Brexit: Theresa May says McDonnell wants to overturn will of British people – as it happened
Rolling coverage of the day's political developments as they unfolded, including Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs and the publication of the government's official analysis of the economic impact of Brexit
9.08pm GMT
We are now going to bring today's live coverage of political developments to a close. Thanks for all the contributions. Here's what happened:
His comments about the second referendum today show that what the Labour Party want to do is frustrate Brexit. They want to overturn the will of the British people. Parliament overwhelmingly gave the British people a vote. They voted to Leave. I think it's a matter of trust in politicians that they actually deliver on Brexit for the British people.
8.16pm GMT
Today's editorial on Brexit and the economy:
A poignant part of the Treasury analysis is the observation of differential regional impacts. London, a remain stronghold, is relatively insulated from harm. The north-east of England and the West Midlands, with higher concentrations of leave voters, look most vulnerable. That disparity represents an opportunity and a challenge to pro-Europeans. They can reasonably point out that Brexit was mis-sold and that calling it off would serve those who voted for it more than those who didn't. But that message carries a risk: many people who backed Brexit envisaging radical change would be insulted by the claim that their grievances can only be satisfied by refusing to do the thing they had so recently voted for.
In that sense, the chancellor's joyless defence of the prime minister's unloved deal illuminates a fundamental truth about the situation. The choice is not between good and bad Brexits but between different types of trauma. Leaving the EU is a painful procedure to which the only real upside is satisfaction of the powerful political demand that it be done. Whether meeting that test is reason enough to inflict the cost of leaving the EU is the real dilemma many MPs are weighing up but dare not express aloud.
Related: The Guardian view on Brexit and the economy: damage limitation | Editorial
8.09pm GMT
John McDonnell has a plan, but he'll need a movement too, writes the Guardian's senior economics commentator Aditya Chakrabortty.
You can't doubt the dedication of the crowd packing out this London concert hall on a Tuesday night. For an audience with John McDonnell, they have braved all the muck that a November evening can throw at them. They line up at the end for selfies and book signings. And the very mention of rent controls is greeted with an ovation.
Yet they're here with good reason. Interviewing the shadow chancellor for this Guardian Live event, it strikes me that what he says and does over the next few weeks matters more for him and for the rest of the country than at any time during his previous 40 years in politics.
Related: John McDonnell has a plan, but he'll need a movement too | Aditya Chakrabortty
8.02pm GMT
The government has published the business motion for the "meaningful vote" on Brexit.
MPs will debate the prime minister's Brexit deal for five days ahead of the main vote on December 11, with the speaker John Bercow permitted to select up to six amendments to the government motion.
NEW: Govt business motion on Brexit just published. Allows amendments 1st then main motion afterwards. But Lab won't be pushing People'sVote until AFTER Govt defeated on main motion.https://t.co/WlhZR2V95d pic.twitter.com/5z2CUYNqyq
7.59pm GMT
Donald Trump has been receiving Brexit briefings about Theresa May's deal from none other than Nigel Farage, according to BuzzFeed.
The site reported that Farage "gave a withering assessment of the agreement May has struck with the European Union, which hardened Trump's view that the UK has not achieved a good deal in the withdrawal negotiations."
7.47pm GMT
If you are just catching up with developments today regarding Labour's Brexit positioning, here is a report from our political correspondent Jessica Elgot and joint political editor Heather Stewart.
Corbyn is reported to be far more lukewarm about a second referendum than his shadow chancellor, and party sources say McDonnell's view does not reflect Labour's policy on the matter.
Related: Labour will inevitably back second Brexit referendum, says McDonnell
7.36pm GMT
The Harry Potter creator, J.K. Rowling, has suggested that some Brexit-supporters have always wanted a no-deal, with millions to be made when an economy collapses - a potential outcome if the UK exits the EU without a deal.
It has been reported that hedge funds used private polling to enrich themselves to the tune of millions, while Nigel Farage was forced to deny shorting the pound on the night of the Brexit vote
Plenty of Leavers have always wanted a no-deal Brexit, because there are millions to be made from a collapsing economy, as long as you've already got offshore bank accounts, plenty of money and the ethics of a hungry shark. https://t.co/3DNEDKztyh
Another trade discussion where I would like to believe the worst but not convinced: Brexit. The Bank of England just released some very dire scenarios 1/ https://t.co/0DvoT45JsS pic.twitter.com/xAeNTD8P6l
7.20pm GMT
This Sky Data poll comes after figures released by the Treasury suggested that the economy could be 3.9% worse off by 2033 as a result of the government's proposed Brexit deal.
In a response to the findings, 'Best for Britain' champion Layla Moran MP said:
The public know this deal is a bad deal and they do not want to be made poorer. The Treasury's economic analysis today shows the grim reality of what lays ahead of us.
In 2016, I do not believe that people who voted leave or remain, voted to give their families less money at the end of the month.
7.10pm GMT
Elsewhere in headaches for the prime minister, Jeremy Corbyn has written an open letter denouncing the scale of poverty in Britain following the United Nations' report last week.
The scale of poverty in Britain shames this Tory Government. This is a national emergency which must no longer be ignored.
My letter to @Theresa_May about the United Nations' report into poverty in the UK. pic.twitter.com/i7JdBmFySO
Related: UK austerity has inflicted 'great misery' on citizens, UN says
6.51pm GMT
Peter Mandelson, the remain-supporting Labour party grandee, has said that Brexit "scaremongering" isn't scaremongering - and that there must be a people's vote on the final deal.
In an interview with LBC's Eddie Mair, he also declared that "the public have got to dig the government out of the hole .. with another vote on this whole thing".
It's not scaremongering, it's analysis of actual proposals, actual conclusions that the government has reached and what we will all experience if we go forward with all this. I mean I would rather we didn't, I feel that at the moment, we're like a bunch of people driving towards er, Brexit, whatever the cost, without any idea of where we're going to end up, but somehow, nobody wants to take the decision to take their foot off the accelerator because of how people voted in 2016. You know, because of the people's will. Well, I think the only people who can determine what their will is now, are the people all over again. I just feel that the government's dug themselves into a terrible hole, er, with this deal as they call it, erm if the deal goes down in the House of Commons, as people expect it will, then I think the public have got to dig the government out of the hole they've put themselves into er with another vote on this whole thing.
I don't see the logic of what she's saying - I think she's falling back on an old formula, what governments always say, but look, the whole Brexit thing was so badly mis-sold. The promises that were made, you know, two years ago, they haven't been er delivered, I think it's time for the government to come clean with people and publish the whole thing and let people, you know, judge it on its own merits or lack of them. I mean, they've gotta come clean with people that's what people want because, you know, what they're being offered now is not what they were promised originally, it's a whole lot worse than we have now. We lose our frictionless trade with our nearest export market, but have to follow their rules with no say in making those rules, and let's face it, the uncertainty will just go on forever because so many of the big questions remain unanswered by what Mrs. May is proposing. The argument isn't going to stop and I say to business, people who say "oh let's get behind Mrs. May because we want to end the uncertainty", that forget it, this uncertainty is going to go on and on. This deal, certainty is the last thing this deal is going er, to give us, because as I say, all the main decisions are postponed and the argument inside the cabinet and the Tory party is going to go on and on if we were to leave next March.
That's quite a shift, that's quite a breakthrough for him. I mean, the thing is though, surely, Eddie, we wouldn't be contemplating either a general election or a People's Vote, another referendum, unless, you know, Mrs. May's deal goes down in the Commons. I think the Commons has got to have the first bite at it"
Oh I have no doubt that they're moving in the direction of a second vote, but that's because they're following public opinion and they should respect public opinion, I mean, at the moment I think it was the Daily Mail today that had a poll which said that the public now want a second referendum, a People's Vote, by a majority of 48% to 34% so it's very clear where the public's heading.
6.40pm GMT
Here's more from the Bank of England's Mark Carney who is apparently seeking to downplay some of the doomsday scenarios that have been drawn from today's Brexit impact analysis:
"These are scenarios, not forecasts," he said. "They illustrate what could happen, not necessarily what is most likely to happen."
6.36pm GMT
John McDonnell responds to the Bank of England's Brexit forecasts:
"The Bank has confirmed what other independent reports this week have been telling us: a No Deal Brexit could be even worse than the financial crisis of ten years ago, and the country would be much worse under Theresa May's deal.
6.29pm GMT
Our Scotland correspondent, Libby Brooks, was at this evening's press conference near Glasgow. She has just filed this report:
Theresa May has accused shadow chancellor John McDonnell of wanting to overturn the will of the British people, while urging MPs of all parties to consider the "significant responsibility" of deciding whether to support her Brexit deal in the Commons early next month.
6.25pm GMT
Here we have reaction from pro-Brexit MPs following the publication of the Bank of England's Brexit impact assessment. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they have cast doubt on the findings.
Jacob Rees-Mogg MP: "It is unusual for the Bank of England to talk down the pound and shows the Governor's failure to understand his role. He is not there to create panic."
6.17pm GMT
Theresa May is giving a brief press conference at the Scottish Leather Group in Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire.
She has reassured the country that the government has been mindful of Scotland's interests during the Brexit negotiations, saying that the ability to do trade deals around the world is of particular importance for premium Scottish products enjoyed around the world.
6.03pm GMT
Thanks Andrew.
John McDonnell has elaborated upon his widely reported remarks from earlier today. In an interview with the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg he suggested that Labour would "inevitably" back a second referendum in the event of the prime minister's Brexit deal being defeated in the Commons, so long as the party is unable to force a general election.
NEW: @johnmcdonnellMP has told @itvnews he's not giving up the demand for a general election if PM loses meaningful vote. Says Labour's position hasn't changed on a people's vote and if it does end up backing one it'll be because the govt forces it. He says he'd vote Remain. pic.twitter.com/No3H8IrTjj
Senior Labour source insists John McDonnell's words to @bbclaurak do not represent what he or the Labour party thinks. Make up your own mind.https://t.co/8xVPzGPIPJ
5.39pm GMT
And while we're on the subject of a second referendum, in this week's magazine James Forsyth, the Spectators's political editor, speculates about Theresa May doing a U-turn and embracing the idea if she loses the vote on the Brexit deal. He says:
But what can May do, given that she wants her deal to pass? Well, there is one route that might work for her: a second referendum. If the Commons won't back her deal, then maybe the country will.
This would require a massive volte-face from May, but it does offer a way to break the log jam in the way that another general election does not, given that two of the last three elections have delivered hung parliaments. Interestingly, a growing number of full-bore Brexiteers are optimistic that they could win a referendum in these circumstances, which means there might not be full-scale opposition to the idea of a three-question second referendum.
5.32pm GMT
Opinion is divided about the significance of John McDonnell's comment about it being "inevitable" that Labour will end up backing a second referendum. (See 3.08pm.) The Labour peer Andrew Adonis thinks this is significant.
John McDonnell's statement today on Labour moving towards a people's vote is very significant
Referendum next May
Senior Labour source insists John McDonnell's words to @bbclaurak do not represent what he or the Labour party thinks. Make up your own mind.https://t.co/8xVPzGPIPJ
While a short delay to the UK's participation in the election of MEPs might be possible without causing huge problems, a lengthy delay would be more problematic. As the European Parliament does not sit in August, muddling through without UK representatives in July might be possible. A delay extending into the autumn would be more difficult to accommodate, and legal and political difficulties would mount.
5.04pm GMT
And here is more from the Press Association report about the Bank of England Brexit analysis.
In the event of a disruptive Brexit, where there is no change to border trade or financial markets, GDP may fall 3% from its level in the first quarter in 2019.
In this scenario, the unemployment rate will hit 5.75% and inflation rises to 4.25%.
4.55pm GMT
My colleague Graeme Wearden is covering the Bank of England announcement in more detail on his business live blog.
Related: UK banks pass 'disorderly Brexit' stress test - business live
4.53pm GMT
The Press Association has snapped these headlines.
The Bank of England has warned the pound would crash, inflation will soar and interest rates would have to rise in the event of a no deal disorderly Brexit.
In the event of a disorderly no deal, no transition Brexit, Britain's GDP could fall by 8% from its level in the first quarter of 2019, according to analysis of a worst case scenario by the Bank.
4.50pm GMT
The Bank of England has now published its Brexit impact assessment.
Here is the 87-page report (pdf).
4.11pm GMT
MPs are debating the offensive weapons bill this afternoon. The government has just won a vote removing from the bill a section originally in the bill banning high-powered military-grade rifles. As we reported last week, the government backed down in response to pressure from Tory Brexiters and the DUP.
MPs are now voting on the Govt's Amdt 26 which removes their own ban on .50 caliber rifles. This is a failure to act in the national interest. @UKLabour are opposing Govt's u-turn on the ban of these powerful weapons which is supported by police & security services. Result 345
Govt pass Amdt to not ban .50 caliber rifles by 309 votes to 274. https://t.co/xzAUsOsLks
The Government has tabled an amendment that effectively reverses their proposed outright ban on these weapons. Instead they want to focus on their safe storage and security. There's not many of them - 159 licences for 0.50 calibre, and perhaps five of these anti-tank guns.
You know a government is in a weak position when it can't even ban the possession of *checks notes* "anti-tank guns." https://t.co/SIkZLifizy
4.03pm GMT
A senior Airbus executive gave evidence to the Commons business committee this morning. As the Labour MP Rachel Reeves, who chairs the committee, reports, she said the company had had to spend a15m on no deal contingency planning.
"Airbus has spent 15 million euros on preparing for #NoDeal. I would much rather that money had been spent into research and technology or more skills..."
Katherine Bennett, Senior Vice-President of Airbus UK.@CommonsBEIS #Brexit #Aerospace pic.twitter.com/37ta4Yu0R5
3.59pm GMT
This morning Politico obtained a copy of the Number 10 media grid for the fortnight running up to the meaningful vote - the diary of key issues that Downing Street was planning to highlight in between now and December 10, starting with today's economic impact assessment.
Since then, it appears there has been some high speed reshuffling of the plans, on account of the the fact that was one rueful official admitted the grid "was accurate at the time it was leaked". Somebody in Number 10's will have had a busy morning to maintain an element of surprise in the coming days.
SCOOP: No10's new Brexit grid, seen by me:
Nov 28: Economy
Nov 29: Security
Nov 30: Int trade
Dec 1: Digital
Dec 2: The Brexit deal
Dec 3: Money
Dec 4: Immigration
Dec 5: Transport
Dec 6: Industrial strategy
Dec 7: Brexit for the whole UK
Dec 8: Consumers
Dec 9:
Dec 10: Ag & fish
3.08pm GMT
John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, has suggested it is "inevitable" that Labour will back a second referendum if Theresa May's Brexit deal is defeated in the Commons but the party is unable to force a general election. McDonnell told the BBC:
We want a deal that will protect jobs and the economy. If we can't achieve that - the government can't achieve that - we should have a general election but that's very difficult to do because of the nature of the legislation that David Cameron brought forward.
If that's not possible, we'll be calling upon the government then to join us in a public vote. It's difficult to judge each stage, but that's the sequence I think that we'll inevitably go through over this period.
That's right. Our policy is if we can't get a general election, then the other option which we've kept on the table is a people's vote.
Is McDonnell stepping more closely to another referendum? sounds like it here... listen for yourself https://t.co/L4kIIEYAbL
3.01pm GMT
In advance of Theresa May's visit to Scotland this afternoon, the Scottish government's constitutional relations secretary, Michael Russell, has accused the prime minister of trying to "cover up" the damage done by Brexit in the just-published Brexit analysis. Russell said:
The UK government is now wilfully and disgracefully pressing ahead with a policy it knows will hit living standards and the economy.
Worse, it is trying to cover up the scale of the damage by modelling proposals it put forward in the summer that the EU has already rejected, instead of the blindfold Brexit they are actually proposing.
2.39pm GMT
The European court of justice will deliver the opinion from its advocate general in the case about whether the UK can revoke article 50 next Tuesday.
#Brexit: Case C-621/18 Wightman on revocation of Article 50 - Advocate General Campos Sinchez-Bordona will deliver his opinion on 4th December
Hi Andrew, the opinion of the Advocate General isn't exactly the same as the ruling. I believe @davidallengreen compared it to Mark Lawrenson giving his premier league predictions earlier...
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has one judge from each Member State, assisted by eleven advocates general whose role is to consider the written and oral submissions to the court in every case that raises a new point of law, and deliver an impartial opinion to the court on the legal solution. Although Advocates General are full members of the court, they do not take part in the court's deliberations, and the Advocate General's opinion is not binding on the court. Although the court reaches the same solution as the Advocate General more often than not, it cannot usually be stated that the advocate general's opinion has been 'followed' in any given case, because the court may have reached the same conclusion via different legal reasoning. The role of Advocate General is created by Article 19(2) of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 253 and 254 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
2.28pm GMT
Jeremy Corbyn's spokesman was keen to pour cold water on the idea that John McDonnell's comment at a Guardian Live event last night, that a second referendum was an option Labour could "seize upon", could mark a shift in Labour's stance.
Asked about it after PMQs, he gave a prolix recitation of Labour's position, as agreed at the party's conference in Liverpool, that should the government lose the vote, and a general election not be called, "all options would be on the table".
We've set our alternative plan for a deal that would work for the whole country. The key point is that the option of Labour's alternative plan has to be on the table, and we believe there is majority support for it in parliament, and it would also command majority support in the country, across both Leave and Remain voters.
If the government is unable to get its deal through parliament on something that's absolutely crucial to its entire programme and to the future of the country, it will have lost the confidence of parliament in any case.
2.18pm GMT
Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is now using a point of order to ask about the government's decision to defy the binding Commons vote saying it must publish the full text of its legal advice on Brexit. He says John Bercow, the speaker, said at the time of the debate that the motion was binding.
He says a written statement today says Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, will make a statement to MPs on Monday. But he says he is deeply concerned about what Philip Hammond said this morning about the government refusing to publish the legal advice in full. (See 9.40am.)
1.57pm GMT
In a speech this morning David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, rejected the government's claim that Brexit would make the UK poorer. He said:
Treasury forecasts in the past have almost never been right and have more often been dramatically wrong.
None of this spine-chilling nonsense came to pass.
The future of the UK economy does not lie with the EU but with the wider world.
1.51pm GMT
Here is more from John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, on the government's Brexit impact analysis.
We're in the ludicrous position of seeing an analysis produced today on the economic implications of Brexit which is in fact an assessment of the Chequers proposals abandoned months ago.
The government has been unable to assess the vague, half-baked deal the PM is promising, but what we do know is the latest proposals are worse than even the Chequers deal.
1.49pm GMT
Theresa May's spokesman was asked after PMQs whether the government accepted that all the Brexit scenarios modelled in the Whitehall analysis - including the prime minister's deal - will make Britain poorer. He replied:
I think what the prime minister said in there was that in all scenarios set out today the economy will continue to grow As the PM said, she believes she secured is the best available that's consistent with the referendum - and today's analysis backs that up."
Do you believe that when elected politicians ask the view of the public in a referendum, those same politicians should just be able to ignore that instruction? A country in which politicians ignore the will of the people, in what was the biggest democratic exercise in our history risks becoming divided, and divided countries do not prosper.
1.44pm GMT
Here is Torsten Bell, the director of the Resolution Foundation, a thinktank focusing on inquality, on the government's economic analysis.
We've got little idea where between and FTA and Chequers we'll end up even if negotiations proceed from current deal. But big picture the analysis accepts that something in that space means a big hit to GDP (3.9%) and (more importantly for living standards) to GDP/capita (2.7%) pic.twitter.com/0iqkljurJF
1.41pm GMT
Back in the Commons, where the UQ is still going on, the Labour MP Chuka Umunna raises the same point that that Anna Soubry did. (See 1.14pm.) He says he and Soubry tabled an amendment to the finance bill demanding a Brexit analysis, and they only withdrew it because the Treasury promised it would publish an analysis of the government's plan. But today's analysis does not provide that, he says. He suggests he and Soubry were "misled".
Stride says the government cannot model precisely what its plan will be because the political spectrum sets a framework covering a spectrum of outcomes.
1.38pm GMT
David Henig, the trade specialist and former civil servant who heads the UK Trade Policy Project, has also posted useful thread on Twitter about the government's economic analysis. He thinks it is "fraudulent". His thread starts here.
So the Government has modelled an imaginary scenario based on the Chequers proposals that the EU has rejected. The figures, which then show it isn't that different to remain, are therefore of little use... https://t.co/byMvjfMGA5 pic.twitter.com/lVtusOaP5z
1.33pm GMT
Kirsty Blackman, the SNP's economic spokeswoman, has posted a useful thread on Twitter with excerpts from government's Brexit economic analysis, with comment. It starts here.
Some excerpts from the UK Government's Brexit analysis. (Short version: despite trying to manipulate the figures to make May's deal look better, it still stinks)
1.30pm GMT
Here is the CBI reaction to the government's Brexit impact assessment. It's from the CBI's chief economist, Rain Newton-Smith.
These forecasts paint a bleak picture over the long-term of a no deal Brexit or a Canada-style deal. It surely puts to bed some of the more far-fetched ideas that a hard landing Brexit will not seriously hurt the economy.
This is about real people's lives and jobs in the years ahead and it's clear to business that while the government's deal is not perfect, it certainly fits the bill in reducing short-term uncertainty and opens up a route to a decent trade deal in the future.
1.25pm GMT
The SNP has accused Theresa May of having her "head in the sand" because at PMQs she refused to agree with Philip Hammond, the chancellor, about Brexit making the UK poorer. (See 12.09pm and 12.22pm.)
In response Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Wesminster, said:
The chancellor explained that every possible Brexit scenario will make the UK poorer, yes astoundingly, Theresa May denied these comments in prime minister's questions.
The chancellor's comments chime with analysis published yesterday by the Scottish government, which shows that most likely outcome of the UK's withdrawal agreement and political declaration on the future relationship with the EU will hit Scotland's GDP growth by 9 billion, leaving every Scot 1,600 worse off.
1.14pm GMT
Anna Soubry, the Conservative pro-European, says the government promised MPs it would produce a modelled analysis of its proposed deal. But that promise has not been met, she says. She says on the basis of that promise she withdrew an amendment to a bill on this issue.
Stride says he does not accept that promises have been broken. The analysis is covers a spectrum of outcomes, because the political declaration is not specific, he says.
1.07pm GMT
Nicky Morgan, the chair of the Commons Treasury committee, starts by complaining that John Bercow has called three Tory backbench men ahead of her, even though the Treasury analysis was demanded by her committee. She says the Bank of England will publish its analysis later. And Philip Hammond will give evidence to her committee next week, she says. She urges MPs to consider all the evidence before coming to a view.
Bercow says he almost always calls every MP who wants to speak in a UQ, unlike other speakers. He says MPs should not worry about when they are called. The three Tories he called ahead of her were the father of the House, and two former cabinet ministers, he says.
1.03pm GMT
David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, asks Stride if he knows of any economic forecast that has got the figures right. Stride accepts such a forecast does not exist.
1.03pm GMT
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, asks what was the point of modelling an plan (Chequers) involving the UK staying effectively in the single market for goods when the EU has rejected this.
Stride says the political declaration makes it clear that the details of the future trade deal are yet to be negotiated.
1.01pm GMT
John Redwood, a Conservative Brexiter, asks Stride if the government will publish figures showing the UK growth rate in the 25 years before it joined the EEC, and since it joined the single market in 1992. That will show how bad the EU has been for the UK.
Stride says he suspects Redwood has seen the figures already.
12.57pm GMT
Ken Clarke, the Tory former chancellor, asks Stride to accept that it is not possible to leave a free trade area and introduce barriers to trade without making the UK poorer. He says it is obvious the UK should stay in the single market and the customs union.
12.55pm GMT
John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, says the least that MPs could expect was an oral statement from the Philip Hammond.
He says we are now in the "ludicrous" position of having an economic analysis of plans based on the Chequers proposals, which the government has abandoned.
12.52pm GMT
Mel Stride, a junior Treasury minister, is responding to the UQ.
The economic analysis has been published, he says. He says it is not a forecast.
12.49pm GMT
Rachel Reeves, the Labour MP and chair of the business committee, raises a point of order. Why is Philip Hammond not hear to answer the UQ, she asks. She says he should be here on a such an urgent issue. He has had lots of time for broadcast interviews, she says.
12.47pm GMT
Labour's Liz Kendall says she has never heard a government say its policy will make people poorer. Is that what May came into politics for?
May says she does not accept this. The economic analysis shows the economy will continue to grow, she says.
12.46pm GMT
Peter Bone, the Tory Brexiter, gets one of the final questions at PMQs. He says a Lords committee said the UK could leave the EU without having to pay anything to the EU. But May says the opposite. Who is right?
May says the Lords committee did say that. But there is a different opinion. She says the other view is that the UK will have legal obligations. She thinks the UK should meet its obligations.
12.43pm GMT
PMQ - Snap verdict: God help us all if the five-day debate on Brexit is anything like this. Anyone looking for insight into what will, or will not happen, when the UK leaves the EU from these exchanges will be disappointed. May has had a relatively easy time of it so far, compared to some of her other recent Commons outings. She has had relatively little criticism from Brexiter Tories, and it was Jeremy Corbyn who put her under most pressure, although even these exchanges weren't particularly decisive because he did not push as hard as he could done on certain issues. His quote from what May said about Blair being under an obligation to publish the Iraq legal advice was effective, although he did not make the obvious point that it is hypocritical for a government committed to letting parliament take back control to be defying the Commons. And he did not fully exploit the huge gap between what Philip Hammond is saying about how Brexit will make the UK poorer and what May is saying about how it won't (because, she argues, there will be some growth anyway in the future). Hammond is not in the chamber (locked away in a cupboard by No 10 aides?) and the biggest takeway from the session is the split between 10 Downing Street and 11 Downing Street over how to spin the economic analysis report. May had a couple of good retorts to Corbyn, about Labour's Brexit plan being shorter than her shopping list (which is quite possibly true - Labour has not published anything like a detailed plan for Brexit, and, as an accomplished cook, May's shopping list may be quite extensive) and about the number of resignations from Corbyn's front bench. What was also telling was that MPs seem to have given up asking May what she will do if she loses her vote. She has dodged this question so often that any further questions seem superfluous. We will just have to wait until 12 December to find out.
12.29pm GMT
Simon Hoare, a Conservative, asks about rural communities and banking.
May says she recognises that free access to cash is important in rural communities.
12.28pm GMT
The SNP's Douglas Chapman jokes about how Scots will be dancing in the streets about May's visit. What lessons has May learned from Brexit to speed things up when Scotland votes for independence?
May says the vote in 2014 settled this.
12.27pm GMT
Theresa Villiers, the Tory former cabinet minister, asks for more funding for the police.
May says the police have been given extra money. But she recognises the importance of this issue.
12.26pm GMT
Tracy Brabin, the Labour MP, asks about a constituent, Matthew, who waived his anonymity to speak about abuse he suffered at the hands of a clergyman. Will May agree to mandatory reporting of abuse in all areas, including in the church?
May says the child abuse inquiry has shown that too many people have suffered from this.
12.24pm GMT
Anne-Marie Trevelyan, a Tory Brexiter, asks May if she agrees that, if her Brexit deal gets voted down, the UK should have a clean Brexit and leave without paying 39bn to the EU.
May defends her deal.
12.22pm GMT
The SNP's Ian Blackford wishes everyone a happy St Andrew's Day for Friday.
He says the government analysis says real wages will fall under Brexit. Does May agree this will leave people poorer than the status quo?
12.18pm GMT
John Lamont, a Scottish Conservative, asks an easy question about small business day.
May says she would like to visit some of the excellent shops Lamont mentioned.
12.17pm GMT
Corbyn says, when May was in opposition in 2003, she said legal advice on the Iraq war should be published. So why won't she practise what she preached on Brexit?
May says the advice any client receives from a lawyer is privileged. The government will publish a summary.
12.14pm GMT
Corbyn says after eight years of making the UK poorer through austerity, this "botched Brexit" will deliver more of the same. He says the report from the UN's Philip Alston said, for the government, the impact of Brexit on poverty was an afterthought. Who is backing her plan?
May mentions different groups that back her plans. On the economy, she says youth unemployment is at a record low. And today the number of children in workless households is at a record low, as is the proportion of workless households.
12.09pm GMT
Jeremy Corbyn also praises Lady Trumpington. And he says he wants to pay tribute to Harry Leslie Smith too. He was an irrepressible campaigner, and was passionate about healthcare for all.
He says Jeremy Hunt said on Sunday the Brexit deal mitigates most of the negative impacts of Brexit. Which ones does it not mitigate?
12.05pm GMT
Douglas Ross, a Scottish Conservative, says he has concerns about the Brexit deal. What assurances can May give to the fishing industry and for the union?
May says she is a committed unionist. She will ensure the UK becomes an independent coastal state. The UK will decide who gets access to UK waters. And fishing access will not be traded for anything else.
12.04pm GMT
Labour's Rosie Cooper asks about the "misery" inflicted on passengers by Northern Rail. There can be no more excuse. This fiasco began in May. Isn't it time to end this franchise?
May says she is clear that the performance in the north following the timetable changes was "unacceptable". Passengers are not getting the services they deserve, although there are more services now than there were. Where operators are at fault, the government will take action.
12.02pm GMT
Theresa May starts by paying tribute to Lady Trumpington.
11.58am GMT
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question at PMQs.
11.55am GMT
PMQs will start soon.
I normally do a snap verdict as soon as Jeremy Corbyn has finished, because for many people what matters most at PMQs is how Theresa May and Corbyn perform against each other.
11.52am GMT
Here is the key table from the government's economic analysis.
11.49am GMT
The government's Brexit economic analysis is out. It runs to 90 pages and it is available here (pdf).
It is one of five government papers out today analysing the deal. You can find them all here.
11.42am GMT
Philip Hammond, the chancellor, will not be responding to the urgent question about the Brexit impact assessment, according to Labour. He will send his junior minister, Mel Stride, in his place.
Despite being able to do an extensive media round, @PhilipHammondUK is refusing to come to the House of Commons and answer questions on the Govt's own analysis of various Brexit scenarios. He's sending out @MelJStride in his place. #HidingFromScrutiny https://t.co/ZZucoutGE4
11.39am GMT
Under its new editor, Geordie Greig, the Daily Mail has turned against the Tory hard Brexiters and turned into a supercharged cheerleader for Theresa May. In that spirit it has splashed today on new polling from Survation which suggests that public support for May's Brexit deal is increasing since it polled on this on 15 November, the day after May secured backing for the deal at a five-hour cabinet meeting.
Total support for the deal is up 10 points, the poll suggests.
Awareness of, and public support for the UK Government's Brexit withdrawal agreement has increased significantly since Survation's November 15th polling: https://t.co/jv87uRlJTx pic.twitter.com/pn1cXe2rgF
https://t.co/jv87uRlJTx pic.twitter.com/GV7FXldNnC
11.09am GMT
There will be an urgent question on the government's analysis of the economic impact of Brexit after PMQs.
BREAKING NEWS: @johnmcdonnellMP UQ granted at 1245 to demand that @PhilipHammondUK make a statement on the Government's publication of economic and fiscal analysis of various Brexit scenarios. He should have made an oral statement, it is a shame he has had to be dragged here.
11.06am GMT
The Financial Times' Laura Hughes has more from the Michael Gove hearing, which has now finished.
Michael Gove: "I think the prime minister's deal is the best one for the country. The only thing I am advocating is the prime minister's deal."
Michael Gove says Defra is preparing for a no deal Brexit but that "the thing that worries me most is what the impact would be in particular on food exporters in the event of no deal".
10.57am GMT
What can the House of Commons do if the government refuses to comply with the binding motion saying it must publish the full legal advice on the government's Brexit deal? (See 9.40am.) Luckily I can give you an expert opinion on this, because John Bercow, the speaker, gave a detailed answer when asked about this last year (exactly a year ago today, in fact), after the Commons used a "humble address" motion to force the government to release its Brexit impact assessments.
A minister who refused to comply with a binding motion of this kind could be in contempt of parliament. Bercow went on:
A member wishing to allege a contempt should, in the first instance, raise it not in a point of order, nor indeed in the media, but by writing to me as soon as practicable after the member has notice of the alleged contempt or breach of privilege. I then decide whether or not the matter should have precedence ... I am more than happy to confirm that my doors are always open for such written notices.
10.39am GMT
At the weekend the Mail on Sunday said that Michael Gove, the environment secretary, decided to back Theresa May's Brexit deal because "Britain would run out of clean drinking water within days" if the UK left without a deal. The report said:
Whitehall disaster planners have warned Ministers that leaving the EU without a deal could spark a national crisis as crucial chemicals used in water purification are imported to the UK from Europe.
The deliveries risk getting caught in weeks of border chaos if Britain quits the EU next March without the Prime Minister's deal with Brussels being approved by MPs.
It is the case that the water industry is reliant on chemicals that are imported from the EU in order to ensure that we have pure and safe drinking water. But it is also the case that the overwhelming majority of those chemicals come in to ports which are not in the narrow straights - they come in through Immingham rather than through Dover, some come through Dover. It is the case that prudently we have talked to the water companies, and I have been talking to the regulator, to make sure that those chemicals can be sourced.
So, if we leave without a deal, then we need to take appropriate steps to mitigate. We are taking those steps. So it should be the case that our water will be - in fact, it will be the case that our water will be completely safe.
10.08am GMT
Second World War veteran and Labour activist Harry Leslie Smith has died aged 95, the Press Association reports. Smith, from Barnsley in South Yorkshire, championed human rights and the welfare state, and appeared at the Labour party conference in 2014 to speak about life before the NHS. A post on his Twitter account, which has more than 250,000 followers, announced his death on Wednesday morning.
At 3:39 this morning, my dad Harry Leslie Smith died. I am an orphan. #istandwithharry
The verified Twitter account links to a Facebook page called Harry's Last Stand.
A post on that page, dated November 21, says: "My dad, Harry Leslie Smith is critically ill in hospital in Ontario Canada after a fall, yesterday morning. You can follow updates on his twitter feed harryslaststand and the hash tag IStandwithHarry This is his son, John."
We will all miss Harry Leslie Smith - he was one of the giants whose shoulders we stand on.
A World War Two veteran who dedicated his life to fighting for our National Health Service, a peaceful world and for countries to meet their moral responsibility by welcoming refugees. pic.twitter.com/1RW63dSa6Y
Very sad to hear of the death of Harry Leslie Smith. He was one of a kind who never wavered in his fight for equality and justice. We should all carry his passion, optimism and spirit forward.
RIP Harry Leslie Smith will always remember this wonderful speech on the NHS you gave at Labour Conference https://t.co/SGhKKMs4ES
9.40am GMT
Philip Hammond, the chancellor, has given at least four broadcast interviews this morning. Here are the main points.
Yes, you're right in that analysis. If you look at this purely from the economic point of view, there will be a cost to leaving the EU because there will be impediments to our trade. What the prime minister's deal does is absolutely minimise those costs.
The economy will be slightly smaller in the prime minister's preferred version of the future partnership.
I'm the chancellor so of course I look at the economy as being of overriding importance, but there are other considerations.
And I recognise that many people feel very strongly about the need to leave the European Union to regain control of our fishing waters, to regain control of migration and control of our borders, to have the right to do third-country trade deals. These are things which have value to people, and it is true that the economy will be very slightly smaller if we do the deal the way the prime minister has set out and negotiated, but the impact will be entirely manageable.
I'm not trying to scare anybody and I reject the term 'scaremongering'. If the government wasn't doing anything about the possibility that we could leave the European Union in just four months' time with no deal at all, if we weren't making any preparations, I'd be on this programme and you'd rightly be attacking me for not preparing Britain for a possibility which clearly could happen.
And in that case we know, for example, that there will be significant delays at the Channel ports because customs procedures will have to be introduced where they don't exist now, and that will slow down the flow of vehicles and therefore the flow of good coming into Britain and going out of Britain.
There's a very important principle here, that the government must be able to commission impartial legal advice which absolutely tells it like it is to enable it to shape its decisions, while always complying with its legal obligation in the negotiations.
It would be impossible for government to function if we create a precedent that the legal advice that the government receives has to be made public.
9.14am GMT
Here are two anti-Brexit MPs on Philip Hammond's comments this morning.
From Tom Brake, the Lib Dem Brexit spokesman
Jaw-dropping.
.@PhilipHammondUK calmly states on @BBCr4today that leaving the EU, with the PM's deal, No Deal or any other deal will damage British jobs.
Is he the first UK Chancellor who has openly admitted they intend hurting the UK economy?#PeoplesVote#FBPE
Philip Hammond's admission that Brexit is going to cost our country between 40 and 150 BILLION per year is surely the first time in our history, other than in war, when a British Chancellor has advocated a policy that will inevitably mean cuts to the NHS, Schools, Defence etc?
9.03am GMT
According to Steven Swinford in the Daily Telegraph (paywall), the government's official analysis of the impact of Brexit will say that, under Theresa May's Brexit plan, the economy will be between 1 and 2% smaller after 15 years than it would be if the UK stayed in the EU. Swinford writes:
A cross-government analysis is expected to show that under the Chequers agreement, which forms the basis of her deal, the UK's GDP will be between 1 and 2% lower over 15 years than if it had stayed in the EU.
However, in a move that will prompt a backlash from Tory Eurosceptics, the ministers are expected to argue that the UK will still be significantly better off than it would if it left without a deal.
8.50am GMT
In October 2016 Philip Hammond, the chancellor, told the Conservative party conference: "It is clear to me that the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer." But now he is admitting that they did. He has been giving interviews this morning ahead of the publication of the government's official analysis of the impact of Brexit, and he confirms that Brexit will make the British economy smaller - even under Theresa May's plan, which is intended to mitigate the economic impact of leaving the EU. He told Sky News this morning:
If you look only at economic benefits, yes there will be a cost to leaving the European Union.
Continue reading...