, who said this is parliament's the eu, so tim barrow, who said this is pa rliament‘s letter, the eu,ament's letter, not the government's, and the third letter from borisjohnson to the eu saying "please don't give us the delay because i don't want one". we know he doesn't want one, what we do have the situation where a day that was supposed to bring us clarity has just brought more model. is that good for britain? is that good for parliament? i think it is hard to say it is. it would be argued by the likes of sir 0liver letwin is that they did not delay it for the sake of it, they delayed it because they don't trust the prime minister and others to deliver the deal in the right, correct way. ithink others to deliver the deal in the right, correct way. i think that's right, correct way. i think that's right, that is what they are saying, because they actually do want a deal, and would likely vote for a deal, and would likely vote for a deal when it comes in front of the house again. what is interesting here is the personal relationships of the prime minister, that the prime minister ha

those letters are on their way and they will be delivered by tim barrow, the uk ‘s representative ine watching a bbc news special. the ayes to the right, 322. the noes to the left, 306. the vote means that all brexit laws must be passed before mps give approval to the deal, but the prime minister says he still intends to leave on time. i will not negotiate a delay with the eu. and neither... and neither does the law compel me to do so. the prime minister must now comply with the law. he can no longer use the threat of a no deal crash out to blackmail members to support his sell out deal. a letter requesting another delay is on its way to the eu tonight, in line with the law, and despite the prime minister's deep misgivings. as mps debated in parliament, thousands of demonstrators marched through central london, calling for a referendum on any brexit deal. and away from the political clashes, we'll be speaking to voters in birmingham, to find out what they made of today's developments. and our other main story tonight. oh, the run in for watson, and england on the way to yokohama. eng

then there is a letter from tim barrow, our representative at the eu, saying it is nothing to do withliament has full state upon us the parliament has full state upon us and then another letter from johnson saying it is deeply corrosive for their to be a delay, asking the eu to ignore the other letter. so, we continue with this eternal round of madness! there was a belief earlier this week that we might actually have a finite decision, a departure date, we had an agreement and a deal struck, surprisingly in many peoples views, at the end of last week. your paper and other papers were asking whether he had pulled it off? it's a reasonable question to ask. a lot of people were doubting whether there was intention to do a deal. a deal was intention to do a deal. a deal was struck and parliament has, in its wisdom, decided to keep things hanging on. it is up to eu leaders who have to go back to brussels, they cannot do this on a video call, they've got to meet in brussels. it will take a while, there are a lot of european leaders together in one room and they have to decide do they getan

alongside that there's a covering note from sir tim barrow, who's a civil servant, explaining that they'ret sending a copy from the act. and with that a second letter, a political message to the eu from borisjohnson maintaining his argument that a delay would be a mistake and asking them to ask parliament to reconsider their decision. from a political point of view, this window there is now, gives borisjohnson‘s opponents what they see as a chance to cause as much trouble as they possibly can to try and try to maybe get that second referendum some of them so desire orjust to try to slam the brakes on the prime minister's project. but for number 10 they are going to keep trying. they are going to try another vote on monday, then maybe another vote on tuesday, the difficulty for them is this process is getting more and more tangled up. and because of that, we've said before, before too long this is probably going to be resolved by a general election. our europe editor, katya adler is in brussels with reaction from there. the fact that the prime minister has an accompanying letter tonight, ——

minister or someone else or whether it comes from its senior civil servant or somebody like sir tim barrowalking officially yet on the eu site about how they would handle that request. when they do, it would be the same questions they had and the same decisions that had to be made the last time and the time before that when there was an extension request. how long should it be? what is the optimum duration? is it something short that creates extra time pressure on mps and the government to come up with something and end this? or is it something longer that allows a bigger process to happen in the uk, like an election, a referendum or a fundamental rethink about what brexit is about and what the uk is trying to achieve? then what conditions can be attached to the extension? the last time the big debate we had four days and days was about with the uk have to have the european parliament elections? the eu decided, yes, if you are staying m, eu decided, yes, if you are staying in, the european elections had to be hell, and that is where we have ended up where we are now. adam fleming in brusse