Isabel Hardman

Why has Sajid Javid announced that he is revoking the citizenship of Shamima Begum? The 19 year old, who travelled as a teenager to join the Islamic State in Syria, has asked for 'forgiveness' from the UK, but last night the Home Secretary responded by saying he would be removing her status as a British citizen. He can do this, he argues, because she has a right to Bangladeshi citizenship, which means the government will not be rendering her stateless. A fair few people have suggested that this is about Javid's own ambitions in the Conservative party, as this move will likely appeal to the Tory grassroots. It has already earned praise from key newspapers like the Sun. But it's not just about the politics of this.

Another Labour MP, Joan Ryan, has tonight announced she is leaving the party to join the Independent Group. This is significant, and not just because it creates a sense of momentum. Ryan is the first Labourite to leave who wasn't involved in the months of secret planning meetings. She was, until fairly recently, arguing that the best thing to do would be to stay and fight to change the party back. Now, she has gone, releasing a potent statement about her reasons. Those reasons include what she calls 'the scourge of anti-Jewish racism', which 'simply did not exist in the party before his election as leader'. She argues that she has 'fought for as long as I can within the Labour Party'.

There are seven MPs leaving Labour: Luciana Berger, Chris Leslie, Gavin Shuker, Angela Smith, Chuka Umunna, Mike Gapes and Ann Coffey. They have revealed that they will call themselves 'The Independent Group'. They will publish a full statement of what they stand for this morning. The MPs are setting out their reasons for leaving. Berger said she had become 'embarrassed and ashamed' of the Labour Party, which she said was 'institutionally anti-Semitic'. Leslie insisted that his values hadn’t changed, but said it would be 'irresponsible' to make Jeremy Corbyn Prime Minister and accused the Labour leader of a 'betrayal' on Europe. Smith set out her family history and said the Labour Party now contradicted what her family had campaigned for.

Tomorrow's Brexit vote has gone from being billed the 'Valentine's Day massacre' to threatening a desperately dull anti-climax, and then back again to being quite interesting. This latest development comes courtesy of the European Research Group, which has said it could vote against the government on the motion that has been tabled because they object to its wording. This is another one of those neutral motions expressing government policy, which allows MPs to table motions expressing their own views.

You could tell that the result of tonight's vote on the Brady amendment (which calls for alternative arrangements to replace the Northern Irish backstop) came as a surprise to those at the top of government from the look on Chief Whip Julian Smith's face as he re-entered the Commons. He looked as though he had spent the past few hours trapped in a ghost house of horrors at a funfair. Smith had, like his colleagues in Downing Street, thought that this amendment was going to fail with a narrow margin until minutes before the result was announced. Instead, it passed with a surprising majority of 16.

A row is brewing in the Commons over Labour's stance on the Immigration Bill, which has its second reading this evening. The party's whips told MPs this morning that they would be on a one-line whip for this piece of legislation, with the plan being to abstain on the vote itself. Centrist MPs in particular are angry about this, suggesting the Labour leadership is trying to 'pander to Ukip' by not opposing the Bill outright. Abstaining at Second Reading is normally something a party does to signal that it supports some aspects of a bill, while having concerns about others. It neither wants to oppose or support the legislation outright at this stage. In this instance, the Immigration Bill ends free movement, and brings EU citizens living in the UK under domestic immigration law.

The Commons has grown rather used to Theresa May giving an update on Brexit each Monday afternoon, and still more used to the Prime Minister offering precious little in the way of new information each time she does so. Today's statement was a little different, in that May is now asking MPs for more information, rather than MPs turning on her and accusing her of not telling them anything. She laboured rather heavily on the point that Jeremy Corbyn has so far refused to attend the cross-party talks designed to work out an agreement that the Commons can stomach, introducing it early in her statement, and returning to the point again after the Labour leader had finished talking.

Theresa May has just given a statement in Downing Street in which she apparently said absolutely nothing. The Prime Minister walked out to the lectern outside No.10 and offered the sort of update on her diary that is normally sent out by email from the Downing Street press office. She said that she had held talks this evening 'with the leader of the Liberal Democrats, and the Westminster leaders of the SNP and Plaid Cymru', adding that 'I am disappointed that the leader of the Labour Party has not so far chosen to take part'. After a day of complaining that the Prime Minister hadn't yet picked up the phone to him, Jeremy Corbyn has refused to meet May until she rules out a no-deal Brexit.