House of Commons
Parliament

Labour's shadow Brexit minister Jenny Chapman is now responding to the debate for the Opposition.

She says that David Davis' comments at the start of the debate was "not sufficient" - asserting that Parliament "must see the plans" in a way that means they can be "tested, debated and if necessary amended".  

"This is what taking back control means" she says - telling the government that with control comes accountability. 

"The future of the UK is in the balance" she says; calling this issue the greatest challenge for politicians in our generation. 

The government should not therefore be surprised, she says, when MPs show an intense interest and concern in how Brexit proceeds.

House of Commons
Parliament

Labour's Tulip Siddiq asks about the concerns of EU nationals who live in her constituency and have contacted her about their future in the country.  

She says that she "can't give them those answers" because the government's plan has been "shrouded in mystery from the start", and although she welcomes ministers accepting Labour's motion she says it is "far too little far too late". 

Ms Siddiq says that the issue of EU nationals is "not just a moral issue" and says the benefits to the economy of such people must be acknowledged.  

She says many of these EU nationals are "significantly younger" than the national average and are more likely to be in work. 

Ms Siddiq calls on the government to secure the future of EU nationals and put their uncertainties to rest. 

House of Commons
Parliament

UUP MP Danny Kinahan says MPs must listen to the people and do what they have said by triggering Article 50 - despite the fact that he voted to Remain.

He says that although he initially thought a "red, white and blue Brexit" was "lovely", he wants to see "a bit of green and orange in there too".

"We trade with Ireland, Ireland are our neighbours" he says and asks for careful consideration as this is a "phenomenally complicated step forward with so much at stake".

House of Commons
Parliament

Conservative Richard Drax says that the vote to Leave came with "no ifs, buts, conditions - nothing". He goes on to say that former Prime Minister David Cameron spent £9 million of taxpayers money on literature "telling us all that".  

"It really could not have been simpler" he says. 

Mr Drax says that Article 50 merely starts the two year period within which negotiations can begin. "The British people voted to leave the EU; the only way to do this is to trigger article 50 - it's as simple as that" he says. 

Talking about the concerns about uncertainty, he blames this on people "prevaricating against the will of the British people". 

House of Commons
Parliament

Green MP Caroline Lucas says that she will not be able to support the Labour motion if the Opposition frontbench insists on adopting the government amendment; calling it a "Tory trap" of insisting that Labour vote to invoke Article 50 by March.   

"Introducing a tight timetable based on an arbitrary deadline", she says, undermines the principle that this is about getting the best deal possible for Britain.  

Ms Lucas also notes that negotiations will not really get under way until the autumn of 2017 after the French and German elections.  

The MP for Brighton Pavilion says that the government's plan needs to be more than "a sum of the banalities" that have been given until now - and calls for a white paper to be published. 

She says that to vote to leave the EU without knowing what the final agreement will contain is "irresponsible" and "reckless". 

House of Commons
Parliament

Conservative Eurosceptic Jacob Rees-Mogg says "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition has reached a point of such loyalty that it is having a day's debate to back Her Majesty's government's policy". 

"This is a very interesting way of passing our time and it should form a new means of having a consensus across Parliament," he says. 

But he goes on to say that a desire to reject the decision of the referendum "underlines" every part of the debate.

Lord Advocate James Wolffe says that the UK government should consult Holyrood on the potential impact of Brexit.

House of Lords
Parliament

Peers have voted 243 votes to 208 to accept Labour's amendment.

The amendment seeks to provide parity of funding between the police and bereaved families at inquests.

Scotland's top legal officer says Holyrood's consent is needed before the UK triggers Brexit.

House of Commons
Parliament

SNP MP Joanna Cherry says that triggering Article 50 will lead to the legislative competences of Scottish Parliament being curtailed and the rights of individuals and businesses being affected. 

She speaks about the political implications of the government's line in the Supreme Court as regards the involvement of the Scottish Parliament and government in the process of triggering Article 50.  

Ms Cherry talks about a potential constitutional crisis if the Scottish government and Parliament are not officially included in the process.

House of Commons
Parliament

Mark Durkan, the SDLP MP for Foyle, says that consensus can sometimes be a great and powerful thing; but warns that the consensus today is "entirely artificial" and "made up from a purely ephemeral coincidence of tactics without any substantive or strategic worth". 

Therefore, he says "we shouldn't fall for it".

Mr Durkan talks about the Good Friday Agreement and the effect on it by the vote to leave the EU; saying that the agreement was the high water mark of Irish constitutional democracy.

He says that the former Northern Ireland Secretary Theresa Villiers had tabled a statement referencing Republican dissidents soon after the EU referendum, which said "Northern Ireland's future will only be determined by democracy and consent".

"Where is the democracy and consent for the people of Northern Ireland when it comes to Brexit?" he asks - a reference to the 55.8% Remain vote in Northern Ireland.

There were five speakers at the Supreme Court hearing today. Here is a summary of what each of them said.

• QCs Lord Pannick and Dominic Chambers argued that the Brexit process can only begin after the prior authorisation of Parliament and that for the government to proceed on the basis of executive powers would be a violation of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty
• David Schoffield and Ronan Lavery said Brexit would have major consequences for Northern Ireland's political institutions, devolution settlement and its relationship with the Republic of Ireland and the UK government must heed this in its approach to Article 50
• Lord Wolffe says the Scottish government was not seeking a veto on the Brexit process but a recognition that it was of major constitutional significance to Scotland and would change Holyrood's competences

BBC political correspondent Vicki Young is summing up today's events in Parliament. She says the government has agreed it will set out its plans before triggering Article 50, but there's been much debate about what exactly the word "plan" means. 

Labour are saying it's time to build a consensus, and Keir Starmer wants the plans to spell out whether we stay in the single market and the customs union.

Labour insist they are not trying to block Brexit, says our correspondent, but that's not how some Conservatives see it. David Davis accuses some Labour MPs of only paying "lip service" to the referendum result to leave the EU.

Lord Advocate James Wolffe says that the UK government should consult Holyrood on the potential impact of Brexit.

House of Commons
Parliament

Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake thanks Labour for securing the debate, and says the government cannot share the credit for this debate and that they should have initiated it in their own time.  

His praise for Labour ends here - and he calls the government pledge to publish Brexit plans "thin gruel"; warning that it may well contain no detail and just "meaningless phrases and Brexit platitudes that masquerade as policy".   

Mr Brake asks where the guarantee is that people will be able to vote on the "destination as well as the departure" on the government's deal with the EU after triggering Article 50.   

The Lib Dem says that whatever the outcome of the negotiations in two years time, "we can be certain that a majority won't be happy".    

He says his party will oppose the government amendment as a "Parliamentary stitch-up that will straitjacket MPs" and tells Labour MPs that they are the official opposition and should not cave in to the government. 

The former Coalition minister says that the Liberal Democrats are now the "real opposition" to the Conservative Brexit government.  

House of Commons
Parliament

Prominent Leave campaigner and senior Tory MP Bernard Jenkin says there should be a quick deal and a quick Brexit so as to reduce uncertainty and keep things simple. 

He proposes a "zero-zero" offer on tariffs - meaning that the UK would neither charge or receive tariffs, as this is in everyone's mutual self interest. 

"We want to be a good neighbour," he says.

Mr Jenkin says that even the proposed repeal bill can be simple unless people want to make it complicated.  

He ends by giving the example of Czechoslovakia which was once two countries, but that within six months of deciding to split - "they split".  

"And they are better friends now than they ever were before," he says. 

House of Commons
Parliament

Former shadow health secretary Heidi Alexander says she thought the British people were failed in the referendum campaign by an "exaggerated and embarrassing debate".

"But we are where we are," she says. 

She says she stands by her belief that leaving the EU will be "economically harmful, socially divisive, and fundamentally detrimental to our relationships with our closest neighbours".  

Ms Alexander says that she cannot vote to trigger Article 50 without a credible plan, and says that the strength of the plan is critical - indicating that she will vote against the government amendment tonight. 

"I won't sign up to an arbitrary timetable set up by the government to placate its own backbenchers," she says. 

She goes on to speak about immigration, saying that she understands that when decent jobs and decent homes are scarce - some people look around for someone to blame; but she warns that we are going to need immigration in this country "for some time to come".

"We are not having enough babies and haven't been for decades," she says.

Heidi Alexander says that she has no fixation with freedom of movement, but says she cannot see how it makes sense to take the economic hit of leaving the single market in order to curb immigration "when we have a basic need for it". 

Image source, Supreme Court

The Scottish government's top law officer has argued that Holyrood should be consulted before the UK can begin the formal process of leaving the EU.

The Lord Advocate, James Wolffe, was addressing the Supreme Court as it considered the historic Brexit legal challenge for a third day.

Lord Wolffe told the court that leaving the European Union would bring about "significant change on the legislative competence of the Scottish parliament and the legislative competence of the Scottish government".

He said: "Ultimately the approach I invite the court to take reflects the proper institutional roles of the UK parliament and the Scottish parliament, in a context where the Scottish parliament has wide legislative competence and the effect of withdrawal from EU would be significant with regard to devolved matters.

"In that context it is constitutionally relevant and significant to know whether the Scottish parliament consents to those effects. It is then for the UK Parliament to decide, in light of the views of the devolved administration, to decide what to do."

The Lord Advocate based part of his argument on the "Sewel convention" of legislative consent, which was later included in the Scotland Act and sets out where Holyrood should be consulted on legislation affecting devolved areas.

The judges questioned whether the convention could be applied as a legal requirement.

The Lord Advocate argued that Sewel is put down in legislation as "part of the law of the land" and should be respected.

Image source, AP

Lib Dem leader Tim Farron says he believes the formal procedure for triggering Brexit is reversible. 

Speaking after meeting the European Parliament's chief negotiator Guy Verhofstadt in Brussels, Mr Farron says: "We discussed whether Article 50 can be revoked, and my conclusion is that if there is the political will, it would be possible to do so." 

He adds that Britons "deserve more than a deal imposed on them by Westminster or Brussels".

Read more here.