Sunak suggests MPs will vote on proposed NI protocol deal and accuses Starmer of wanting to ‘surrender’ to EU – UK politics live

MPs have now passed the Northern Ireland (executive formation) bill. In the debate, Sammy Wilson, the DUP’s chief whip, urged the government not to abandon the Northern Ireland protocol bill, which is currently on pause in the House of Lords. The bill would allow the UK government to unilaterally ignore parts of the protocol (despite some lawyers saying this would be against international law).

Wilson said:

I believe in these negotiations the EU has to understand that there is an alternative and not to proceed with the protocol bill would be wrong because there must be a fallback position if these negotiations don’t succeed.

This is also an argument being made by some Tory Brexiters like Boris Johnson, Suella Braverman and Simon Clarke.

Ash Regan, who is standing to be SNP leader and next first minister, has called for an end to “mudslinging” in the contest.

Speaking to STV News on Wednesday, Regan, who resigned last year from her post as community safety minister because of her opposition to the gender recognition reform bill, said:

I just want to put out a call for calm – I think that’s really important at the moment. Kate and Humza are really valued colleagues, they’re a really important part of the SNP.

So, I think all the mudslinging that’s been going on just now just needs to stop, everyone needs to take a breath.

We’ve all got to remember that we’re all going to be working together at the end of this.

I want us all to come back together as a strong SNP and we’re all going to be working together for the betterment of Scotland.

Regan is competing against Humza Yousaf, the health secretary who is now the favourite, and Kate Forbes, the finance secretary whose personal opposition to equal marriage has been widely criticised. Forbes has also been accused of breaking party rules banning transphobia by claiming that a trans woman in biologically male.

NEU says it will only call off next week’s teachers’ strikes if it gets ‘serious’ pay offer by Saturday

Richard Adams

The National Education Union says it will only call off next week’s regional strikes in England if the government makes a “serious proposal” on teachers’ pay, in a rebuff to the government’s offer of talks.

Gillian Keegan, the education secretary, yesterday wrote to teaching unions in England offering to begin “formal talks” on condition that the NEU cancel next week’s strikes. (See 10.15am.)

The NEU’s leadership has responded by calling for Keegan to make concrete proposals this week, to enable the union’s national executive to postpone the strikes planned for next Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.

In a statement the NEU said:

If the government comes forward with a serious proposal to end the dispute ahead of Saturday and we consider it compelling enough, then we will put it to our national executive this Saturday with the recommendation to pause forthcoming strike action in order to discuss it further.

As things stand, however, no such offer has been made and the strikes remain in place.

Leaders of other teaching unions have accused the government of being “naive” by insisting on cancellation, and say that so far talks with Keegan have “meandered” without any proposals being put forward.

The NEU is planning a series of rolling one-day strikes starting on 28 February in north and north-west England, Yorkshire and Humber, followed by 1 March in the East Midlands, West Midlands and the NEU’s eastern region, and 2 March in London, south-east and south-west England.

Any moves in England will not affect the NEU’s planned strikes in Wales scheduled for 2 March.

Keir Starmer used all his questions at PMQs to ask about Rishi Sunak’s proposed deal on the Northern Ireland protocol deal with the EU, and other MPs asked about it too. Sunak was not in the mood to spill all, and on some questions he was evasive. But some of what he said was revealing. Here are the main points.

• Sunak said parliament would “express its view” on the protocol deal. In response to a question from Keir Starmer, who asked him to confirm that “whatever deal he brings back, this house will get a vote on it”, Sunak replied:

Of course parliament will express its view.

Starmer then said: “I take it from that that this House will get a vote and I look forward to that vote in due course.”

I’m a bit more cautious, and have taken that as Sunak suggesting that MPs will get a vote. (See 12.11pm.)

Holger Hestermeyer, a professor of international law and a former adviser to a House of Lords committee, does not agree and says Sunak may just have been promising a debate.

Hestermeyer may be right. (At the post-PMQs lobby briefing, No 10 refused to say exactly what Sunak meant.)

But a debate would probably entail a vote of some kind anyway. Starmer was pushing for a proper vote on a substantive motion, presumably on a three-line whip. This would be the proper thing to do on an important policy matter, even though, as Hestermeyer says, there is no procedural requirement for a vote. But Sunak will be nervous of this, because on a three-line whip some Tories would probably vote against.

To avoid a vote, Sunak could schedule a debate on the deal on a ‘take note’ motion (“that this house has considered the Northern Ireland protocol deal” etc) or even on an adjournment motion. These debates normally end with the (essentially pointless) motions being approved on the nod. But sometimes MPs treat these motions as votes on the matter of substance and force a division. If so, in this case the DUP, or Tory Brexiters, could decide to vote against just to make a point.

I am a Conservative, a Brexiter and a unionist, and any agreement that we reach needs to tick all three boxes.

“It needs to ensure sovereignty for Northern Ireland, it needs to safeguard Northern Ireland’s place in our union, and it needs to find practical solutions to the problems faced by people and businesses.

I will be resolute in fighting for what is best for Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom.

• Sunak refused to confirm that his deal would involve Northern Ireland continuing to follow some EU law, and the European court of justice continuing to have some role in the region. And he refused to confirm that, if a deal is agreed, the Northern Ireland protocol bill will be permanently shelved. Starmer put these questions to him, but Sunak refused to confirm all three points because he knows all three propositions are anethema to some Tories. Jessica Parker, the BBC Brussels correspondent, says we do know what the answers are.

• Sunak said that he understood the DUP concerns about the deal “loud and clear”. This came in response to a question from Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, who said:

Can I thank the prime minister for his efforts in relation to the Northern Ireland protocol. It is unacceptable that Northern Ireland has been put in this place with a protocol imposed upon us that harms our place in the UK.

It must be replaced with arrangements that are acceptable and restore our place in the UK and its internal market. Does the prime minister accept how important the constitution and democratic issues are in relation to getting a solution and will he agree with me that is unacceptable that EU laws are imposed on Northern Ireland with no democratic scrutiny or consent and will he assure me that he will address these fundamental constitutional issues and do so not just by tweaking the protocol, but by rewriting the legally binding treaty text?

In reply, Sunak said:

I have heard loud and clear when he says he wants and needs these issues resolved so that he has a basis to work with others to restore power-sharing and I know that that is genuine.

He raises a question of practical issues and it is vital that these are addressed but he also raises a vital question about the constitutional and legal framework in which these arrangements exist and I can assure him that I agree.

Addressing the democratic deficit is an essential part of the negotiations that remain ongoing with the EU and just as he has been consistent, so have I and I can assure him that this at the very heart of the issues that must be addressed.

As Alex Wickham from Bloomberg points out, Donaldson was asking for something – change to the text of the treaty – that the EU has repeatedly ruled out, and which is not expected in the final deal.

Given this point, there were two interesting features of the Sunak/Donaldson exchanges.

First, despite the clear policy difference between what the DUP wants and what seems to be on offer, the tone, on both sides, was polite and respectful. That is not with the DUP. Sunak may have given up hope of getting the DUP to back his deal, but he may hoping that they won’t oppose it wholeheartedly either.

Second, Sunak implied there was still a chance of getting some sort of change to “the constitutional and legal framework”. Some reports (eg this from RTE’s Tony Connelly) say that the text of the agreement has already been finalised. But Sunak implied otherwise. And he used a similar phrase in a later reply, to Sir Robert Buckland, telling him “it is absolutely right that we address the constitutional and legal framework of our arrangements”.

Unison has released more details of the strike by its health workers planned for 8 March in England. It says this is “a serious escalation of the dispute and a direct result of the government’s failure to hold proper pay talks with health unions”.

In a news release, the union states:

Health workers at NHS Blood and Transplant, Great Ormond Street hospital, the Tavistock and Portman NHS foundation trust, Liverpool Women’s hospital and the Bridgewater community trust will now be among those now walking out for the first time.

They will be joined by ambulance staff at four services in England – south central, east of England, West Midlands and east Midlands, also now able to take action following their successful strike vote last week.

This means staff will be on picket lines in all but one ambulance service in England in two weeks’ time. Colleagues working for ambulance services in London, Yorkshire, the north-east, north-west and south-west – who have already taken action on four previous occasions – will also walk out on 8 March.

Up to 32,000 NHS workers belonging to Unison in England are now able to take strike action. This follows the re-balloting of 10 NHS employers in England, where the strike vote fell just short of the legal threshold last year.

NHS workers at two trusts in Liverpool (the Liverpool University hospitals NHS foundation trust and the city’s Heart and Chest hospital) will also join the 8 March strike.

Unison has announced that ambulance staff and other health workers in the union will strike on 8 March in an escalation of their dispute over pay. This is from Christina McAnea, the general secretary.

In the Commons MPs are now debating the Northern Ireland (executive formation) bill. This is the emergency legislation being passed to ensure that, even though power sharing has not been restored at Stormont, it will not be necessary to hold another assembly election until next year.

In a speech in the debate Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, claimed that there was “a lot of support” in parliament for his party’s stance on the Northern Ireland protocol. The DUP says any deal to revise the protocol must meet its seven tests.

Donaldson said:

Obviously we haven’t seen any of the legal text of any agreement, and there remain matters that need to be addressed and those are quite significant issues.

But I welcome the progress that has been made, I welcome what the prime minister had to say in the House of Commons, that we are not just talking about tinkering around the edges of the protocol.

This is about significant, substantive change to the treaty itself, that respects Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom and our ability to operate freely within the internal market of the UK.

What is important here is we get the right deal for Northern Ireland. We are not working for a timetable, we are working to get the right outcome for Northern Ireland.

I don’t know what the timing will be for any agreement.

I am clear we have a lot of support here in parliament for the stance we are taking.

No 10 says prospect of Commons vote on NI protocol deal is ‘hypothetical’ because no agreement reached yet

Pippa Crerar

Rishi Sunak’s press secretary has clarified that the prospect of a Commons vote is “hypothetical” as no deal on the Northern Ireland protocol has yet been struck.

“We’re not going to get ahead of ourselves, talks are ongoing, we don’t yet have a deal,” she told reporters. “There is nothing to vote on yet, we don’t have a deal”.

Downing Street also revealed that Sunak spoke again with European Commission president Ursula Von Der Leyen last night. They discussed “good progress” that had been made on negotiations and would talk again “in coming days”.

However, there are no scheduled discussions planned for Thursday at this stage, and VDL is supposed to be in Italy, suggesting it less likely she will travel to London.

That was very 2019: Keir Starmer asking about Brexit (he was shadow Brexit secretary back then); Labour offering to support a Tory PM against their own backbenchers (although this time Starmer meant it – he wants the Northern Ireland protocol row with the EU settled before the general election); and the Tories accusing Labour of “surrender”.

This script eventually played out in Boris Johnson’s favour just over three years ago. But today Rishi Sunak was clearly on the back foot, and Starmer artfully illustrated how precarious his position is.

At press conferences the trick for journalists is to identify the question that they know the politician can’t or won’t answer. That is what Starmer was doing today? Would Sunak confirm that the protocol deal was going to involve Northern Ireland continuing “to follow some EU law”? Would Sunak confirm that there will be a continuing role for the European court of justice? Would Sunak confirm that, if there is a deal, the Northern Ireland protocol bill would be abandoned? And would Sunak commit to giving MPs a vote?

Sunak half-answered the final question – implying that there would be a vote, without saying so explicitly – but the other three questions, he would not touch at all.

And Starmer had a good line ready in response to Sunak’s reticence.

The sound you here is them [Tory MPs] cheering the prime minister pulling the wool over their eyes.

In a speech in Belfast last month Starmer portrayed Sunak as being in hock to “a Brexit purity cult [in the Conservative party], which can never be satisfied”. Today’s exchanges amounted to a show and tell follow-up.

Sunak did not want to engage with Starmer’s questions. But there were a few clues as to his latest thinking on the protocol from what he said and, even though he is clearly nervous about upsetting the ERG hardliners, a massive revolt when the deal does get published does not look inevitable and could still be avoided. I will post more on the minutiae of his Brexit answers shortly.

On the politics, Sunak resorted to accuses Sunak, and Labour, of being opposed to Brexit and pandering to Brussels. He said:

It’s his usual position when it comes to the European Union, it’s give the EU a blank cheque and agree to anything they offer. It’s not a strategy, that’s surrender.

He also accused Stamer of serial inconsistency in his final response. Referring to Starmer’s plan to announce five election missions for Labour in a speech tomorrow, Sunak said:

We already know what they are: it’s uncontrolled immigration; it’s reckless spending; it’s higher debts; and it’s softer sentences; and for the fifth pledge we all know that he reserves the right to change his mind on the other four.

Given that Starmer has changed his position on some issues considerably since he ran for Labour leader, this final charge carries some clout. But the “surrender” accusation on Brexit just sounded stale. Most Brexiters realise that leaving the EU has not worked out quite as planned, and so just re-running the 2019 insults doesn’t sound plausible.