Cameron suffers first major Commons defeat on EU budget vote

Tory rebels and Labour vote by 307 to 294 to support a real-terms cut in the EU budget.

It turns out that the government wasn't bluffing when it briefed that it would lose tonight's EU budget vote. David Cameron has just suffered his first major Commons defeat after Conservative rebels and Labour combined to vote in favour of a backbench Tory amendment (tabled by the aptly-named Mark Reckless) calling for a real-terms cut in the budget. MPs voted by 307 to 294 to support the motion, a majority of 13.

Since the vote was non-binding, the government's negotiating position remains unchanged - Cameron will go to Brussels on 22 November vowing to veto any above-inflation increase in the budget (the rebels, as I said, want him to go further and veto anything other than a real-terms cut). But the result is further evidence of just how divided the Tories now are on Europe. Fifty one of the party's MPs (excluding the tellers) voted against the government, making the rebellion larger than any before 2010, including the Maastricht revolts. The new Conservative chief whip, Sir George Young, has failed the first major test of his ability to control the party.

The result is also a significant victory for Ed Balls, who has long argued that Labour should seek to exploit Conservative divisions on Europe by forming tactical alliances with Tory rebels. While the party is vulnerable to the charge of opportunism, tonight's result will embolden those who argue that Labour should do all it can to maximise Cameron's discomfort in this area.

David Cameron gives his final press conference on the second day of an EU summit in Brussels earlier this month. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

New Statesman
Show Hide image

Quiz: Can you identify fake news?

The furore around "fake" news shows no sign of abating. Can you spot what's real and what's not?

Hillary Clinton has spoken out today to warn about the fake news epidemic sweeping the world. Clinton went as far as to say that "lives are at risk" from fake news, the day after Pope Francis compared reading fake news to eating poop. (Side note: with real news like that, who needs the fake stuff?)

The sweeping distrust in fake news has caused some confusion, however, as many are unsure about how to actually tell the reals and the fakes apart. Short from seeing whether the logo will scratch off and asking the man from the market where he got it from, how can you really identify fake news? Take our test to see whether you have all the answers.

 

 

In all seriousness, many claim that identifying fake news is a simple matter of checking the source and disbelieving anything "too good to be true". Unfortunately, however, fake news outlets post real stories too, and real news outlets often slip up and publish the fakes. Use fact-checking websites like Snopes to really get to the bottom of a story, and always do a quick Google before you share anything. 

Amelia Tait is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman.