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/live/2019/oct/18/boris-johnson-launches-frantic-sales-pitch-of-brexit-deal-ahead-of-commons-vote-politics-live

The article has changed 13 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 7 Version 8
Brexit: Labour to back rebel Tory bid to force Johnson to demand extension – live news Brexit: Labour to back rebel Tory bid to force Johnson to demand extension – live news
(about 2 hours later)
My colleague Heather Stewart says Labour is planning to back the Letwin amendment tomorrow. This sounds like a technicality, and it is not unexpected, but it may be the most important news of the day, and it could make a Brexit extension followed by an election more likely. A judge at the court of session in Edinburgh has rejected a bid by the anti-Brexit campaigner, Jolyon Maughan, that questioned the legality of Boris Johnson’s new withdrawal deal.
Understand Labour will support the Letwin amendment - which makes it likely to pass.Would force Johnson to request an extension tomorrow; and mean we won't get a clean, up-and-down vote on his deal. The basis of the legal challenge by the QC and director of the Good Law Project was that the newly agreed deal contravened legislation – originally amended by hardline Brexiters to stymie the backstop arrangement – that prevents Northern Ireland forming part of a separate customs territory.
Yesterday the government was defeated by 12 votes on a motion tabled by Sir Oliver Letwin, the former Tory cabinet minister, ensuring that, when the Commons votes on the Brexit deal tomorrow, it will be possible for MPs to debate and vote on multiple amendments. For obvious reasons, the government wanted to restrict the chances for its motion to be amended. But Lord Pentland, who heard submissions on Friday morning and delivered his ruling at 5pm the same day, said Maugham’s argument was “weak”, adding that his petition was “of doubtful competency”. In his ruling, Pentland said:
Taking advantage of his own rule change, Letwin has tabled an amendment to the government motion tomorrow. It has heavyweight, cross-party support, with those backing it including Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem leader, and Philip Hammond, the former chancellor. It is a cardinal principle of constitutional law that the courts should not intrude on the legitimate affairs and processes of parliament.
You can read the text of the Letwin amendment on the order paper here (pdf). The amendment would remove almost all the government motion (which says the Commons has approved the Brexit deal) and says the Commons is withholding approval of the deal until the legislation implementing it has been passed. Responding to the ruling, Maugham accepted that he had been mistaken in bringing the action in haste.
As Letwin explained in the debate yesterday, his aim is to close a loophole in the Benn act. The legislation forces the PM to request a Brexit extension if a deal has not been passed by the end of tomorrow. A vote in favour of the deal tomorrow would have meant there was no need for the PM to request an extension. But if the withdrawal agreement bill (WAB) failed to get through parliament by 31 October, the UK could end up leaving with no deal by accident. Letwin’s amendment would lead to the PM having to request an extension tomorrow, on the proviso that if the WAB gets through by the end of October, at that point the extension would be withdrawn. You could call it a backstop. We had to make a decision to issue proceedings for interim remedies quickly or not at all; once the withdrawal agreement reaches parliament it becomes impossible to challenge.
The Benn act passed by 29 votes at second reading and it is likely that the Letwin amendment, which is just intended to copper bottom the Benn act, will also pass tomorrow. That was a difficult decision to make. It is difficult to move quickly and accurately and, the court has found, I got that decision wrong.
If it does, the make-or-break vote on Johnson’s deal will never actually take place. Instead MPs will vote on a bland motion (see below), which could go through on the nod. Lord Carloway, Scotland’s most senior judge, has already cleared time for an emergency hearing in the court of session at noon next Monday, as part of an earlier action by Maugham along with the SNP MP, Joanna Cherry, and Dale Vince, the millionaire owner of the Ecotricity green energy company. Carloway could issue court orders forcing Johnson to send a letter to the EU asking for an extension to article 50 until 31 January, as required by the Benn Act.
At that point, if Johnson complies with the assurances that he gave to the court of session in Scotland, he will have to write a letter to the EU requesting an extension. In another broadcast interview, this time with ITV News, the prime minister has claimed his deal – which leaves Northern Ireland practically within the customs union, while removing England, Scotland and Wales – gets the UK out of the backstop.
And at that point Johnson would have to decide whether to try to pass his withdrawal agreement bill by 31 October, to release him from the obligation to take up the extension - or whether to accept the extension, and then hold the election that Labour has promised to back in the event of an extension happening. He would campaign promising to implement his Brexit deal - against Labour promising a further negotiation. It busts out of [the] backstop, the previous problem with the deal, the previous deal that kept us locked in the customs union and the single market so, it’s a vast, vast, vast step forward.
This is starting to get speculative, but what is clear is that there is now a real chance that “Super Saturday” could turn out not to be the make-or-break Brexit moment people have been expecting. And what it also does, which is good, is it creates a period, a transition period from end of October, end of this month, there’s a period of standstill giving certainty to business and at the end of that it is perfectly correct that we will move to the new arrangements.
Assuming that Letwin’s amendment passes, this is the motion, as amended, that MPs would be voting on. (The Letwin text, replacing 12 lines in the original, is in bold.) For a clear idea of what, precisely, the deal entails, see this very handy explainer from my colleague, Lisa O’Carroll:
That, in light of the new deal agreed with the European Union, which enables the United Kingdom to respect the result of the referendum on its membership of the European Union and to leave the European Union on 31 October with a deal, this house has considered the matter but withholds approval unless and until implementing legislation is passed. How is Boris Johnson's Brexit deal different from Theresa May's?
From PoliticsHome’s John Johnston Johnson also insisted the agreement did not signal a “race to the bottom”.
A protestor dressed as Boris Johnson is now half way up the Big Ben scaffolding. Police screaming at him to come down. pic.twitter.com/eJvk3ZFDJi There’s some good language in the level playing field stuff, in the political declaration about this country’s ambitions on the environment and on social protection you know we’re world leaders in this stuff, there are ways in which we want to go further than the EU.
And Leo Varadkar, the Irish taoiseach (prime minister), has also said that MPs at Westminster should not assume that the EU27 would inevitably agree to a Brexit extension. Speaking at his post-summit press conference, he said: Under the freedoms that we will win it will be possible for instance for the UK to ban the export of live animals, which has caused offence over many years in this country and we can do all things differently to a higher standard and our aspirations to high levels of protection will be enshrined in the political declaration.
The position that we have agreed as the European council is that as things stand there is no request from the UK for an extension, if for some reason a request came, then Donald Tusk – president of the European council – would consult individually with all the European leaders to see if we would agree to such a request. There is “no better outcome” than the Brexit deal on offer, the prime minister has claimed this evening.
But bear in mind that request would have to be agreed unanimously by all 27 leaders, so I don’t think MPs voting tomorrow should make the assumption there would be unanimity for an extension. But our point of view has always been that we would be open to it, but it would be a mistake to assume that it’s a guarantee, given that it requires unanimity by all 27 member states. In an interview with the BBC, Boris Johnson has sought to portray the forthcoming vote on his Brexit deal as a chance to “move on” from three years of divisive politics in Westminster and beyond.
He also said although Ireland would be open to an extension to allow more time for the House of Commons to ratify a deal, there was no plan B. He explained: There’s no better outcome than the one I’m advocating tomorrow.
Plan B is no deal, and we’re all preparing for that, and we’ve all been preparing for that since the referendum, but let’s hope that doesn’t happen. I just kind of invite everybody to imagine what it could be like tomorrow evening, if we have settled this, and we have respected the will of the people, because we will then have a chance to to move on.
Emmanuel Macron, the French president, has said he does not want to grant another Brexit extension. Speaking at a press conference at the end of the EU summit, he said: Johnson said he was hopeful the deal would pass in the Commons tomorrow, saying:
So that we can turn to the future I believe that we shall stick to the deadline of October 31. Look, you know, this has been a long exhausting and quite divisive business Brexit. I hope that people will think well, you know, what’s the balance, what do our constituents really want? Do they want us to keep going with this argument, do they want more division and delay?
That being said, I’m not trying to read the future but I do not think we shall grant any further delay. Critics, of course, will point out that Johnson’s own government’s analysis suggests his deal will cost the UK billions in economic growth and that the best outcome – on that front, at least – would be no Brexit at all.
I believe it is now time to put an end to these negotiations and work on the future relationship and put an end to what is currently ongoing. UK would lose £130bn in growth if Brexit deal passed, figures suggest
Like I said, there shall be no delay unless there are some major changes. Asked about the deal he struck on the Irish border issue, the prime minister denied breaking a promise to the DUP, saying:
Under the Benn act, Boris Johnson will have to request a Brexit extension if his deal is not agreed by parliament tomorrow. For an extension to be granted, all EU states would have to approve, which means that Macron would have a veto. Any suggestion that he might not allow an extension is helpful to Johnson, because he wants MPs to think tomorrow that they face a choice between his deal and no deal. I think that what you have is a fantastic deal for all of the UK, and particularly for Northern Ireland because you’ve got a single customs territory. Northern Ireland leaves the EU with the rest of the UK.
The intervention by Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, at the summit yesterday, when he also said there should be no extension, was also interpreted as an attempt to help Johnson get his deal through the Commons. In an article for the Times (paywall) Philip Hammond, the former chancellor, and one of the 21 Tories who lost the whip after rebelling over Brexit last month, says he will only vote for the PM’s deal if he gets an assurance that it will not lead to a no-deal Brexit when the transition period finishes at the end of next year. Hammond says:
In practice, although most of the EU27 are fed up of Brexit and want it over, it is assumed that, faced with a no-deal Brexit as an alternative, in practice they would grant a request for an extension from the UK. I haven’t come this far seeking to avoid no-deal in 2019 to be duped into voting for a heavily camouflaged no-deal at the end of 2020. But I am not a lost cause.
The court of session has finished hearing submissions on the latest legal challenge by anti-Brexit campaigner Jolyon Maugham QC, and Lord Pentland has said that he will give his decision by the end of the day. The assurance Hammond is seeking is the exact opposite of the assurance that the Tory Brexiter John Baron demanded in a BBC interview this morning. Baron said that he had received private promises from ministers that the government would be willing to default to no-deal at the end of next year if trade talks with the EU failed, but that he wanted Boris Johnson to say this in public. (See 2pm.) Hammond wants Johnson to say in public that he won’t consider this.
Scotland’s highest court heard that Boris Johnson’s new withdrawal agreement to leave the European Union involves a “clear and unequivocal breach” of national law. The People’s Vote campaign described the Baron comment as evidence that the government is planning a no-deal Brexit for 2020, but government insiders dismiss this as “conspiracy theory” thinking. They argue that Johnson would not have worked so hard for a deal in recent weeks if he actually wanted no deal.
The basis of the challenge is that the newly agreed deal with the EU contravenes legislation – originally amended by hardline Brexiters to stymie the backstop arrangement – that prevents Northern Ireland forming part of a separate customs territory. That’s all from me for today.
Sitting before Pentland, the court of session in Edinburgh heard from Aidan O’Neill QC that the provisions of the new withdrawal agreement make it plain that Northern Ireland would also form part of a separate customs territory, that of the European Union, and that this breaches section 55 of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018, which states that it is “unlawful for Her Majesty’s government to enter into arrangements under which Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory to Great Britain”. My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is taking over now.
Noting that section 55 – the result of an amendment sponsored by the hardline European Research Group - “intended to tie the government’s hands”, O’Neill added that whether Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory after Brexit “is a question of objective law” and that it “can’t be plainer” that the UK government has acted unlawfully. Emmanuel Macron, the French president, has joined the Boris Johnson fan club, it seems. This is from my colleague Jennifer Rankin.
But Gerry Moynihan QC for the UK government argued that the petition was beyond the competency of the court, saying it was inviting the court to “inhibit” consideration of the agreement. “This is a manifest attempt to interfere with proceedings in parliament,” he told Pentland. He added that a substantial part of Northern Ireland’s trade would remain part of the UK’s customs territory and therefore section 55 would be complied with. Emmanuel Macron on Boris Johnson:"He is sometimes colourful...but he is a leader with genuine strategic vision and those who did not take him seriously were wrong." https://t.co/nFjSpQQekI
Moynihan also presented a letter from the Speaker’s counsel which warned that Maugham’s petition was asking for action that would “inevitably involve interference on proceedings in parliament and as a breach of the separation of powers”. Macron has changed his tune a bit from the days when he used to denounce those who led the Vote Leave campaign as “liars”.
The hearing, which concluded just before 1pm, involved testy exchanges between Pentland and O’Neill, as the judge attempted to clarify whether the court was in effect being asked to prevent parliament debating the deal on Saturday. Sebastian Payne says, in the light of Labour’s Melanie Onn saying she would back Boris Johnson’s deal, the PM now has a notional majority of two for his plan according to the Financial Times’ tally.
O’Neill said that he was asking the court to clarify the law for parliament, and that it would be parliament’s decision whether to then repeal section 55 in order to retrospectively validate the agreement. And now there were 10: @OnnMel is backing Boris' deal. By our numbers, Boris Johnson has a majority of *two* for his deal tomorrow https://t.co/2DBWj354Bc
Another “Spartan”, the former Brexit minister Suella Braverman, has announced that she will be voting for Boris Johnson’s deal. Melanie Onn has become the latest Labour MP to declare that she is prepared to vote for Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal despite intense pressure at Westminster to oppose it, my colleagues Heather Stewart and Peter Walker report.
Just over a year ago I resigned from Government over the terms of the deal. I voted against it 3 times. Tomorrow I will vote to support the new deal secured by @BorisJohnson. This is about more than Brexit. It’s about integrity & democracy. Let’s get Brexit done & restore trust Labour's Melanie Onn declares intention to vote for Brexit deal
The Tory Brexiter John Baron told the BBC this morning that ministers such as Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, and Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, have told him that, if the trade talks with the EU do not produce a deal by the end of next year, the UK would leave the transition and trade with the EU on no-deal (ie, WTO) terms. On the World at One Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the Commons, said he thought Labour MPs in seats that voted leave might want to back the PM’s Brexit deal. He said:
He also said a similar assurance in public from Boris Johnson would help to persuade hardline Brexiters (ie, the core of the European Research Group) to back the deal. He said: There are Labour MPs in seats that voted 60, 70% to leave and they will, of their own volition, regardless of anything I could say to them, be thinking about how do they best represent their own voters.
All I can share with you is this: I am doing my best to persuade colleagues, the so-called Spartans who like me voted three times against Theresa May’s deal, to look at this in a favourable light. Because provided we can get that clear assurance, and I have been given it so far by people like Michael Gove and Dominic Raab, and I’m hoping to get it from the prime minister tomorrow, that we will be leaving after the trade talks, if those trade talks fail up to December 2020, on no-deal terms - as long as we can get that assurance, and I think we have done, then we’ll be supporting the deal tomorrow. In fact new research from the British Election Study, which studies voting behaviour in considerable detail through an extensive database going back years, suggests that Rees-Mogg is wrong. Even in constituencies that voted leave in 2016 by large majorities, the people voting Labour are predominantly remain supporters, the research found.
Under the government’s current plan the UK would leave the EU legally on 31 October but then remain in a transition until December 2020, during which most aspects of EU law would continue to apply. Ministers claim that they will be able to negotiate a new trade relationship with the EU before the end of next year, but the withdrawal agreement allows the transition to be extended for an extra year or two years and most trade experts think that in practice this will be necessary because there is very little chance of negotiating a trade deal within 14 months. In an interview with the Irish Times last month Phil Hogan, the incoming European trade commissioner, said it would take him up to eight months to assemble a new trade negotiating team and then “a number of years” to conclude talks with the UK. Here is an extract from Ed Fieldhouse’s write-up for the British Election Study website. (I have highlighted some of the highlights in bold)
But the People’s Vote campaign says Baron’s comment show that the government is not sincere about wanting a trade deal and that is is preparing for a no-deal Brexit at the end of next year. First, while 68% of Labour voters voted to remain in the EU in 2016, what about voters in those seats which voted to Leave the EU? Dividing countries in to leave and remain seats and subdividing by the 2017 winner, the BES data shows that in Labour seats where there was a leave majority, 60% of Labour voters voted to remain in 2016 compared to 76% in remain seats. In other words while unsurprisingly there were more Labour leave voters in leave seats, on average there was still a substantial remain majority. Even in those with a leave vote of greater than 60%, a clear majority (57%) of Labour voters voted remain in 2016.
BREAKING: John Baron reveals the NO DEAL promise from Michael Gove & Dominic Raab that is making #Brexit extremists vote for this fake deal. They have no intention of signing up to a free trade deal before 2020. They want the UK to crash out out with No Deal. Please RT: Of course, Labour is not looking to win only the votes of those who supported them in 2017, and some people have changed their Brexit preferences since 2016. Rather than focus on 2017 vote and 2016 EU referendum vote we can use the BES to look at the Brexit preferences of all potential Labour voters in May 2019. We defined respondents who scored Labour on a like-dislike scale at least 5 on a 0-10 scale as potential supporters, making up 46% of all respondents that said they would vote and had decided how to vote.
These are from BuzzFeed’s Alex Wickham. Overall 70% of these potential Labour voters said they would vote to remain in the EU, with only 21% preferring to leave, with the rest saying they ‘don’t know’ or ‘would not vote’ in another referendum. In leave constituencies these figures change only slightly to 65% and 25% respectively. When we narrow this down to Labour seats we see little evidence to suggest that Labour MPs in leave constituencies who are concerned about their re-election prospects need worry more about alienating leave voters than remain voters. In Labour held sets with a leave majority the figures are almost identical: 64% remain and 25% leave. Even in strong leave Labour seats (where leave vote exceeded 60%) the number of potential Labour voters who would vote remain (62%) is more than twice the number who would vote Leave (26%).
No10 fighting to nail down votes of the 21 former Tory rebelsHad previously been thought most would come overBut now fears these rebels could remain in the high single figureshttps://t.co/LXj8LW5nu4 Fieldhouse says the view expressed by Rees-Mogg (also shared by some Labour MPs, who worry that a remain stance will cost them votes in leave areas) is what social scientists call “an ecological fallacy”. Fieldhouse explains: “Just because Labour voters disproportionately live in leave areas doesn’t mean that they are more likely to be Leave voters themselves.”
Tory whips balancing actSome Spartans not backing deal yet, asking for commitment to leave transition period on WTO terms if a FTA cannot be agreedPaterson a problemBut make that commitment and the former Tory rebels and Labour MPs will fall awayhttps://t.co/LXj8LW5nu4 The government has tabled two motions for the debate tomorrow; the first, approving Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal; and a second, alternative one, approving a no-deal Brexit. As this House of Commons library briefing explains, the second motion is only expected to be moved (ie, put to a vote) if the first one gets defeated.
Some Spartans frustrated at Sammy Wilson / Ian Paisley Jnr / Nigel Dodds counter-whipping operation trying to get them to oppose the dealOne says Wilson in particular is being “annoying” and is hell-bent on no-dealhttps://t.co/LXj8LW5nu4 The Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson, who have been behind previous attempts to get the Commons to support a confirmatory referendum on a Brexit deal, have tabled an amendment to the second motion saying a referendum should be held. They say more than 90 MPs have signed it.
The Tory Brexiter John Baron told the BBC this morning that Boris Johnson’s deal could make a no-deal Brexit possible at the end of next year, when the transition ends. (See 11.02am.) The People’s Vote campaign claims this comment shows that no deal remains a Brexiter ambition. It has released this quote from the Tory MP Guto Bebb, a PV supporter. He said: The amendment for a confirmatory ballot has been tabled for #SuperSaturdayIn the space of one hour over 90 MP’s from across the House signed the amendment...on a Friday! #KyleWilson #Compromise pic.twitter.com/hBQ8g1o8qQ
John Baron let the cat out of the bag. He admits that he and many of his fellow ideologues in the extremist Conservative faction of the ERG are supporting Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals only because they see it as the fastest way to fulfil their no deal fantasies. Our approach has always been about consensus and compromise. Having heard from hundreds of MPs it is clear that most want to focus entirely on the deal as priority number one, not two substantial propositions simultaneously. Many want to vote on the deal before anything else
Liberty has lost a bid to have an urgent hearing of its case against Boris Johnson over the Brexit deadline, the Press Association reports. Lawyers for the civil rights organisation argued today that its legal challenge, brought to ensure Johnson “acts within the law”, should be heard immediately. But their application for an urgent hearing was rejected by court of appeal judges, who said there was no need for an expedited hearing. So @MPphilwilson and I have tabled our amendment against Motion 2.Should the deal fail to get a majority, MPs will move forward and be given the chance to vote on #KyleWilson.If successful, the House will have instructed govt to put any Brexit terms back to the people
Government lawyers said Liberty’s case did not need to proceed urgently, as there was “ample time” for it to be heard before the UK’s planned exit from the EU on 31 October, the Press Association reports. But, given that the second motion will probably not get moved in the first place, the Kyle/Wilson amendment will probably not get put to a vote.
Mark Francois, the deputy chair of the European Research Group, which represents hardline Tory Brexiters, and one of the 28 “Spartans” who voted against Theresa May’s deal on all three occasions, has gone into No 10 for a meeting with the PM. On his way in he said: And Nick Boles, the former Tory who now sits as an independent, will back Boris Johnson’s deal.
I still have some concerns about some of the specifics of the deal. So I’m going to go in now and discuss them personally with the prime minister. He very kindly granted me a meeting. And I’ll decide what to do when I’ve had a chance to put some questions to the prime minister. I voted for May’s deal three times. I still want the UK to leave the EU with a deal. The compromise that Johnson has struck is flawed. But it is a lot better than no deal or no Brexit. I will support the motion as amended tomorrow and every stage of the implementing legislation.
From YouGov David Gauke, the former Tory justice secretary and one of the 21 Tories who had the whip withdrawn last month after rebelling over Brexit, says he will back Boris Johnson’s deal – but is backing the Letwin amendment too.
BREAKING: Snap YouGov poll finds that by 41% to 24%, Britons want Parliament to pass Boris Johnson's Brexit deal. Two thirds (67%) of Leave voters want the deal passed https://t.co/2FZCSNZmE2 pic.twitter.com/PhQ4skIuFE I have always believed that the best outcome to Brexit was to leave with a deal. I voted 3 times to leave with a deal.For me, the worst outcome was to leave with no deal. I’ve been prepared to resign from the Cabinet and lose the party whip in order to oppose no deal. /1
From Sky’s Rob Powell Any deal involves compromises. The PM deserves credit for being willing to compromise and get a deal.With the best will in the world and everyone acting in good faith, it will be very difficult to scrutinise and pass any legislation between now and 31 October. /2
NEW: Brexiteer Mark Francois - who voted against May's deal three times - heads into Downing Street to meet Boris Johnson. He says he "still has concerns about some of the specifics of the deal" and will decide what to do after meeting the PM. As an insurance policy, the Benn Act needs to stay in place. That’s why I’ll support the Letwin amendment.I have some concerns about the deal. Is there a risk that at the end of 2020 we find ourselves on WTO terms with the EU? That’s a very bad outcome. /3
The DUP MP Sammy Wilson is urging Tory MPs to join the DUP in rejecting Boris Johnson’s deal. But that is a matter Parliament can examine whilst scrutinising the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.I’ve been making the case for a long time that resolving Brexit was going to require compromise. Tomorrow I will back the PM’s compromise. I hope Parliament will back the deal. /4
Conservative & Unionist MPs must take a stand for the Union and join us in rejecting this deal. Internal & burdensome trade barriers will be erected within the UK without parallel consent from both unionists & nationalists. This is not Brexit. The FT’s Sebastian Payne reckons Boris Johnson could now have a majority of one for his deal.
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, told the BBC this morning that, if Boris Johnson wins the vote tomorrow, the opposition parties should unite to bring down his government with a no confidence vote. Blackford said: With Graham Stringer sounding increasingly emollient towards the deal, that takes Labour MPs supporting the deal up to 9. So if all the ERG and Independent Conservatives are on board, @FinancialTimes analysis means he has a majority of 1 for the deal. https://t.co/LsCXL4tcLB
If it does go through [the deal], we will be saying to the opposition parties that we have to come together. We have to remove Boris Johnson’s government from office and we have to move to an early general election.
This is a deal that if it does get support in the House of Commons, is going to be devastating for our communities, devastating for jobs.
Richard Benyon, one of the 21 Tories who lost the whip after rebelling over Brexit last month, has confirmed that he will vote for the government tomorrow.
I will be supporting the deal tomorrow
Many of the 21 will be voting with the government. They rebelled because they wanted parliament to rule out a no-deal Brexit, but many of them are willing to see the UK leave the EU as long as a deal is in place.