We’re going to close down this blog now. Here’s a summary of the day’s events:
The prime minister acted unlawfully when he advised the Queen to suspend parliament, the supreme court has ruled. In one of the most dramatic judicial decisions in recent history, the 11 justices unanimously declared Boris Johnson’s prorogation of parliament “null and of no effect”.
Pressure also mounted on the attorney general and on the prime minister’s senior aides. Those who advised Johnson that the lengthy suspension of parliament would be both lawful and wise came under intense scrutiny themselves, including from hard Brexit supporters.
Johnson agreed to respect the supreme court’s decision, while saying he disagreed with it. Johnson also indicated that he wanted to go ahead with a Queen’s speech, which would require another prorogation.
But a No 10 source criticised the judges and there were reports a government minister had accused them of mounting a “coup”. A Downing Street source said the supreme court had made “a serious mistake in extending its reach to these political matters”, before an aide travelling with Johnson in the US was forced to distance the prime minister from those comments. It was reported later that the Commons leader had made similarly combative comments to the cabinet.
The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, addressed the party’s annual conference. He attacked the prime minister and committed Labour to – among other things – setting up a publicly owned drugs company to supply cheap versions of drugs for the NHS.
Parliament is due to reconvene on Wednesday after the Speaker called MPs back. Rees-Mogg is due to set out the business of the house in the morning and MPs are queuing up to have their voices heard.
If you’d like to read yet more, my colleagues Heather Stewart, Peter Walker and Rowena Mason have the full story:
The Commons leader, Jacob Rees-Mogg, told fellow government ministers that the supreme court judgment amounts to a “constitutional coup”, according to media reports.
The BBC, the Financial Times and the Daily Mail all report that Rees-Mogg made the comments during a conference call with cabinet colleagues this evening.
1. Several Cabinet ministers say mood of the conference call was just to move on, to get back to sorting out the political problems -official line and the PM's line is to respectfully disagree with the judgement but get on with trying to get over the next enormous hurdle
2. But some expressed more frustration with the court in line with No 10 source earlier - one Cab minister says “interesting for justices to be giving political direction"
Prime minister speaks to the Queen, following supreme court ruling
Peter Walker
Boris Johnson spoke to the Queen after today’s court ruling, a government official has said, declining to give any no more details.
Johnson is due to arrive in London at around lunchtime tomorrow, following an overnight flight. However, a government official with the prime minister in New has said it was impossible to say whether the prime minister would appear before the Commons.
I would anticipate there would be statements to the house, I’m just not in a position to say what they will be on.
Amid a continued backlash over the verdict, the official said Johnson still had full confidence in the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, and the senior No 10 aide, Dominic Cummings.
Officials with Johnson in New York are distancing the PM from these sentiments, seemingly being briefed in London.
Asked if Johnson would use words like that, the official in New York said: “I haven’t. And nor has the prime minister.”
After a conference call of the full cabinet, chaired by Johnson in New York ahead of his speech to the UN general assembly later in the evening, Downing Street gave no indications over what the prime minister would do next.
They said the leader of the Commons, Jacob Rees-Mogg, would set out the planned government business first thing tomorrow.
Another official said that, while it was confirmed the Conservative party conference would take place next week as planned, it had not been decided whether it was necessary to pass a motion seeking a recess for the period, as is traditional.
It has not been ruled out, but nor has it been ruled in.
A Labour government will work towards a net-zero carbon emissions target by 2030. Delegates have backed a motion at the party conference, despite opposition from some trade unions.
They have voted in favour of the “Labour’s Socialist Green New Deal” motion and have backed a separate motion calling for a “Green New Deal” that does not make reference to any dates for decarbonisation.
Speaking after the motion passed, Laura Parker, a spokeswoman for Momentum, said the plan would create “tens of thousands of good, green jobs across the country”.
It will usher in a new era of public luxury for all and welcome climate refugees who have been forced from their homes. In the face of a monumental crisis, we must be bold and ambitious.
We are the last generation who can stop climate breakdown and build a society that works for the many. And now Labour has a plan to do just that.
The US congresswoman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, praised the move.
This is a huge deal: one of the first major political party adoptions of a #GreenNewDeal as an official policy plank.
Our future relies on whether our leaders choose to act now.
Responding for the government, the business secretary Andrea Leadsom said:
With even Labour-backing unions admitting this plan is completely unworkable and would threaten jobs, it’s clear Labour aren’t serious about tackling climate change.
Labour’s plans to renationalise huge swathes of the energy system would scare away the investment that is so vital for reducing emissions while leaving the taxpayer to pick up the huge cost.
While Labour talk, Conservatives have been taking action. We have a realistic target to end our contribution to global warming by 2050 and we’re making good progress towards achieving it - reducing emissions by a quarter since 2010 and increasing the use of renewables to record levels.
Here’s a little more on the comments from the Irish taoiseach, who has said he and Boris Johnson reached “no agreements by any means” after their meeting in New York. Leo Varadkar said he “got into some more details” with Johnson during the meeting on Tuesday, but stressed nothing concrete had been agreed.
We are very keen that there be a deal, that the UK should be able to leave the European Union in an orderly fashion. That’s in Ireland’s interest, it’s in Britain’s interest too.
But there are certain guarantees that we expect to be honoured; that there won’t be a hard border between North and South.... that North-South cooperation will continue as envisaged by the Good Friday Agreement, that what was given to us by the British government back in December 2017.
Johnson added: “It certainly will.” Later, a Downing Street spokesperson said:
The prime minister met with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar at the UN General Assembly today. They discussed the Brexit talks and the ideas that the UK has been putting forward, including on the issue of consent.
The prime minister was clear that the UK would be leaving on 31 October and said that he was cautiously optimistic that we would be able to do so through negotiating a deal which is acceptable to both sides.
The prime minister underlined his steadfast commitment to the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement and said that we will never place infrastructure, checks or controls at the border.
They agreed on the vital importance of ensuring the peace, prosperity and security of Northern Ireland. The leaders agreed to stay in close contact in coming days.
Trump urges Johnson to shrug off 'just another day in the office' court defeat
Andrew Sparrow
In New York Boris Johnson has held a bilateral meeting with Donald Trump at the UN meeting in New York.
Asked if he would resign for misleading the Queen in the first media question of the meeting, Johnson replied:
As I said earlier on, let’s be absolutely clear. We respect the judiciary in our country, we respect the court. I disagree profoundly with what they had to say. I think it was entirely right to go ahead with a plan for a Queen’s speech. Frankly we need to get on with Brexit.
After the PM was questioned about resigning, Trump said:
I’ll tell you, I know him well, he’s not going anywhere.
Johnson added: “No, no, no.”
Trump also rebuked the reporter who asked whether the PM would resign, saying: “That was a very nasty question from a great American reporter.” But Johnson added: “I think he was asking a question, to be fair, that a lot of British reporters would’ve asked.”
Trump said his reaction to the supreme court judgment was to tell the PM “it’s just another day in the office”. Trump also cited victories of his own in the US supreme court in an effort to reassure the PM. He said:
We won the wall, we won asylum, we’ve won some of the biggest ones, we’ve had a great streak going. We’ve won a lot of decisions and I’m sure that will happen to you.
Johnson added:
Well we are not counting our chickens and we’re full of respect, as I say, to the justice system ... We’re going to respect what the court had to say but we’re going to get on and deliver Brexit.
Trump also said that Johnson was “doing a really good job” and that he was going to make “really great progress in October and November”.
“October,” Johnson insisted, referring to his Brexit deadline.
That’s all from me for tonight.
My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is taking over now.
'He's not going anywhere': Trump shows support for Johnson – video
Jeremy Corbyn will return to London on Tuesday evening and and on Wednesday Labour will use “whatever mechanisms there are to try and hold the prime minister to account” in parliament, Corbyn’s spokesman said.
Downing Street’s private comments about the supreme court are a lot more critical than anything that Boris Johnson (see 1.41pm) or the government (see 6.25pm) have been saying in public. These are from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.
1. No 10 source: “We think the Supreme Court is wrong and has made a serious mistake in extending its reach to these political matters."
2. Source goes on... "Further, the Supreme Court has made it clear that its reasons are connected to the Parliamentary disputes over, and timetable for, leaving the European Union. We think this is a further serious mistake. "
3. No 10 - "We think this is a further serious mistake. We will study the judgement carefully to consider how we can best respond in these unique circumstances. As always the government will respect the law and comply with the courts.”
David Gauke, the former Tory lord chancellor, who had the whip removed after rebelling over Brexit earlier this month, has condemned this briefing.
This is not on. A clear attempt to undermine respect for the judiciary, questioning the motives of the judges, encouraging others to pile in. Not how a Government should behave. https://t.co/96leSxXCUi
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman said Labour would use every mechanism to bring about an early general election - but that a poll would be conditional on the government not using it to force a no-deal Brexit. The spokesman said:
We will use every mechanism we can to bring about an early election and the only condition being that we need to ensure that they can’t use that to force a crash-out of the European Union without a deal.
Labour says Geoffrey Cox should 'consider his position' after summary of his legal advice published
Sky News has seen an unredacted version of the cabinet minute that was released to court during the prorogation hearing in Scotland saying Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, advised Boris Johnson that his five-week prorogation would be lawful. As Sky reports, the version released to court, the reference to the legal advice was redacted, but the unredacted version says:
The attorney general said that his advice on the question of the law is that this was lawful and within the constitution.Any accusations of unlawfulness or constitutional outrage were motivated by political considerations. The proposal was compatible with the provisions of the NIEF [Northern Ireland Executive Formation] Act 2019.
Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, has suggested that Cox needs to “consider his position” in the event of his advice turning out to be wrong. At the very least, Cox should make a statement to MPs and release the full legal advice, he said.
In a statement the attorney general’s office said:
The government acted in good faith and in the belief that its approach was both lawful and constitutional. These are complex matters on which senior and distinguished lawyers have disagreed. The divisional court led by the lord chief justice agreed unanimously with the government’s legal position, as did the outer house in Scotland. We are disappointed that in the end the supreme court took a different view. We respect the judgment of the supreme court.
Labour sources are saying that the plans for the pharmaceutical industry announced by Jeremy Corbyn (see 5.01pm), involving making research funding conditional on firms providing cheaper drugs and the establishment of a publicly-run firm to produce generic medicines, will save the NHS money. They do not have costings.
Few injustices are as stark as the knowledge that a medicine exists to treat or cure a family member, but that the unaccountable greed of a corporation means they are denied it. With drug prices leaping from tens to hundreds of thousands of pounds per patient, these injustices are only going to become more common globally. Here in the UK this situation is placing the egalitarian, collective ethos of the NHS under unbearable strain ...
The current market incentives used in drug development are a socially constructed tool, designed to serve the world’s citizens. If they are no longer serving the greater good in their current form – indeed, if they are leading to patients dying without access to lifesaving treatments – then it is incumbent on us to rethink the current model. We need a pharmaceutical innovation system that catalyses the scientific capacity to achieve the status of an innovation nation here in the UK while supporting the kinds of south–south technology transfers that will bring economic sustainability and opportunity. Most importantly, we need a health innovation model that safeguards our NHS, that protects patients, and underpins effective public services around the world to ensure they are able to deliver healthcare for all.
That might not have been Jeremy Corbyn’s best conference speech, but it may have been his most self-confident and best received. In 2015 he addressed the party still not quite believing he had been elected leader, and with MPs horrified by what had happened. In 2017 he was giddy with success, having done well in a general election that was expected to finish him off. But this year he addressed a party more Corbynite than ever before, as yesterday’s vote showed, with a policy offer more leftwing and radical than ever before, and facing a Tory party looking more divided and chaotic than ever before. The obstacles to Corbyn becoming prime minister are still formidable - read John Curtice on the subject at 9.25am - but the Labour leader could be forgiven for wallowing in the positives for 45 minutes.
This was reportedly a shorter speech than planned, and it did feel as if some newsy chunks with announcements had been cut out at the last minute and saved for another day. But that was obviously the right thing to do in the light of the supreme court announcements. Corbyn’s attack on Johnson was robust, but did not shed much light on the parliamentary tactics that Labour will adopt in the coming days. His account of how he would govern for the 99% was fine as far as it went, but he did not say anything about his approach to government that he has not said before. The most interesting passage was the one that contained the one announcement in the speech, plans for a quasi-socialisation of the pharmaceutical industry. Labour has just released a detailed 52-page document (pdf) with full details. Corbyn himself is not one of parliament’s great policy experts, but if you look, you will find that in many areas his party now has a detailed blueprint for transformative change. What voters will make of it, of course, remains to be seen.
Together, we can go beyond defending the gains made by previous generations. It’s time we started building a country fit for the next generation. Where young people don’t fear the future but look forward with confidence and hope.
The tide is turning. The years of retreat and defeat are coming to an end. Together, we’ll take on the privileged, and put the people in power. Thank you.
Corbyn thanks his party for their support, his constituents (he says how much he has learned from them) and his wider family.
He has a different view of leadership from others, he says.
I have what might be considered a different view of leadership from the one people are used to. I do believe leaders should have strong principles that people can trust. But leaders must also listen and trust others to play their part. Because there are leaders in every community driving change. Many of them would never dream of calling themselves leaders, but they are.
As an example, he cites a woman campaigning against damp in a block of flats. She may not think of herself as a leader, but she is.
If the British people elect a Labour government in the coming election, I will be proud to be your prime minister. Because I will be a different kind of prime minister. Not there from a sense of born-to-rule entitlement. Certainly not there for some personal power trip. There because I want to put government on your side. To put power and wealth into your hands.There because I believe government should work for you.
Corbyn says Labour stands for the 99%, while the Tories promote division.
This Conservative government. as well as the far right. has fuelled division in our society. They’ll blame people’s problems on the migrant worker trying to make a better life. They’ll blame it on the mum who’s struggling on universal credit. They’ll blame it on Muslims, on young people, on anyone but themselves and their backers, who benefit from a grossly unequal and rigged system.
Labour will do the opposite. We will bring people together. A Labour government will transform our economy and communities. We stand not just for the 52% or the 48% but for the 99%.
Dangerous and wrong-headed international interventions have also exacerbated community tensions at home. When Boris Johnson compared Muslim women to letterboxes or bank robbers, it wasn’t a flippant comment, it was calculated to play on people’s fears. Displays of racism, Islamophobia or antisemitism are not signs of strength, but of weakness.
Comments (…)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion