You can find out more about cookies below, otherwise by continuing to use the site you agree to the use of the cookies as they are currently set.Skip to content
- House of Commons
- House of Lords
- What’s on
- Bills & legislation
- Publications & records
- Parliament TV
You are here:
- Parliament home page
- Parliamentary business
- Publications & records
- House of Commons publications
- House of Commons Annual Accounts
- Publications & records
- House of Commons publications
- Sessional Returns
- Sessional Diary
- Standing Orders of the House of Commons – Public Business
- Proxy Voting Scheme
- Standing Orders of the House of Commons – Private Business
- House of Commons Commission publications
- House of Commons Annual Accounts
- Register of Members’ Financial Interests
- Code of Conduct and Guide to Rules
- Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
- House of Commons supply estimates
- House of Commons Members’ Fund
- Financial consequences memoranda
- House of Commons publications
House of Commons Annual Accounts
The House of Commons has published annual administration accounts for the House of Commons and its Members since 2001.
These accounts and reports set out the costs of running the House of Commons.
Administration Annual Accounts
- Administration Annual Accounts 2015-16
Ref: HC 480
- Administration Annual Accounts 2014-15
Ref: HC 274
- Administration Annual Accounts 2013-14
Ref: HC 470
- Administration Annual Accounts 2012-13
Ref: HC 492
- Administration Annual Accounts 2011-12
Ref: HC 486
- Administration Resource Accounts 2010-11
Ref: HC 1423
- Administration Resource Accounts 2009-10
Ref: HC 365
- Administration Resource Accounts 2008-09
Ref: HC 954
- Administration Resource Accounts 2007-08
Ref: HC 974
- Administration Resource Accounts 2006-07
Ref: HC 831
- Administration Resource Accounts 2005-06
Ref: HC 1453
- Administration Resource Accounts 2004-05
Ref: HC 542
- Administration Resource Accounts 2003-04
Ref: HC 1240
- Administration Resource Accounts 2002-03
Ref: HC 67
- Administration Resource Accounts 2001-02
Ref: HC 419
Members Annual Report, Annual Accounts & Audit Committee Annual Report
- Members Resource Accounts 2005-06
Ref: HC 1454
- Members Resource Accounts 2004-05
Ref: HC 541
- Members Resource Accounts 2003-04
Ref: HC 1239
- Members Resource Accounts 2002-03
Ref: HC 68
- Members Resource Accounts 2001-02
Ref: HC 420
Find out more about the management and governance of the House of Commons.
- A-Z index
- Contact us
- Freedom of Information
- Data protection and your privacy
- Using this website
- House of Commons
- House of Lords
- What’s on
- Bills & legislation
- Publications & records
- Parliament TV
You are here:
- Parliament home page
- Parliamentary business
- House of Lords
- Who’s in the House of Lords
- Financial support for members
- House of Lords
House of Lords expenses
Find out more about allowances and expenses claimed by House of Lords members, and the current financial support system.
- Claims from April 2019
- Claims from 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2019
- Financial support for members explained
- Find out more about financial support for members
- Investigations of complaints
- Law Lords’ expenses
Claims from April 2019
View monthly details of daily attendance allowances and travel costs claims by House of Lords members for the last financial year:
- July 2019 ( PDF 181 KB)
- July 2019 ( XLSX 83 KB)
- July 2019 ( CSV 90 KB)
- June 2019 ( PDF 173 KB)
- June 2019 ( XLSX 82 KB)
- June 2019 ( CSV 87 KB)
- May 2019 ( PDF 257 KB)
- May 2019 ( XLSX 82 KB)
- May 2019 ( CSV 87 KB)
- April 2019 ( PDF 1.3 MB)
- April 2019 ( XLSX 82 KB)
- April 2019 ( CSV 90 KB)
A members’ financial support scheme was introduced on 1 October 2010. Read the explanatory notes for information on what expenses and allowances cover each financial year.
Claims from 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2019
Financial support for members explained
Most members do not receive a salary for their parliamentary duties but are eligible to receive allowances and, within certain limits, the travel expenses they incur in fulfilling their parliamentary duties.
Members of the Lords who are not paid a salary may claim a flat rate attendance allowance of £157 or £313 (new rate from the 1st April 2019), or £153 or £305 (old rate up to 31st March 2019), or may choose to make no claim for each sitting day they attend the House.
This daily allowance replaces the separate overnight subsistence, day subsistence and office costs in the previous system. Entitlement is determined by attendance, not residence criteria.
Members who receive a ministerial or office holders’ salary are not entitled to claim the allowances based on attendance.
Find out more about financial support for members
- Guide to financial support for members ( PDF 3.63 MB)
- System of financial support for members: Briefing note ( PDF 147 KB)
- Register of Lords’ interests
Investigations of complaints
The House of Lords Commissioner for Standards is responsible for investigating complaints about members of the Lords’ allowances claims.
Law Lords’ expenses
Law Lords moved from the House of Lords to Supreme Court in October 2009. 2008/09 was the last full financial year where travel expense claims were managed by the House of Lords.
Subscribe to e-alerts
Subscribe to monthly e-alert updates when expenses are updated.
Lords enquiry service
Contact the House of Lords enquiry service with general questions about the Lords:
- Telephone: 0800 223 0855 (Freephone) or 020 7219 3107
- Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Text Relay: 18001 7219 3107
House of Lords quick links
- Select committees
- Lords Hansard
- Bills before Parliament
- House of Lords business
- Lords Divisions results
- Frequently asked questions
- Lord Speaker
- Lords publications
- A-Z index
- Contact us
- Freedom of Information
- Data protection and your privacy
- Using this website
General election 2019: Anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray to stand for Lib Dems Posted November 13th 2019
Anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray is to stand for Parliament for the Lib Dems.
The activist is a familiar figure in Westminster where he regularly bellows his ‘Stop Brexit’ message through a megaphone outside the House of Commons.
He has been selected to fight the seat of Cynon Valley in south Wales. It has been held by Labour for more than 30 years but its longstanding MP Ann Clwyd has retired and is not standing again.
The Lib Dems have vowed to cancel Brexit if they win power.
The party’s leader Jo Swinson dismissed suggestions Mr Bray’s candidacy was a stunt, saying the Lib Dems needed people prepared to put themselves on the line to stop the UK leaving the EU.
“He cannot be accused of not being committed to his cause,” she said. “To have candidates who care so passionately about that is a positive.”
Mr Bray, a rare coins dealer from Port Talbot, has spent every day since September 2017 protesting opposite Parliament, where his anti-Brexit antics having become a tourist attraction in their own right.
He and fellow protesters who he met through an anti-Brexit Facebook group also stage a daily evening vigil outside nearby Downing Street.
The 50-year-old says Brexit is a “wrong turn” for the country and must be stopped. Image copyright PA Media Image caption Mr Bray has come face-to-face with the likes of Jeremy Corbyn
Mr Bray would appear to have little chance in Cynon Valley, where the Lib Dems polled only 585 votes in 2017, finishing fifth behind UKIP.
Wales, as a whole, voted to leave the EU in 2016 but the Lib Dems have made gains there in recent times, winning the seat of Brecon and Radnorshire in a by-election in August.
The Lib Dems have formed a loose electoral pact with other anti-Brexit parties, including Plaid Cymru, which will see the parties not fielding candidates in some of their respective target seats to try and maximise the pro-Remain vote,
Plaid Cymru has already selected a candidate in Cynon Valley, where it came third in 2017.
Ms Clwyd retained Cynon Valley with a majority of more than 13,000 in 2017, having represented the seat since winning a by-election in 1984. Labour has selected Bethan Winter to fight the seat.
Hard Labour No Fun Posted November 10th 2019
Thatcher killed old Labour exploiting greed and die hard trade unions bigotry and in fighting. Blair and Brown came to power on her coat tails. They made matters worse, the former destabilising the Middle East, removing Gaddaffi and opening Britain’s borders to different cultures, especially Islamic extremism.
Europe has not benefitted working people. Immigtation has hit the poorest people who pay the bulk of the taxes. Real probelms are not supposed to be talked about. Vague promises like Corbyn attacking the rich elite are absurd. Things have gone too far.
Corbyn lives in his Hampstead bubble, too far away to realise that his party’s supporters were majority real Brexit and immigration controls. The same old empty rhetoric about taxing the rich cuts no ice, especially when he and his key adviser Milne are millionaires already. Robert Cook
The Tories look the most likely party to lead a Government after the December 12 election, new polling shows.
New data indicates the Tories will get 41 per cent of the vote, while Labour would receive 29 per cent and the Lib Dems on 15.
The polling, conducted by Opinium for the Observer, canvassed 2,001 British adults from November 6 to 8.
It puts the Tories down one per cent and Labour up three per cent from a similar poll carried out the week before.
A YouGov poll released on Friday showed the Labour party faltering in its traditional strongholds, down 25 per cent from its 2017 general election result in the north west.
Meanwhile another poll carried out by Electoral Calculus and released on Wednesday gave the Tories a 96 seat majority if it were to be accurate come December 12.
Miss the Speaker? Posted November 5th 2019
The new Mister Speaker – and they are the 156th Mister, not the second Madame – is proof that politics in Britain right now really is topsy-turvy. A privately educated, knight of the realm who is the son of an MP and peer, to the untrained eye Sir Lindsay Hoyle has a CV that makes him sound like an archetypal Tory.
The reality, as his broad Lancashire accent attests, is very different. Lindsay refused to ‘inherit’ his father’s seat of Warrington North, preferring to take on the Tory marginal of Chorley and win in it 1997. Furthermore, Doug Hoyle (watching in the gallery today) never wanted to go to the Lords – having long believed it should be abolished – but was persuaded by his son to accept the honour from Tony Blair.
It’s that pragmatism, as well as his genial nature, that makes Hoyle junior so popular across the House of Commons that he now chairs. And although no one could call him a Tory, it was the apparent conservatism of his Speakership candidacy that certainly appealed to many government MPs who waved their order papers on his victory.
Editorial Comment There was a clear presumption that the new speaker should be a woman. Discrimination against men in all walks of life now seems not just acceptable, it is preferred.
Tory MP Ross Thomson stands down after Labour MP alleges sexual assault in Commons bar Posted November 5th 2019
- Simon Johnson, Scottish Political Editor
3 November 2019 • 3:42pm
A Tory MP and close ally of Boris Johnson has announced he is standing down after being accused of sexually assaulting a Labour MP in a Commons bar.
Ross Thomson protested his innocence but said he had made the “hardest decision of my life” not to contest the seat for Aberdeen South at the general election.
But the Telegraph understands that he only quit after the Aberdeen City Conservative Association made clear it had lost confidence in him.
Simon Turner, the association’s chairman, is understood to have told the MP that he would not sign Mr Thomson’s nomination paper.
Editorial Sex assault and domstic violence allegations are powerful and highly destructive weapons with which to destroy men. Evidence is not necessary. In my experience Aberdeen is a grim place. Ross did a good job representing it.
The Brexit Stalemate will never end Posted November 3rd 2019
05 Jun 2019
When a new Conservative leader is elected in a few weeks, and Britain has a new Prime Minister, he or she will be faced with the same impossible situation as Theresa May. There are only around 60-70 MPs in Parliament that support a no-deal (full) Brexit, which means that only 1/10th of the House of Commons believes in Brexit. And then on top of that, you have the House of Lords, which is overwhelmingly against Brexit and has strangled the process of leaving the EU for the last 3 years. So if Boris Johnson, for example, becomes the new Prime Minister, his promise to implement a no-deal Brexit if he can’t get a better deal is impossible, because he doesn’t have the numbers to get such an option through parliament.
Even more crucial still, large sections of his parliamentary party are trying to block his leadership bid by fielding as many candidates as possible to split the vote. So if he did become Prime Minister with the support of Conservative Party grassroots members, a large number of Remainer Conservative MPs could gang up with opposition parties like Labour and the Liberal Democrats, and pass a no-confidence vote against him in the House of Commons. This would effectively leave him as powerless as Theresa May, and thus would send us back to the same position that we are currently in. On top of that, Boris’s genuine support for Brexit is questionable, with many believing he only supported leaving the EU to further his chances of leading the Conservative Party. And of course, Boris might not win the leadership election, and a Remainer taking the reins of power would just continue the same postponement of Brexit that we are experiencing now.
Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party would take seats from the Conservative Party in a general election, and the Liberal Democrats would take seats from the Labour Party. On top of that, the likelihood of Remainer Conservative MPs forming a coalition with Brexit Party MPs is zero. This, in turn, would mean that Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the SNP and possibly Remainer Conservative MPs would form a coalition of their own – which would no doubt lead to a 2nd referendum.
Brexiteers rightly fear a 2nd referendum for two good reasons. Firstly, unlike in the preparation for the 1st referendum, where the Remainer Parliament was so confident of victory that they didn’t allow EU citizens to vote (apart from citizens of the RoI, Cyprus and Malta), the current Remainer Parliament would not make this strategic error again. Secondly, the Remainer Parliament previously blocked the right of 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in the 1st referendum. Again, there is no way Remainers will repeat this mistake. You can count on the fact that they will do everything in their power to gain whatever pre-determined advantage they can.
And then there is the question of Nigel Farage himself. His new Brexit Party, which has crushed UKIP’s vote and prospects, is likely to become nothing more than a new centre-right party rather than a true right-wing alternative. It’s easy to jump to conspiracy theories, and I try to avoid them unless there is clear evidence. However, I cannot help but notice that every time a true right-wing party emerges, Farage comes from nowhere and crushes it. He did this in the late 2000s and early 2010s when as leader of UKIP he defeated and routed the BNP. And this year, when UKIP was re-emerging as an anti-Islam and anti-mass immigration party, Farage creates the Brexit Party and obliterates it at the European elections. And despite all of this, Farage has not achieved Brexit at all. The only thing he has achieved is the destruction of any true right-wing party willing to tackle difficult issues like Islam or non-white immigration.
While Salvini, Orban and Le Pen correctly prioritise stopping non-white immigration over leaving the European Union, Farage is leading British right-wing voters down the opposite path. And sadly, most of them can’t seem to accept or realise the reality of this. Overall though, the one thing you can guarantee in Britain at the moment is that the flood gates are still open, the third world is still pouring in, and nobody is doing anything about it.
No Confidence Vote call from SNP Posted September 28th 2019
The SNP has urged opposition parties to back a no confidence motion that could remove “zombie prime minister” Boris Johnson from office.
Mr Johnson is facing calls to resign after the Supreme Court ruled that his suspension of Parliament was unlawful.
But opposition parties are split over what to do if he refuses to quit.
The SNP’s Westminster leader, Ian Blackford, said a confidence vote could remove the PM and allow a general election to be held.
Mr Blackford said a “caretaker” prime minister would need to be found if the motion of no confidence was successful – and did not rule out the possibility of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn filling the role until a general election was held.
- MPs return after court rules suspension unlawful
- Live updates as MPs return to the Commons
- What is a vote of no confidence?
Speaking to the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland programme, he stressed that it was crucial to ensure that the so-called Benn bill, which aims to prevent the UK leaving the EU on 31 October without a deal, is fully implemented and an extension to the Brexit deadline is sought.
But Mr Blackford said the country now had “a zombie prime minister and a zombie government” and called on opposition parties to come together to end Mr Johnson’s tenure in 10 Downing Street.
He added: “We need to make sure we can remove him but a manner which is safe, and we can do that by having a motion of no confidence, and we seize the initiative and move quickly to have an election safe in the knowledge that the extension to the Article 50 process is going to be granted.
“This is a government that shut Parliament down unlawfully and they need to be removed. We need to have that motion of no confidence in a timely manner.
“I’ll be appealing to colleagues and other parties to stand with us to make sure that we show Boris Johnson the door.”
Mr Corbyn has previously said Labour would introduce a motion of no confidence “when we can be confident of success”.
If the Conservative government was to fall as a result of the vote, Mr Corbyn would have 14 days to persuade enough MPs to allow him to head a temporary government that would extend the Brexit deadline before holding an election.
Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson initially claimed Mr Corbyn was too divisive a figure for a caretaker role – but later signalled she was not ruling out the possibility of backing him.
However, she warned on Wednesday against an early vote of no confidence in Mr Johnson, which she said could risk the UK “accidentally crashing out of the EU”.
When asked whether he would be prepared to accept Mr Corbyn as the head of a caretaker government, Mr Blackford said that the focus should be on removing the current prime minister from office rather than on an individual who would temporarily replace him.
Mr Blackford was speaking as MPs returned to the Commons the day after Supreme Court judges ruled unanimously that the suspension Mr Johnson imposed earlier this month was unlawful.
The prime minister cut short his trip to the United Nations in New York to return to London following the court’s judgment, and is expected to face the Commons later on Wednesday.
Mr Johnson spoke to the Queen after the Supreme Court verdict but government sources would not comment on whether he apologise
Most British Politicians are from privileged backgrounds- especially in Government and Shaddow Posts September 25th 2019
The so called Brexit Crisis exposes the privilged background of most of our MPs. The figure of 82% University educated suggests white collar or no work experience outside of politics. The House of Commons document below speaks for itself and goes a long way to explaining the appalling conduct of our MPs. Lawyers, especially High and Supreme Court Judges in recent and ongoing events.
These people can moralise as much as they like, but they do not understand or even care about their constituents or the people they cast judegment on. They feed off the masses while holding them in contempt. Robert Cook
House of Commons Library
Social background of Members of Parliament 1979-2019
Published Monday, November 12, 2018
This briefing paper provides data on the gender, age, ethnicity and educational backgrounds of MPs elected at the 2017 General Election and how this has changed over time.Jump to full report >>
There were 208 female MPs elected at the 2017 General Election (32% of all MPs). This is the highest ever number and proportion. In 1979 there were 19 women MPs, 3% of the total.
45 MPs elected in 2017 were openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans or queer (LGBTQ), 7% of the total. This was the highest ever recorded figure.
52% (339) of MPs elected in 2017 were aged over 50. Following the election, the proportion of MPs aged 70 and over increased to 4% (28). 14 MPs aged under 30 were elected (2% of the total).
52 MPs were from non-white backgrounds, 8% of the total. Around 14% of the whole UK population are from a non-white background.
82% of MPs were graduates and 24% have attended Oxford or Cambridge. 29% of MPs attended fee-paying schools.
87 MPs elected in 2017 had no previous Parliamentary experience (13%). 551 (85%) had been MPs in the 2015-17 Parliament and 12 were re-elected having served as MPs further in the past.
This version includes the latest data from The British General Election of 2017 book by Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh
Commons Briefing papers CBP-7483
Authors: Richard Cracknell; Cassie Barton
|Bercow pledges ‘creativity’ to stop no-deal |
Posted September 13th 2019
John Bercow might be leaving his role as Commons Speaker but he’s not going quietly. He says “creativity” will be used in Parliament
to prevent any attempt by Boris Johnson to ignore a law designed to
stop a no-deal Brexit. The prime minister says he would rather be “dead
in a ditch” than ask the EU to delay the UK’s withdrawal from the bloc
beyond 31 October, as required by the law which was forced through by
backbenchers. But Mr Bercow used a lecture in London to say Parliament
would act “forcefully” against any attempt to avoid obeying the law. |
If, like MPs, you’re finding it hard to talk about Brexit without getting into a row, the BBC has gleaned some tips on how to “respectfully disagree”.
Jeremy Corbyn net worth: The staggering earnings of Labour leader ‘fighting for workers’
Posted September 11th 2019
JEREMY CORBYN announced today a Labour Government would introduce the biggest extension of workers rights ever seen before in the UK. But how much does the Labour leader earn himself?
By Katie Sewell PUBLISHED: 14:35, Tue, Sep 10, 2019 | UPDATED: 15:56, Tue, Sep 10, 2019
Brexit: Corbyn accuses Johnson of ‘shutting down democracy’
At today’s TUC conference, Jeremy Corbyn said he aimed to deliver better wages and greater job security. Mr Corbyn told delegates Labour “will put the power in the hands of workers”. He added: “For 40 years, the share of the cake going to workers has been getting smaller and smaller. It’s no coincidence that the same period has seen a sustained attack on the organisations that represent workers – trade unions. We have witnessed a deliberate, decades-long transfer of power away from working people.”
- WATCH as Jeremy Corbyn makes huge blunder in clip shared on Twitter
- ‘Power to the people!’ Corbyn winds back clock with 70s-style speech
How much is Jeremy Corbyn worth?
Before pursuing his career in politics, Jeremy Corbyn attended a private preparatory school and then a state grammar school.
After a brief stint working as a reporter at a local newspaper, Mr Corbyn then had a successful career as a trade union organiser.
He went on to be elected as a councillor in Haringey, North London, and has been involved in left-wing politics ever since.
Jeremy Corbyn net worth? How much does Jeremy Corbyn get paid? (Image: GETTY)
The Labour leader has spoken in the past of having a frugal lifestyle, stating: “I don’t spend a lot of money.
“I lead a very normal life, I ride a bicycle and I don’t have a car.”
According to Spears magazine, Jeremy Corbyn’s net worth stands at £3 million.
As of 2019, Corbyn earns £74,962 as an MP, and reportedly £62,440 goes into his account annually.
- Corbyn: Boris wants showdown over no deal Brexit
- Corbyn attempts brutal swipe at Rees-Mogg during anti Brexit rant
Jeremy Corbyn net worth: Jeremy Corbyn as a councillor in 1975 (Image: Evening Standard/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
Jeremy Corbyn net worth: According to Spears, Jeremy Corbyn’s net worth stands at £3million (Image: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)
Combined, Corbyn makes over £137,000 a year.
The magazine also reports he has claimed over £3 million from the state over the last thirty years – which is £1.5 million more than a normal MP.
Once he retires, Mr Corbyn is predicted to receive a £1.6 million pension.
Editorial Comment As for Boris breaking the law, the remainer fake Brexit people rushed through a half baked law to block the peoples vote. It is a moot point as to who is breaking the law here.
Robert Cook September 11th 2019
IPSO Regulated Copyright ©2019 Express Newspapers. “Daily Express” is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.
The Queen’s speech is due to be delivered by Her Majesty on Monday, October 14 and will be voted on by MPs a week later, on October 21.
The speech, while read out by the Queen, is in fact written by the Government, detailing the plans for the coming parliamentary session.
This will be the 64th time the Queen has delivered a speech throughout her reign.
And in all those years, it has only been voted down three times – in 1886, 1892 and 1923.
Brexit news: The Queen’s speech is due to be delivered by Her Majesty on Monday, October 14 (Image: Getty/Express)
But now opposition parties are planning on banding together once more to vote down Boris Johnson’s plans, leaving the Queen to deal with more fallout from the ongoing crisis.
The Telegraph reported party insiders claiming it is also likely Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn will table a motion of no confidence in the Prime Minister On October 22, if he is successful in voting down the speech the day before.
Senior SNP and Lib Dem sources also confirmed that a confidence vote in late October was discussed by opposition leaders during a meeting in Westminster on Monday morning.
Prior to the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, a Queen’s Speech was considered a vote of confidence and losing it would normally lead to a Government resigning, but now, a motion of no confidence must be tabled.
Brexit news: The last Queen’s Speech in the House of Lords in 2017 (Image: Getty)
Brexit news: The last Queen’s Speech in the House of Lords in 2017 (Image: Getty)
Labour believes that inflicting the Queen’s speech defeat on Mr Johnson could provide the necessary push required for Tory rebels to vote with the opposition to bring him down.
If a vote of no confidence against Mr Johnson’s Government is successful, it would trigger a 14-day window to see if the current government – or an alternative one with a new PM – could win a vote of confidence.
But if no-one wins the confidence of the House in 14 days it would trigger a general election with Mr Johnson as Prime Minister.
Things would get complicated here, particularly if Mr Johnson still refuses to request a Brexit extension, which is required in law.
Brexit news: Parliament has been suspended until October 14
THE WAUGH ZONE
By Paul Waugh. | 9 September 2019.
The dark night rises September 9th 2019
For his admirers, it’s the end of an era. For his critics, it’s the end of an earache. Either way, John Bercow’s decision to step down as Commons Speaker confirmed that even he can’t compete with the brute force of Boris Johnson’s gambit of seeking an autumn election.
Bercow, inevitably, had one last tweak of the government’s tail, deciding to stay on until October 31, the planned day of Brexit itself. He also ensured that the next Speaker would be elected by the current hung parliament, increasing the chances that his successor will continue to be a thorn in the Tories’ side whatever the result of the next election.
The Speaker has of course been a crucial facilitator of the anti-no-deal majority of MPs in the Commons since 2017. His tearful farewell was pure Bercow, peppered with attacks on the media, on the whips, on Johnson’s handling of the Nazarin Zaghari Ratcliffe case. He even (perhaps a nod to his cult following in the US) had dig at Donald Trump’s racist ‘go back’ remarks.
His enemies are already muttering about the unresolved bullying allegations against him and his refusal to give up his £1m pension pot. The race is already on to succeed him, with Lindsay Hoyle, Harriet Harman and Chris Bryant all tipped for the job (Eleanor Laing is the safe choice of many Tories).
The tributes to the Speaker took a full 90 minutes and he added that “we would have more time if we weren’t disappearing for a rather excessive period”. And for many MPs that’s the real issue tonight – the five week suspension of parliament entailed by the prorogation order expected to be enacted later.
In a back-handed compliment to both Bercow and the Tory rebels, Johnson’s decision to prorogue the Commons seems to be the only way he can stop them inflicting yet more defeats. And those defeats – his fifth in 6 days tonight thanks to Dominic Grieve – prove he really is in office, but not in power.
The Liaison Committee of senior select committee chairman had been due to quiz Johnson for three full hours on Wednesday, his longest grilling yet in the job. That won’t now happen, despite a plea by chairwoman Sarah Wollaston asking the PM to still give evidence, outside parliament.
The PM’s gameplan seems obvious: carry on with a pseudo snap election campaign, with daily cash and policy announcements that won’t breach Purdah rules – but without any Commons scrutiny. Michael Gove may well supply weekly no-deal preparation updates, for example, yet no MP will for weeks be able to probe the detail. And with no Commons sitting, how can they enforce their will on things like the Grieve motion?
Johnson’s critics think the Grieve motion tonight was crucial because they think it will prove beyond doubt that he lied to parliament and to the Queen for his reason for prorogation. There are others close to the PM who think that even that won’t hurt him, and will be seen by Leave voters as yet more procedural machinations far away from their everyday lives.
As we wait for Lords to doff their tricorn hats and deploy Norman French later tonight (or the early hours of tomorrow at this rate) in the prorogation ceremony, there are rumours that Johnson may have a surprise up his sleeve. He won’t get his snap election tonight, but he will get one sometime soon in November, and you can bet he’ll blame Labour for holding polling day when the nights are dark.
Even more than Theresa May ever was, Johnson is a now zombie PM in a zombie parliament. Unlike her, his answer is to shut down the graveyard (the Commons and Lords). Yet like May, he thinks he can get a new lease of life through a general election. Let’s see if the script is more The Walking Dead than Carry on Screaming.
Quote Of The Day
“At the 2017 election, I promised my wife and children that it would be my last.”
– John Bercow reveals the private family pledge that means he will now step down on October 31, ahead of an expected snap election.
Editorial Comment John Bercow’s main interest has always been himself. He is popular with forelock tugging yokels in my constituency, but has been conspicuous by his absence.
When I was chair of The North Bucks Parish and Town Council Consortium, he made all sorts of promises to deal with our cocnerns about Milton Keynes expansion without infrastructure and into surrounding conservation zones. As usual, he did nothing.
As we saw yesterday, this Jane Austin enthusiast talks like a nineteenth century relic, but apart from the new technology, the self importance of our elite makes him just a contemporary carricature of what our ‘rulers’ are. Robert Cook
Moment furious Bercow erupts at Brexiteer MP in extraordinary attack – ‘Like it lump it!’ September 9th 2019
SPEAKER John Bercow lashed out at an MP in the Commons during a standing order after he was told to “show some dignity” and appeared to be called a “bully”.
By Katie Weston PUBLISHED: 18:21, Mon, Sep 9, 2019 | UPDATED: 19:30, Mon, Sep 9, 2019
Brexit: Roy Stewart says what Labour wants ‘doesn’t exi
Brexit: Juncker compares May to an ‘Egyptian Sphinx’
John Bercow has announced that he will stand down as Speaker of the House and said he could resign on October 31 – the current Brexit deadline. Following his statement on Monday afternoon, the Speaker lost his temper at one MP, telling them to “like it or lump it” during a standing order. Mr Bercow began: “The very large number of members standing in support of the right honourable learned general, I do note the very, very loud expression of opposition from the honourable gentleman member for Wellingborough.
- John Bercow quits: When will he stand down?
- Polling guru outlines real reason Boris won’t make pact with Farage
“It is testament to the existence of more than enough support. Can I just say, and whether I can or not I’m going to, I do know what I’m doing in these matters – “
One MP interjected “so do we” before the Speaker continued: “And I do know the standing orders, and I do listen to the advice.
“Sometimes you get these pop-up characters who think they understand these matters on the basis of minimal familiarity with the said standing orders and presume to say that the rules have been broken.
“They are entitled to their opinions but suffer from the notable disadvantage of being completely wrong. I know what the rules are and what they allow, and this is absolutely in keeping with the standing orders.
“If there are people who don’t like the subject matter, and wold prefer it not to be heard and judge that it’s inconvenient, they’re perfectly entitled to their view, but it’s got nothing to do with the procedural propriety – “
John Bercow news: the Speaker lashed out at one MP on Monday afternoon (Image: Sky News)
John Bercow news: Bercow told the MP to “like it or lump it” (Image: Sky News)
He then paused briefly with MPs heard in the background accusing him of being a “bully” and one saying “come on John, have some dignity”, before the Speaker raged: “Don’t tell me young man from a sedentary position what I can and cannot say.
“If you’re not interested leave the chamber, I’m not remotely interested in your petty fogging objection, countered inelegantly from a sedentary position.
“The position is as I’ve described it and quite frankly young man, you can like it or lump it. The right honourable gentleman has obtained the leave of the House, people will understand that as far as the Speaker is concerned his job is to stand up for the rights of the legislature.
“And never have been, am not and never will be in the business of being bossed around by some footling member of the executive branch.”
Radio host Julia Hartley-Brewer reacted to the outburst, tweeting: “This is an absolutely extraordinary outburst from Commons Speaker John Bercow, just minutes after MPs lined up to tell him how wonderful he was.”
John Bercow news: the outburst happened during a standing order (Image: Sky News)
Bercow: Speaker announces he is stepping down
One Twitter user commented: “Absolutely appalling.” Another said: “I would call that bullying.” A third added: “Bercow has totally lost it.”
Speaking to the House earlier in the afternoon, Mr Bercow said that if the Commons votes in favour of an early general election he will not contest his Buckinghamshire seat.
But if the MPs vote down the motion, the Speaker will stand down on October 31. Mr Bercow said: “In 2017 I promised wife and children it’d be my last, this is a pledge that I intend to keep – if House votes for early election my tenure will end.
Brexit block: How France could scupper EU trade agreement after no deal [VIDEO]
Bercow snubbed as entire frontbench refuses to give standing ovation [VIDEO]
Brexit LIVE: MPs plot to seize Boris’s texts, emails and WhatsApps [LIVE BLOG]
- Next Commons Speaker: Who is Lindsay Hoyle? Who will be next Speaker?
- Lord Adonis gushes about how Bercow ‘democratically defeated’ Brexit
- John Bercow snubbed as entire front bench refuse to give exiting Speaker ovation – VIDEO
- Moment furious Bercow erupts at Brexiteer MP in extraordinary attack – ‘Like it lump it!’
- BBC’s Katya Adler uncovers EU’s real ‘blame game’ plot to thwart Brexit with fresh delay
“If the House doesn’t I have concluded that least disruptive course of action would be for me to stand down for close of business on October 31. Least disruptive because that date will fall shortly after the votes on the queens speak on the 21st and 22nd of October.
“The week after that may be quite lively and it may be best to have an experienced figure in the chair for that short period. Most democratic because it will mean that a balance is held when all members have some knowledge of the candidates.
“This is far preferable fro a contest at the beginning of a Parliament when new MPs will not be similarly informed and may find themselves vulnerable to institutional influence.”
Labour MP Darren Jones has described John Bercow as “a champion of parliamentary sovereignty” after the Commons Speaker announced he was to stand down as an MP at the next general election.
Mr Jones tweeted: “John Bercow has been a champion of parliamentary sovereignty and a champion for backbenchers like me being able to hold the executive to account. He’ll be missed by many of us in the @HouseofCommons. The next Speaker has big shoes to fill.”
Originally Mr Bercow said he would stand down last summer but then refused in order to navigate Parliament through the Brexit crisis.
His wife Sally Bercow was spotted sitting in the public gallery just moments before he revealed his plans to resign, which prompted people to speculate that Mr Bercow was going to announce the news.
- Moment John Bercow on brink of tears as he announces plan to step down
- John Bercow quits: How is a new speaker elected?
- Bercow attacked as he outlines quit plans
Most read in UK
- 1 John Bercow snubbed as entire front bench refuse to give exiting Speaker ovation – VIDEO
- 2 Moment furious Bercow erupts at Brexiteer MP in extraordinary attack – ‘Like it lump it!’
- 3 BBC’s Katya Adler uncovers EU’s real ‘blame game’ plot to thwart Brexit with fresh delay
- 4 Remainer plot backfires: ‘Massive own goal’ MP squirms as he’s told Boris surging in polls
- 5 Varadkar’s no deal crisis: Brussels has ‘screwed’ Ireland amid economic collapse warning
Creggan riots: Police in ‘brutal, sustained’ attack as homes evacuated in Northern Ireland Brexit betrayal: Labour plot to defy referendum and take down Boris Johnson in shock vote Boris Johnson blasts Brexit ‘yellow bellies’: PM again refuses to ask EU for a delay EU chaos: Macron forced to ask for emergency aid from Brussels amid French no deal fears Varadkar’s no deal crisis: Brussels has ‘screwed’ Ireland amid economic collapse warning BBC host delivers shock verdict on how Boris Johnson is fooling Parliament on Brexit Jeremy Corbyn torn apart as former Labour MP launches scathing attack on Opposition leader John Bercow: How Speaker spent £31k of taxpayers’ cash on apartment renovation ‘The MPs are a disgrace!’ Brexiteer savages Remainer panellists in heated Jeremy Vine show ‘Parliament all over the place’ MPs issued dire forecast on impact of new general election Brexit U-turn: How John McDonnell insisted Labour would NOT seek Brexit delay
See today’s front and back pages, download the newspaper, order back issues and use the historic Daily Express newspaper archive.
IPSO Regulated Copyright ©2019 Express Newspapers. “Daily Express” is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.
Confusion over Corbyn’s election position
The Labour Party is divided over whether to vote for an October 15 election or to force Johnson to hold a later one.
Jeremy Corbyn indicated on Wednesday afternoon that he would back an October election, and would vote for one as soon as the prime minister is legally required to seek a Brexit extension by October 19.
“We want a general election,” the Labour leader’s spokesman said.
“We want to be sure of stopping a no-deal crash-out on the 31st. We want to be sure of the government being unable to change the date or allow a crash-out during an election campaign and pre-empt the decision of the people in an election campaign. We have been attempting to find the mechanisms to do those three things. We think we can do those three things.”
He said Corbyn would agree to an October 15 once the bill is law, which would be next week.
But Corbyn’s position seems to be at odds with many other Labour MPs, including Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary.
Editorial Comment Corbyn is multi faced and a fake. There are two key things in what he has said above. He doesn’t trust Johnson to go for a no deal and recognises that there is no actual legal obstacle to him doing that at the moment.
As for Starmer, no one could accuse him of being a toff, as son of a nurse and tool maker. But he was head of the corrupt CPS which sent a lot of innocent ‘men’ to jail- working class men. Few things worse than a working class person made good. Labour is not the workers party. It is built on fakery. The workng underclass have no party and no edcation worth the name.
Three Men in The Same Boat -Apologies to Jerome K Jerome September 3rd 2019
Hopefully many people- too much to hope for most- will realise that a Deal Brexit is not Brexit because it means staying in the customs union subject to European rules, not open to free trade with the rest of the world. It is a con trick.
Europe’s elite need Britain to remain, even on BRINO terms to give the crumbling Union credibility. France has endured nearly 11 months of yellow vest protests, not that anyone would notice from Britain’s elite owned and elite run mainstream media.
Rolling wars in the Middle East have opened the door to mass migration from the Middle East and North Africa, increasing the need for public spending, pushing up prices, deflating wages and increasing racial tensions – covered up by press censorship. But you can’t avoid a storm or volcano by pretending you don’t feel the tremours.
True Democracy is not the European Union’s or Britain’s style, but spin and patronising the masses is- none do that better than the British elite. This elite has corrupted Europe with its war mongering and pseudo liberaslism. And so it comes to pass this night that a Tory crosses the floor to the insipid Liberal Democrats, wiping out Boris Johnson’s feeble majority.
Along comes Sir Oliver Letwin, arch money loving Tory for a comfortable South West constituency. Son of Jewish U.S academics William and Shirley-William Letwin, emeritus professor at trendy London School of Economics.
He was educated at the Hall School, Hampstead, Eton and Trinity College Cambridge. He is not, by any stretch or the imagination a man of the people, but typical of the ruling elite who just don’t get or care about what is happening among and to the underlings- rather like not noticing your car radiator is steaming because your nose is up in the air.
So this evening, according to what super smug wordy Speaker John Bercow- sounds like a character from a Jane Austin novel, by the way- Letwin had a private conversation with him yesterday, this obviating the need to record his planned Bill to stop the government pasing a no deal Brexit.!
The motion should have been posted for the House of Commons by 10;30 this morning. The Tory MP who made this point was patronised and slapped down by Speaker Bercow- the man who published a leaflet on how to seduce drunk girl students when he was an undergrad at Oxford. Sex with drunken females is now defined as statutory rape if the female so desires.
Then along comes Jeremy Corbyn, fake man of the people- how many working people ever called their son Jeremy. He calls Johnson’s suspending Parliament an outrage. What another pompous person. So all in all, we have ‘Three Men in a Boat.” All in the same boat, taking Britain up the European war mongering diverse, money grabbing increasingly race riven censored European Police State river to hell.
Britain is a world leader in police state techniques, Europe cannot afford to lose that expertese or the money. Moreover, Labour are international socialists, while key Tories are of the financial world, either directly or by sponsorship. The plan is to deceive with a Brexit Deal. If it comes to an election, then the BBC will be all behind them.
House of Sin- source Metro July 12th 2019
A number of private locations within the Houses of Parliament have tested positive for cocaine. In an investigation conducted by VICE, nine secure areas within the building were checked for the Class A drug, and four came back conclusive. Various rooms that can only be entered with a pass were swabbed with a simple testing kit, consisting of pale pink wipes that turn blue if traces of cocaine is present.
One of the areas that displayed the highest levels of residue was in the toilets outside of the Strangers Bar, which is only accessible to members of parliament and high ranking public officials. Earlier this month the original candidates of the Conservative leadership race came clean about their history of illegal drug use. A number of secure locations within the Houses of Parliament tested positive for cocaine
A number of secure locations within the Houses of Parliament tested positive for cocaine. Conservative MP and leadership contender Michael Gove admitted to snorting cocaine while working as a journalist Conservative MP and former leadership contender Michael Gove admitted to snorting cocaine while working as a journalist .
Rory Stewart, a former contender in the Conservative leadership battle, said that he had previously smoked opium Rory Stewart, a former contender in the Tory leadership battle, said that he had previously smoked opium.
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt admitted to consuming a cannabis lassi.
Michael Gove admitted to snorting cocaine ‘on several occasions’ during his time as a ‘young journalist’, while Rory Stewart said he had smoked opium at a wedding in Iran. Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Raab and Andrea Leadsom all confirmed they had previously used cannabis, and Sajid Javid denied ever taking any Class A or Class B substances.
Front runner Boris Johnson confirmed he had enjoyed several joints, but gave conflicting statements about his cocaine use. He previously admitted to having a ‘solitary line’, although in 2005 during an appearance on BBC’s Have I Got News For You, he joked that he had not actually taken it. Mr Johnson said: ‘I sneezed and so it did not go up my nose, in fact, I may have been doing icing sugar.’ Dominic Raab said he smoked cannabis as a student Dominic Raab said he smoked cannabis as a student (Picture: Getty Images) Andrea Leadsom has smoked weed before Andrea Leadsom has smoked weed before.
Boris Johnson said that he ‘sneezed’ and the suspected cocaine ‘didn’t go up his nose’ Boris Johnson said that he ‘sneezed’ and the suspected drug ‘didn’t go up his nose’ . Other locations which tested positive were the disabled toilets outside
The Woolsack, one of several bars in the Palace of Westminster, as well as two other bathrooms outside of MP’s offices. A Parliamentary spokesperson said: ‘Parliament takes the issue of substance misuse very seriously and offers a range of welfare and health support services for those who need them.
I am close in age to this generation, in the days of elitist universities, rather than today’s less pampering ‘unis’. I was never keen on my posh contemporaries at the University of East Anglia and Goldsmiths College, rather to hypocritical for my liking. Now they are in charge of the asylum.
By the way, why did Cameron offer us a referendum on Europe if he meant it to be staying in without representation? Drugs have a lot to answer for.
When my poor old school cleaner widowed mum walked me to the bus stop, seeing me off for my first term at university, she said, with a worried look and tone, ‘Rob, don’t go getting mixed up with those drugs.’
I was a keen sportsman at the time- running 100 miles a week- and had no idea what she was talking about, I soon learned from the posh boys.
Unfortunately the rich tend to hedonistic use of drugs, the working classes, as with booze. use it for escape. It is the latter group who usually get jailed. Robert Cook
Meghan and Harry spent £2,400,000 of taxpayers’ money to renovate Frogmore Cottage
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’ country residence, close to Windsor Castle, underwent major work to turn five properties back into a single home for the couple and their son Archie – with all fittings and fixtures privately paid for by the duke and duchess.
It is likely they installed a luxury kitchen and bathroom and it has reportedly been designed by the couple with dining and entertaining in mind and with extra bedrooms to accommodate guests, like the duchess’ mother Doria Ragland. Accounts for the Sovereign Grant, which funds the Queen and her household’s official expenses, show the monarchy cost the taxpayer £67 million during 2018-19 – an increase of almost £20 million on the previous financial year.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/
Will the EU elections spark off a currency crash?
Dear Reader, The results are in. And they confirmed what I’ve been warning Europe is coming apart at the seams – financially and politically. First it was Brexit. Then the Italians challenged EU authority over spending. Then the Yellow Vest protestors brought France to its knees. Britain, France and Italy all saw big ‘anti-establishment’ votes at the weekend. In particular the Italian government saw its position strengthened… with Matteo Salvini getting ready for another big fight with the EU (the last one helped trigger a near 20% selloff in the markets, with the entire European banking system going deep into the red). Salvini had this to say over the weekend: “I’m told a letter from the European Commission on the Italian economy is on its way. I think Italians gave me and the government a mandate to completely, calmly and constructively re-discuss the parameters that led to unprecedented job instability, unemployment and anxiety.” In other words: bring it on. I called all this over a year ago. Now I’m making a new prediction. I want to give you a step by step account of where we go next. Full disclosure: I think we’re moving unstoppably towards a new currency and banking crisis. I lay it all out in my best-selling hardback book. A book that you can get hold of for just £5 today (while stocks last). Get yours here while you can. Best, Nick Hubble Chief Strategist, Southbank Investment Research
|The calm before the storm|
|Dear Reader, I’m talking about the UK Uncensored inbox. After a few |
days when hardly any Brexit-related emails arrived, suddenly there’s been a flood of responses to our last article and also to the latest political events. Today I’ve again taken some excerpts. Please forgive me if your own observations aren’t included below: we don’t have space for everything we’ve received. But I’d like to thank all contributors – we do appreciate the favourable comments that several people have made.
Mind you, some of you who don’t like what we’ve written! For example, ‘A’ has criticised my description of Theresa May’s effect on the Tories… “Ripped asunder, torn asunder, but shattered asunder? If you are going to write something PLEASE make sure it makes sense in English”. As asunder means ‘into several pieces’, I’d beg to differ about my use of words. To me, “shattered asunder” looks a reasonable description of the present state of the Conservative Party.
After all, it has just suffered its worst election result since the Reform Act in 1832! And ‘P’ reckons I “clearly understand nothing about politics & even less about Jeremy Corbyn” when I say that the latter’s “willingness to say absolutely anything simply to get elected as PM (like that would help the country at the moment?) isn’t working either”. OK, maybe I don’t understand politics – I normally avoid writing about it.
But by according Labour just 14% of the overall European election vote, the British electorate appears to agree with me that Mr Corbyn’s campaign strategy was badly flawed and that he wouldn’t exactly be the PM the UK needs right now.
Meanwhile, ‘M’ is puzzled that “a referendum campaign which contained more ‘lies’ than any previous political campaign and asked a ridiculous binary question on an extremely complex subject is being portrayed as the ‘will of the people’ while a second vote, on real options far less unknown, is somehow ‘undemocratic’!
The current ‘will of the people’ is probably for a narrow Remain win on the basis of the last three years’ demographic changes.” ‘H’ doesn’t believe that “much consideration was put into the Brexit vote by UK farmers (although a vast majority of them voted to leave)”.
“Michael Gove’s promise that Britain’s farmers will be protected from overseas produce prices is an empty one. We cannot expect (say) New Zealanders to agree to duty-free entry of UK goods while we impose import duty on their lamb and dairy produce.” ‘N’ is also concerned about “misperceptions or downright inaccuracies”, starting with “the perception that the EU is an outside party, mainly dominated by Germany, dictating to the UK. In fact Britain has been one of the strongest voices determining EU policy and also the prime instigator of the European Court”.
And ‘E’ says that he knows “how awful it is to only hear one’s own opinions reflected back to oneself and how this goes to reinforce one’s own prior opinion”. “The Remain camp, because of its foolish attachment to honesty, presented its economic case… from a multiplicity of independent ‘best effort’ models of the UK economy.
These were incomprehensible to the great majority of the public who chose instead to believe the simplistic lies presented by the Leave camp (immediately on the side of a bus, but basically emanating from the side of a fag packet)… in what was a deeply-flawed referendum”.
Also, “the public wasn’t adequately presented with the arguments concerning the possibility of the break-up of the UK”, while many “were persuaded that ‘immigrants’ were a direct and significant factor in their misery concerning insufficient housing and an overwhelmed NHS. But there is no inherent shortage of housing land while the proposition about the NHS is false: indeed the latter is highly reliant upon immigrant labour”. Never let it be said that we don’t publish Remain views when we receive them!
Please note these are not the views of the editor.
Image Kieran Cook, Heathrow.
Conservative leadership candidate Rory Stewart has apologised for smoking opium in Iran.
Jet setter Mr Stewart, who is currently the International Development Secretary, smoked the class-A drug while in Iran.
When asked about the opium on Sky News, Mr Stewart admitted that it was against the law in the country at the time when he took it.
“I think it was a very stupid mistake and I did it 15 years ago, and I actually went on in Iran to see the damage that opium was doing to communities,” Mr Stewart said.
Watch: I will not serve under Boris, vows Stewart (Evening Standard)
May’s deal is not Brexit, and neither is ‘Common market 2.0’ – they both mean economic serfdom
Early life and start in politics
The only child of an Anglican minister, Theresa Brasier grew up in rural Oxfordshire. She attended both state-run and private schools before matriculating at the University of Oxford, where she studied geography. At a dance at Oxford, another student, Benazir Bhutto, the future prime minister of Pakistan, introduced Brasier to Philip May, whom she married in 1980. Both she and her husband undertook careers in banking. She worked for the Bank of England before moving on to the Association for Payment Clearing Services (APACS), where she served as head of the European Affairs Unit and senior adviser on international affairs.
Our political elite, many are ‘Uni’ girls have no idea of what life is like for the lower orders, like me. Picture below, me driving my truck down Westway into Central London June 3rd 2019. I passed the ruins of Grenfell Tower on my way in.
26/03/2019by Harry Western 3,207 Views6 min read
Written by Harry Western
The government is claiming that, if its Withdrawal Agreement is rejected, parliament will take over and impose a ‘softer’ form of Brexit. This line of argument is dishonest, because the differences between the economic end-state that would result from the government’s WA being passed, and the end-state resulting from ‘Common Market 2.0’ or ‘Norway plus’, are almost non-existent.
- The government is now trying to force MPs to vote for its withdrawal agreement by threatening that parliament will impose an ‘even softer’ form of Brexit such as a ‘permanent customs union’, ‘Common market 2.0’ or ‘Norway plus’
- The choice the government is trying to force MPs to make is a false one. The differences between its withdrawal agreement and so-called ‘soft Brexit’ options are miniscule: both would result in non-voting versions of EU membership that would deny the UK all the main benefits of Brexit while keeping most of the costs of being in the EU
- The government’s claim that parliament might impose a ‘permanent’ customs union as part of a ‘soft’ Brexit is also dishonest: the withdrawal agreement it is trying to push through also creates an indefinite customs union
- The only Brexit option offering a genuine exit now is a WTO exit, which is perfectly manageable and would probably lead to a free trade deal with the EU over the medium term
The UK government’s withdrawal agreement (WA) with the EU has now been decisively rejected by parliament on two occasions. However, rather than pushing ahead and leaving the EU on schedule without such an agreement, the UK government is delaying and still trying to push its WA through.
The government’s latest tactic is to claim that, if the WA is rejected, the UK parliament will take over and impose a ‘softer’ form of Brexit. This might take the form of a ‘permanent’ customs union, or so the so-called ‘Common Market 2.0’ or ‘Norway plus’ options being touted by some MPs.
This line of argument is dishonest, because the differences between the economic end-state that would result from the government’s WA being passed, and the end-state resulting from ‘Common Market 2.0’ or ‘Norway plus’, are almost non-existent.
Let’s first consider what these alternative ‘softer’ Brexit options involve.
‘Common Market 2.0’ or ‘Norway plus’ mean:
- The UK remaining in a customs union with the EU, with no say
- The UK aligning entirely with EU single market rules, on an ongoing basis, with no say. This might occur via a mechanism similar to the EEA agreement which governs the relationship between the EU and Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein
It is clear from this that both ‘Common Market 2.0’ and ‘Norway plus’ are misnomers. The ‘common’ market would actually be the EU market; a complete ‘rule taking’ position for the UK, whereby all key decisions on tariffs, quotas, product regulations and standards, environmental and also some tax rules will be taken by the EU, with no UK say.
Meanwhile, the ‘Norway plus’ option is actually nothing like the deal Norway has with the EU: Norway is not part of a customs union with the EU – it has an independent trade policy.
So, it’s certainly correct to say that ‘Common Market 2.0’ or ’Norway plus’ are ‘soft’ Brexit arrangements. But crucially, the government’s WA will lead the UK to the same place, economically, as these ‘softer’ options would: there is essentially no difference between them.
Under the government’s WA, the UK will effectively remain a non-voting EU member for two years. After that, the ‘backstop’ arrangements will kick in, unless a ‘final deal’ supersedes them. Under the backstop, the UK will:
- Remain in a customs union with the EU and will only be allowed to leave it if the EU agrees. This is essentially a permanent arrangement – there is no exit door for the UK
- Northern Ireland (NI) will implement all EU single market regulations. And, to prevent a ‘regulatory’ border appearing between NI and the rest of the UK, the UK government has recently committed to the rest of the UK to following all these regulations too
So, under the backstop, the UK will effectively remain a non-voting member of the EU customs union and EU single market.
And, crucially, there is no prospect of this changing as a result of a ‘final deal’. The EU will only accept a final deal that is almost identical to the backstop arrangements, as it has already made clear. The Political Declaration that accompanies the WA also states this quite plainly; it talks of the future relationship being based on a single customs territory with no rules of origin checks – conditions only possible in a customs union.
With no exit clause in the WA, there will be nothing the UK can do to get around this – all roads under the WA lead to a customs union and de facto single market membership, with no say.
Indeed, it is quite likely any ‘final deal’ flowing from the WA will be even more restrictive of the UK’s economic freedom than the backstop is. This is because the backstop has some very unpleasant features for the UK including a costly and cumbersome system of movement certificates for UK exports to the EU. In order to get rid of these elements, the UK is likely to have to concede on other key issues such as fishing and freedom of movement.
From the above, some crucial conclusions flow:
- Threats about the UK being forced into a ‘permanent’ customs union if the WA fails are empty. The WA already leads the UK into such an arrangement.
- Threats that parliament will impose a ‘softer’ Brexit if the WA is rejected are also empty. The WA already implies a Brexit that will be a Brexit in name only, with no economic upsides and no way out. The ‘softer’ arrangements being threatened are just a re-badged version of the same thing.
- MPs who think that supporting the WA now will allow the UK to negotiate a ‘looser’ Brexit arrangement later are fooling themselves. There is simply no mechanism to do this under the WA: all the exits have been blocked.
Both the government’s WA and alternative ‘soft’ Brexit options would leave the UK as essentially a non-voting EU member and remove any scope for the UK to reap the potential economic benefits of Brexit: no free trade deals with third countries, no gains from better regulation, no benefits for consumers from lower tariffs, no control of EU immigration. Both would also leave key UK industries like financial services at risk of regulatory assault from the EU and leave the UK under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, which will have become a foreign court.
The only route to a genuine Brexit now is for the UK to reject the WA and leave the EU on time, trading with the EU under WTO rules. Preparations over recent months now mean this is a perfectly viable option, and over the longer term the trade and regulatory freedom it would grant could yield major economic benefits for the UK – up to £80 billion per year.
Harry Western is the pen-name of a senior economist working in the private sector.