This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/02/brexit-impact-documents-david-davis-start-talks-handover

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
David Davis to start talks on handover of Brexit impact documents Brexit impact papers to be released in victory for Labour
(about 1 hour later)
David Davis is to hold discussions over the handover of dozens of previously confidential documents assessing the impact of Brexit on the economy after Labour won an unanimous motion in the Commons calling for them to be released. The government has conceded that it must release dozens of previously confidential documents assessing the economic impact of Brexit after Labour won a Commons motion demanding they do so.
While ministers have yet to say whether they will abide by the motion, passed on Wednesday evening, talks have already begun on how the process could happen, the junior Brexit minister, Robin Walker, told MPs. After Wednesday evening’s unanimous vote calling for the 58 studies to be released, ministers refused to confirm whether the the arcane type of motion passed unanimously by MPs, known as a “humble address”, was considered binding.
The motion calls for the 58 studies, which ministers have fiercely resisted publishing, to be released in full to the Brexit select committee, members of which would then decide what elements to issue publicly. But answering questions in the Commons on Thursday, the leader of the house, Andrea Leadsom, said this was the case. However, she indicated that there could be some delays as ministers pondered how to release the information without damaging Brexit negotiations.
At Brexit department questions on Thursday, Walker declined to confirm the government would definitely release the papers, despite the Commons Speaker, John Bercow, saying the motion passed would usually be seen as binding. “I said we would respond appropriately and we will do so as soon as conceivable,” Walker said in response to a question from the shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer. “It is absolutely accepted that the motion passed by the house yesterday is binding, and that the information will be forthcoming,” she said. “But as I think has been made very clear, it is the case that it’s difficult to balance the conflicting obligation to protect the public interest through not disclosing information that could harm the national interest, whilst at the same time ensuring that the resolution that the house passed yesterday is adhered to.”
But he did say that Davis, the Brexit secretary, would have already spoken to Hilary Benn, the Labour MP who chairs the Brexit select committee, over possible next steps. “We take very seriously the motion of parliament, we will be responding it,” Walker said. “The secretary of state has already spoken to the chairman of the select committee of exiting the European Union and will be discussing this matter with him further in due course. The Labour motion, tabled by the shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, calls for the full, unredacted impact assessments to be passed to the Brexit select committee, which would decide what elements could be released more widely.
Labour has sought for months to secure the release of the studies, which cover the great majority of the UK economy, prompting speculation that ministers were wary of sharing them because of the gloomy assessments they contain. The motion was passed unanimously after the government said it would not oppose the measure, a tactic it has taken several times recently to ward off likely rebellions by Tory MPs supporting Labour motions. Earlier on Thursday, Robin Walker, the junior Brexit minister, said talks had already begun between his department and the chair of the Brexit committee, Labour MP Hilary Benn, on the next steps.
However, while normal opposition day motions can be ignored by the government without consequence, the measure seeking release of the papers was tabled as a “humble address”, an arcane parliamentary request rarely used since the 19th century. Bercow said such motions were “traditionally regarded as binding or effective”, but said he could not immediately rule whether ministers would be judged in contempt of parliament if they did not act. “We take very seriously the motion of parliament, we will be responding it,” Walker told MPs. “The secretary of state has already spoken to the chairman of the select committee of exiting the European Union and will be discussing this matter with him further in due course.
Labour has sought for months to secure the release of the studies, which cover the great majority of the UK economy, prompting speculation that ministers were wary of sharing them because of the gloomy assessments they contain.
The motion was passed unanimously after the government said it would not oppose the measure, a tactic it has taken several times recently to ward off likely rebellions by Tory MPs supporting Labour motions.
However, while normal opposition day motions can be ignored by the government without consequence, the measure seeking release of the papers was tabled as a humble address, an arcane parliamentary request rarely used since the 19th century.
The Speaker, John Bercow, said such motions were “traditionally regarded as binding or effective”, but said he could not immediately rule whether ministers would be judged in contempt of parliament if they did not act.
Starmer, who tabled the motion, said after the vote that he expected ministers to release the studies. “Labour has been absolutely clear since the referendum that ministers could not withhold vital information from parliament about the impact of Brexit on jobs and the economy,” he said.Starmer, who tabled the motion, said after the vote that he expected ministers to release the studies. “Labour has been absolutely clear since the referendum that ministers could not withhold vital information from parliament about the impact of Brexit on jobs and the economy,” he said.
“It’s completely unacceptable for the Tories to have wasted months avoiding responsible scrutiny and trying to keep the public in the dark. The reality is that it should not have taken an ancient parliamentary procedure to get ministers to listen to common sense.”“It’s completely unacceptable for the Tories to have wasted months avoiding responsible scrutiny and trying to keep the public in the dark. The reality is that it should not have taken an ancient parliamentary procedure to get ministers to listen to common sense.”
During the debate, Starmer argued that passing the papers initially to the Brexit select committee would be a prudent approach, not least as it has a majority of Conservative MPs. During the debate, Starmer argued that passing the papers initially to the Brexit select committee would be a prudent approach, not least as it has a majority of Conservative MPs, despite being chaired by a Labour member.
Responding to Starmer, Walker said the government was wary of releasing “unvarnished” advice lest it prompted future documents to be written in less frank terms. He refused to say whether the motion would be binding, saying it was “not my job” to interpret the rules of house. Responding to Starmer, Walker said the government was wary of releasing “unvarnished” advice in case it prompted future documents to be written in less frank terms. .
However, further stalling by ministers would prompt disquiet among those Tory MPs who support publication of the studies, including the pro-Brexit MP Jacob Rees-Mogg as well as other rebels such as Anna Soubry and Sarah Wollaston. Release of the documents was backed in the debate by several Tory MPs, including the pro-Brexit Jacob Rees-Mogg as well as other rebels such as Anna Soubry and Sarah Wollaston.
In her contribution to the debate, Soubry took aim at diehard Brexiters on her own side, who she said had to get serious about the process. “You’ve won, you’re in charge of this, now you have to face up to the responsibility of delivering a Brexit that works for everybody in this country and for generations to come,” she said.In her contribution to the debate, Soubry took aim at diehard Brexiters on her own side, who she said had to get serious about the process. “You’ve won, you’re in charge of this, now you have to face up to the responsibility of delivering a Brexit that works for everybody in this country and for generations to come,” she said.
Soubry added that some of those opposed to releasing the studies seemed mainly worried about what they contained: “The implication is quite clear: there’s something in them that’s not to be disclosed because it might prick this golden bubble, this balloon, of the promised land of Brexit.” Soubry added that some of those opposed to releasing the studies seemed mainly worried about what they contained, saying: “The implication is quite clear: there’s something in them that’s not to be disclosed because it might prick this golden bubble, this balloon, of the promised land of Brexit.”