Theresa may

Theresa May has met Tory MPs tonight in a last-ditch effort to try and persuade them to vote for the Brady amendment tomorrow. She said that she would go back to Brussels and push for ‘fundamental changes’ to the backstop. But to do that, she needed to be able to show the EU that parliament was behind her—and so, MPs had to vote for the Brady amendment. May said that the government would whip in favour of Brady, essentially making it government policy. (Some in the room, though, say that May suggested in one answer that this would be subject to Cabinet agreement). Getting the Brady amendment through will be

Tuesday is the last chance for those MPs who want to secure as meaningful a Brexit as possible, I write in The Sun this morning. That evening, MPs will vote on a series of Brexit amendments designed to show the EU what kind of withdrawal agreement the Commons would accept. If one of them passes, then Theresa May can go back to Brussels and say: look, this is what will get the deal through my parliament. It would give her a decent chance of getting the EU to engage. But if none of these amendments can muster a majority, then the EU will simply sit tight. It knows that this

I learned two things yesterday that will give extra frisson to those votes on Tuesday, when MPs attempt to wrest control of Brexit from the PM. First is that the six Tory MPs on the executive of the 1922 committee that comprises all Tory MPs, and who are led by Sir Graham Brady, hope and expect the Prime Minister to give official backing to the amendment to her motion that they have all signed. It “requires the Northern Ireland backstop to be replaced with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border; supports leaving the European Union with a deal and would therefore support the Withdrawal Agreement subject to this change”.

The Commons has grown rather used to Theresa May giving an update on Brexit each Monday afternoon, and still more used to the Prime Minister offering precious little in the way of new information each time she does so. Today’s statement was a little different, in that May is now asking MPs for more information, rather than MPs turning on her and accusing her of not telling them anything. She laboured rather heavily on the point that Jeremy Corbyn has so far refused to attend the cross-party talks designed to work out an agreement that the Commons can stomach, introducing it early in her statement, and returning to the point

Today’s Cabinet conference call was more illuminating in terms of direction of travel than the details of what Theresa May is actually going to do. It is now clear that May’s approach is to try and put the Tory DUP alliance back together by getting something on the backstop rather than trying to find some cross party consensus. One of the reasons for this is that the Labour leadership’s reluctance to play ball makes it very hard to get the numbers for any compromise deal. I am told that David Lidington, who had been leading the cross party talks, reluctantly acknowledged this point. As one Cabinet Minister put it to

Theresa May has just given a statement in Downing Street in which she apparently said absolutely nothing. The Prime Minister walked out to the lectern outside No.10 and offered the sort of update on her diary that is normally sent out by email from the Downing Street press office. She said that she had held talks this evening ‘with the leader of the Liberal Democrats, and the Westminster leaders of the SNP and Plaid Cymru’, adding that ‘I am disappointed that the leader of the Labour Party has not so far chosen to take part’. After a day of complaining that the Prime Minister hadn’t yet picked up the phone

The Cabinet aren’t even waiting for the meaningful vote to be lost to start discussing Plan Bs. As I say in The Sun this morning, multiple ministers are expecting a major row when Cabinet meets on Tuesday morning—ahead of the meaningful vote. The row will be about what to do once the government has lost. One faction in the Cabinet believes that, in the words of one Secretary of State, ‘the only realistic route to go down is to force it into the EU’s hands’. This would involve devising a motion that made clear under what conditions parliament would back the deal. Then saying to the EU, if you want

As a hack who lived and breathed the financial crisis, you might think that at the start of 2008 and 2009 I would have been more anxious about what lay ahead than I am today. Wrong. In my understanding of the mechanistic link between a bust banking system and the wallop to our prosperity, I could at least broadcast about what needed to be done to clean up the mess. A problem understood is a mendable problem. I am more unsettled today than at any time in 35 years as a journalist because of a political paralysis that makes the destiny of this nation so uncertain. The Prime Minister’s Brexit

As MPs prepare to return to Westminster following the Christmas recess, the Prime Minister has given her first TV interview of the new year. With the deadline for Brexit fast approaching, Theresa May again put the case for her Brexit deal, on which she postponed a crucial Commons vote in December. Andrew Marr asked her if this time, the vote would definitely be going ahead: TM: Yes we are going to hold the vote… The debate will start next week and it will carry on until the following week, but we will be holding the vote. AM: We’re talking about the 15th or 14th? TM: That sort of timing, yes.

How does Theresa May break the Brexit logjam? Well, as I write in the Sun this morning, there are three ways to do this being discussed by Cabinet Ministers—the situation is now such that ministers don’t feel there’s anything disloyal about discussing contingency plans. The first option would see the government back an amendment to May’s deal when it comes to the Commons for a vote in January. The government would accept an amendment that added a sunset clause to the backstop, this would mean that it would expire after a defined period of time unless parliament voted to keep it going. With that change, May’s deal would have a

After a nightmare EU Council summit, Theresa May attempted to put on a brave face in her summit press conference. The Prime Minister told hacks that despite the fact the EU had refused to agree to her request for a 12 month limit to the backstop, progress had been made. As for that heated exchange between May and Jean Claude Juncker in which she appeared to call the European Commission president out for describing her as nebulous, that was merely the type of ‘robust’ conversation good friends can have. While there is reason to believe Juncker was being disingenuous in calling May ‘nebulous’ over her requests (the UK side insist

I spend most of my time drawing politicians, trying to work out what makes them distinctive. The eyes, the expression, their mood: it’s all about finding people’s peculiarities and accentuating them. When I started, I’d focus on the face. Everything else was an afterthought. It wasn’t until I came across a drawing by the Norwegian cartoonist Finn Graff – a cartoon of Helmut Kohl, I think – that I realised what I had been missing. How much you can tell from someone’s shoes. I didn’t discover this, so much as rediscover it. When I was a teenager, I worked in a shoe shop in my home town of Arendal, Norway.