourable lady to what i have already said, we respect the judiciary and the supreme court but i humbly disagree with what the justice have said. thank you mr speaker. the answer to brexit should lie in this chamber but after more than three years of discussion, people are beginning to despair of their politicians. those like me who voted to remain have had to compromise and i have now voted three times to leave and i do hope that i get a fourth opportunity. for the prime minister agreed that it is not more time to this chamber needs, but more compromise? there's no point in an extension without compromise if they cannot compromise, they must call a general election. i really think that my honourable friend puts herfinger on theissue honourable friend puts herfinger on

the issue because this is been a crucible of the nation, and intellectual house for honourable members, if they had any solutions or ideas on how to take forward a deal between us and our much valued european union friends and partners. if they had a single notion, this would be, if! if they had a single notion, this would be, if i was doing something or missing a trick or some idea that they had, we have not heard anything. nothing remotely positive, not a single idea, zilch from the people opposite and i think they'll be noted by people watching. people opposite and i think they'll be noted by people watchingm people opposite and i think they'll be noted by people watching. in 2014 from those scotland voters to remain in the uk, the only way to ensure our eager membership was through voting for independence, 2016 came

we had another referendum in scotland, my constituency and every other constituency in scotland voted to remain in the eu. so we're going to remain in the eu. so we're going to ask the prime minister, since he has brought us towards the snow deal chaos, i was going to ask if he was going to stop that he doesn't need, and just where does even begin to justify the absolute hell he is about to put on my constituents and more so about to put on my constituents and more sojust how about to put on my constituents and more so just how gullible does he think they are? i can obviously see if she really disagrees so vehemently over the course that we are embarking on, she is at liberty to table a no—confidence motion and go foran to table a no—confidence motion and go for an election. she is refusing to do that but i would remind her what we're trying to achieve is a deal. and she is smiling because i

hope that she supports that outcome andi hope that she supports that outcome and i hope we can count on her presence in the lobbies if you're lucky enough to get one. mr speaker, as the prime minister saad done to close down parliament, there are those in this government was sought to silence the voice of employers speaking out about their concerns of brexit. that was revealed last week by the financial times. four different employers organisations. with the prime minister condemn such behaviour and say in unequivocal terms that there can be no question ever of that voice of dissent being muzzled, preventing truth being told to power? we're going to leave parliament now and shortlyjoin outside source which is coming up after an impeachment inquiry is watched in the transcript of his

phone call to the ukrainian president. do turn over to bbc parliament. hello, kasia madera, this is outside source. borisjohnson returns to parliament after yesterday's ruling that it had been closed down illegally. the prime minister made no apology — instead calling the supreme court's ruling wrong. he also reiterated his call for a general election: this for a general election: parliament was —— must eiti stand this parliament was —— must either stand aside and let this government get brexit done, or bring a vote of confidence and finally face the day of reckoning with the voters! this is the live scene from the house of commons — where the prime minister is still facing a grilling from mps. our other big news story this

hour...