Government's no-deal funds for ports decried as 'too little, too late'

The government’s plans to give councils an extra £9m in additional funding for no-deal preparations have been criticised as “too little, too late” and “a drop in the ocean”, with the leader of Portsmouth council leader saying the city had spent £4m preparing for potentially thousands more lorries to use the port.

The shadow communities secretary, Andrew Gwynne, said: “‘Too little too late’ doesn’t even begin to describe the government’s woeful level of support for councils’ no-deal preparations. The £9m promised last night to some coastal councils is a drop in the ocean when compared to the amount that councils across the country have already had to spend.

“Beyond ports, so many of the vital services that our local authorities provide are put at risk by the government’s pursuit of a reckless no-deal Brexit and they have simply not received the support they need.

“All of this takes place against a backdrop of nine years of savage cuts to local government funding. Councils are already at breaking point and this additional spending means even less money is available to spend on vital services such as adult social care, road maintenance or environmental protection.”

Gerald Vernon-Jackson, the Liberal Democrat leader of Portsmouth council, said it had only been refunded £350,000 of its spending on no-deal preparations. The council has been advised that a two-minute delay in vehicles clearing in to the port could mean 60 extra lorries queueing on to the motorway.

“The government has been happy to give money to ferry companies that have no ferries, that was £20m, but they have not helped local authorities get ready and we have had to plan to make sure if there is a no-deal Brexit that the whole of the M27 doesn’t grind to a halt because of queues of lorries trying to get into the port who can’t get in,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Wednesday.

Liberal Democrats: Their first choice would be legislation to extend article 50 then call a second referendum. If this did not work the party would support the no-confidence motion, but rather than installing Corbyn, the Lib Dems would seek a cross-party government led by a backbench grandee, such as Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman. It is not clear if the party would try to block a temporary Corbyn government.

SNP: The Scottish National party supports a no-confidence motion. They have said they will talk to Corbyn about his plan, despite their differences over Brexit. The party’s leader, Nicola Sturgeon, has criticised Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson's stance.

Plaid Cymru: Liz Saville Roberts, Westminster leader for the party, has indicated she could back the Corbyn plan, but would prefer an immediate second referendum rather than general election.

Independent Group for Change/Independents: The group formerly known as the TIGers, now split and reduced in number after two joined the Liberal Democrats, seem wary of the Corbyn plan, with some MPs saying they could not support him.

Greens: Caroline Lucas, the Green party’s sole MP has taken a similar view to Saville Roberts, and has also appealed to Swinson to reconsider backing a temporary Corbyn-led government.

Rebel Tories: Conservative party MP Guto Bebb has said that even a Corbyn government would be preferable to no deal. But it seems hard to see many other Tories following him.

Former Labour independents: Ian Austin, a long-time Corbyn foe, has already ruled out supporting his plan for a temporary government, and it is hard to see MPs such as Frank Field, John Woodcock, and others, doing so either.

Peter Walker Political correspondent

Vernon-Jackson said preparations, including triage points and lorry parks, had cost the council millions. “We’ve been out and spent the money anyway. We can’t allow government inaction and inefficiency to crucify Portsmouth,” he said.

Asked if the logjam could be averted, he said: “We hope so, but we don’t know. We do 500 lorries a day. Dover dwarfs us, they do 10,000, but we’ve been told to expect up to 2,000 extra lorries a day turning up in Portsmouth because they can’t get through Dover.”

On a visit to Holyhead in North Wales on Wednesday, Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister in charge of no-deal Brexit planning, said predictions of a three-month “meltdown” at ports contained in leaked Operation Yellowhammer documents represented a worst-case scenario.

“I’m confident that, if we all do the right thing, on 31 October we will be able to ensure that goods can flow in and out of ports like Holyhead without any significant delay,” he said. “There are a number of scenarios, there is a worst case and we are trying very hard to reduce the risk of that worst case materialising.

“I think the steps that we’ve taken over the course of the last three weeks and more steps that we’ll be taking in the next few weeks and months will ensure that we reduce the risk even further. One of them is making sure that traders have all the information and the systems that they need in order to be able to export.”

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government announced overnight that it would allocate £9m to councils to help ensure they are staffed to deal with any issues at ports. Calais alone has spent £20m on no-deal contingency planning, but the ministry says it has already spent significant sums on council’s no-deal preparations.

It said £5m would be split between local authorities which either have or are near a major air, land or sea port, of which Kent council would receive £2.6m because of the pressures on the port of Dover.

The other £4m is set to be spent on “local resilience forums” across England, which are supporting Brexit preparations for public services.

The communities secretary, Robert Jenrick, said the funds would “help local areas get ready for Brexit, whatever the circumstances” and that the ministry had “stepped up our preparedness significantly in recent weeks, including by asking every council to appoint a Brexit lead officer”.

Jenrick said Portsmouth city council would be getting an additional £286,000, well short of the £4m spent by the council. The sum was “purely for staff, communications and planning”, he said.

Jenrick also defended the amount announced on Wednesday. “We’ve been giving significant amounts of money to local authorities,” he said. “With the money we’re announcing … we’ll have given £77m to local authorities across the country to prepare for our departure,” he told the Today programme.

“This is not money for hard infrastructure, that could come from the chancellor’s additional £2.1bn he’s announced.”