13:23

I’ve summarised the main points from Theresa May’s opening statement already. (See 4.36pm.) But, as is often the case with these statements, some of the most interesting material came in the questions that were thrown at her, and in what she said in response. Here are the highlights from those responses.

Theresa May’s Chequers plan faced strong criticism from MPs from all sides of the Commons. While there was little personal criticism of May during the exchanges, which lasted for around an hour and 40 minutes, what was striking was how little support there was for the proposal agreed at Chequers and fleshed out in the government’s white paper. Even Tory MPs normally cast as loyalist sounded sceptical.

May gave a hint that a failure to agree a deal could lead to the Commons voting for a second Brexit referendum. She has repeatedly said she is opposed to a second referendum and she said that again today, arguing that it would undermine trust in politics because it would dishonour the 2016 referendum result. But when the Conservative MP Heidi Allen said a second referendum might be needed if there were no deal, May replied:

We are working to get a good deal with the European Union. If it were the case that at the end of the negotiation process actually it was a no deal, that both sides agreed that no deal was there, than actually that would come back to this House, and then we would see what position this House would take in the circumstances of the time.

It was not clear what May meant by her answer, but in her Conservative party conference speech she told Brexiters that if they did not back her plan, they could end up with no Brexit, and so it is in her interests to talk up the prospect of a second referendum taking place. However it is very hard to see how a referendum could take place without the government allowing time for the legislation setting one up - and, given everything else she has said on this, it is difficult to imagine a government led by her actually doing this.

May said she was opposed to extending article 50 to allow more time for Brexit talks. When Labour’s Yvette Cooper proposed this, May replied:

I do not believe that we should be extending article 50.

But May did not categorically rule it out. (I have taken out a heading in an earlier post saying she was unequivocal about this.)

May appeared to rule out an Irish backstop plan that would involve Northern Ireland being subject to single market regulations not applying to Great Britain. She has already said she would oppose a new customs border down the Irish Sea. But at one stage there was speculation that she might allow goods going to Northern Ireland from GB to be subject to regulatory checks required by the single market. The DUP’s leader at Westminster, Nigel Dodds, asked her to rule this out, saying:

Will she confirm today ... that a proposed backstop that would see Northern Ireland carved off in the EU customs union and parts of the single market, separated through a border in the Irish Sea from the UK’s own internal market, could never be accepted by her.

May replied:



When the UK leaves the European Union, it will be the UK that leave the European Union. We will be leaving the European Union together.

She also explained that this was why she could not accept the EU’s “backstop to the backstop”. Afterwards Dodds seemed to welcome her clarification.

Nigel Dodds (@NigelDoddsDUP) The PM gave a commitment in the House today that “a backstop that would see NI carved off in the EU’s customs union and parts of the single market.......” is something “I could never accept”. She must hold to this.

May repeatedly refused to say that the Irish backstop would include a precise end date. And, when asked by Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, if it could definitely end by December 2021 (as the government proposed in its June backstop paper), she refused to give that assurance.

Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) By our team's count, 8 MP s asked PM for a reassurance on a time limit on UK wide customs union, none of them got a clear answer

She refused to rule out the UK having to pay more than the £39bn “divorce bill” agreed if the UK-wide Irish backstop gets activated. (See 4.53pm.)

That’s all from me for tonight.

My colleague Kevin Rawlinson is taking over now.