The secretary of state for exiting the EU has been accused of appearing before parliament without any details of how the government is planning to embark on Brexit negotiations.

David Davis faced a barrage of criticism from MPs from Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the SNP after he updated them on the work of his department so far.

The Brexit secretary conceded it was extremely unlikely that Britain would remain a part of the single market if the price was no additional controls over immigration. “This government is looking at every option but the simple truth is that if a requirement of membership is giving up control of our borders, I think that makes it very improbable.”

He said his priority was “to build a national consensus” around the UK’s negotiating position, although he ruled out any veto for Scotland.



He also said he was confident the UK would not need to make trade-offs suggested by critics, but instead could control immigration and retain free trade. One idea being considered is ensuing that EU citizens can only come to Britain if they can prove they have a job offer.





David Davis - backed by Boris Johnson and Liam Fox - sets out Brexit plans - Politics live Read more

The shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry, who leads for Labour on Brexit, attacked Davis for failing to explain how his government was hoping to win such concessions, arguing “his positive vision is just a pipe dream”.

Former shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper dismissed Davis’s words as an “astonishingly empty statement” with “no plan, no sense of grip, no detail”.

Tim Farron, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, said: “David Davis told us nothing. He read out a few dates in his diary, but anyone looking for Britain’s post-Brexit strategy would have looked in vain. No trade deals, no allies, no plan.”

There was also pressure from Davis’s Tory backbenchers, with Anna Soubry saying that parliament was “none the wiser about the government’s plans” following his statement. “‘Brexit means Brexit’ has surely passed its shelf life. It’s time for some detail,” said the MP who is backing the Open Britain group that has sprung out of the Remain campaign from the referendum.

The negative response from pro-EU MPs came as Davis used his statement to parliament’s first sitting since the summer break to say that it was natural for people to ask what Brexit would mean.



“Simply, it means the UK leaving the European Union. We will decide on our borders, our laws, and taxpayers’ money,” he said, insisting that meant no attempt to “delay, frustrate or thwart the will of the British people” and “no attempt to engineer a second referendum because some people didn’t like the first answer”.

However, he conceded that the talks did represent a considerable challenge. Arguing that he would seek to find a position that would be acceptable to Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales as well as to English councils and small and large businesses, Davis said he was seeking a “unique to Britain and not an off-the-shelf solution ... This must mean controls on the numbers of people who come to Britain from Europe – but also a positive outcome for those who wish to trade in goods and services.”

Davis, who said his department now had 180 staff in London and 120 officials in Brussels, also set out some of the government’s thinking around the negotiations, including that Theresa May would lead talks aimed at the UK regaining control of its laws, borders and money.



He argued that Britain could be a “beacon for free trade across the world” and a “more glorious country” with an immigration system that controlled the numbers but also encouraged the “brightest and best” to come. He suggested Britain could bring in an even more rigorous immigration system than a points-based system.

He said his work would be driven by four key principles: to seek the national consensus; to put the national interest first and act in good faith towards European partners; to minimise uncertainty; and ultimately to leave the European Union.

And he said parliament would be regularly “informed, updated and engaged” but did not suggest any need for a vote to trigger article 50.

Thornberry said the government had gone from “gross negligence to rank incompetence” when it came to preparing for the process of exiting the EU. And she said it was unacceptable for the government not to give parliament more of a say during the process.



“When there is no evidence of sound planning by the government, no detail whatsoever on the deal they want to strike, the strategy for achieving that deal or the reasons for rushing it through, parliament must have more than a say on those issues,” she said. “We must have a vote.”

She accused the prime minister of “literally making up policy on immigration, tax and NHS spending” during a plane journey to the G20 summit in China. “So we know some of the things they are not going to do. No points-based immigration system, no extra money for the NHS, but when will they tell us what they are going to do?”

Davis, who promised to hold roundtables with stakeholders in different sectors, also faced a difficult challenge from a Tory grandee.

The former chancellor Ken Clarke said that while some “anti-foreigner rhetoric” may have increased the leave vote, that was not the driving factor. He called on Davis to confirm that the government would “not needlessly sacrifice access to a market with 500 million people just to demonstrate that we are turning away foreigners” who British companies needed to employ.

Davis agreed to “wholly condemn” hate crime but said people’s concerns about immigration were not “xenophobic”.

