EU Referendum Statement House of Commons

policing and fire and rescue services is to be able to offer

enhanced services. In looking at a decision to be on a local level, a

business it -- case will Mr Speaker, the commission I would

like to make a statement on the agreements reached in Brussels last

week. First let me say a word about the migration crisis which was also

discussed at the European Council. We agreed that we needed to press

ahead with strengthening the use borders to ensure that not the

charges are returned promptly and back the new mission that has

brought the criminal gangs to put them in peoples slides and the risk.

Britain. But the Constitution and all of these areas. Turning to

Britain's place in Europe. I have spent the last nine months ending

out the four areas are ready for form and beating with all other 27

EU heads of state and government to reach an agreed with that delivers

concrete reforms and all four areas. Let me take each in turn. First, but

as jobs and businesses depend on being able to trade with Europe on a

level praying field. The one new protection for our economy to

safeguard the proud and promote our financial services industry to

protect British taxpayers from because the problems in the euro

zone and to ensure that we have a full say over the rules of a single

market while remaining outside the euro zone. We got all those things.

We have not is probably the fact of the towns and our right to keep it

but we have ensured that we cannot discriminate against. Responsibility

for supervising the financial stability of the UK, will always

remain in the hands of the Bank of England. We

have not be made to bail out countries in the euro zone, they

made sure that the euro zone cannot act as a block to undermine the

integrity of these free-trade single market. We guarantee that produced

this is one of faith and he does commission for being outside the

euro zone. For example, our financial service firms, our number

one service export, employing over a million people can ever be forced to

relocate inside the euro zone if they want to undertake complex

trades and Europe, just because they're based in the UK. These with

taxes and not to set out in a legally binding agreements, off 28

member states will also clear that these reviews will be changed, to

incorporate the protections of the UK as the economy that is inside the

EU, but outside the euro zone. We also agree that a to enable 9 euros

on countries to raise issues of concern, and we won the battle to

ensure that this could be triggered by one country alone. Of course the

distance would be available if he were to leave the EU. We wanted

commitments to make Europe more competitive, creating jobs, and

making British families more financially secure. Again, we got

them. Europe will complete the single market and key areas that

will help Britain. And services making it easier for thousands of UK

service bays companies like IT firms to trade in Europe. In the capital

so UK startups can access more for their business and an energy. We

have secured commitments to complete trade and investment agreements with

the fastest-growing and most dynamic economies around the world.

Including the USA, Japan, China as well as our Commonwealth allies,

India, New Zealand and Australia. These deals could add billions of

pounds and thousands of jobs. Of course, they build on the deals we

already have with the three countries around the world for which

Britain has been accredited to the negotiating muscle that comes from

being part of the world largest trading bloc. This is bigger, of

course country after country has said that they could find trade

deals with Britain, but they have also said that their priority would

be trade deals with the EU. By their nature, these EU deals would be

bigger and better, a deal with Britain would not even be possible

until we have settled our position outside of the EU. This is bigger,

for those members who care about finding new trade deals outside of

the EU, we would be looking at years and years of delay.

Last but by no means least on competitiveness, one of the biggest

frustrations for Britain's business is red tape and bureaucracy. There

will be partners to cut the total burden of EU regulation on business.

This build on the progress that we have already made, with the

commission already cutting the number of initiatives by 80%. In the

that the cost of EU red tape will be going down, not up. Of course if we

were to leave the EU, but ultimately achieve a deal, with access to the

single market like Norway. Who would be subject to all of the EU

regulation when selling in the euro. But with no say over the world. As

the former Europe spokesman for the no reason conservative party, if you

want to run Europe you must be an euro. If you want to be run by

Europe, feel free to join nor Ray. Third, we want to reduce the very

high level of migration within the unique -- EQ by preventing our role

for system to act as a magnet for people to come to our country. After

the hard work of the home Secretary we have secured new powers against

criminals of the country and power to stop them from coming here in the

first is empowered to do for them if they already here. We agreed a

longer reentry bands for fraudsters and people who collude and then into

the ridiculous situation for EU nationals can avoid British

immigration rules when bringing their feminism outside the EU.

Disagreement broke new ground with the European Council agreed to

reverse positions from the European Court of Justice. We also secured a

breakthrough agreement for Britain to reduce the unnatural drawl that I

benefit system exerts across Europe. Therefore he made sure that EU

migrants cannot claim the new employment benefit or universal

credit. Those coming that have not found work within six months cannot

be required to leave. At this counsel we agree that EU migrants

working in Britain can be prevented from sending Child benefit home at

UK rates. This would apply first some new claimants and then to

existing claimants on the start of 2020. We also establish a new break

so that EU migrants would have to wait for years until they have full

access to our benefit. Mr Speaker, people for the it was impossible to

achieve real change in our area. Yet, that is what we have done, we

have got the benefit. What is activated, once activated, the

emergency brake will be in place for seven years. If it began to lecture

it will still be operating in 2024. There will be people who won't be

getting 40 benefits until 2028. Bass full benefits. People should not be

able to come there and get access to our benefit to them straightaway. No

were something for nothing. I'm sure the discussion about welfare and

immigration, will be intense, let me make this point. No country outside

of the EU has agreed full access to the single market without accepting

paying into the EU, and accepting free movement. In addition, our new

safeguard lives if we vote the leave the EU. We might end up with free

movement, but without these new protections. The fourth area, where

we wanted to make significant changes was to protect our country

from further European political integration, and to increased powers

for our national parliament. Ever since we joined, Europe has been on

the path to something ever closer union. It means a political union.

We have never liked it or wanted it. And now, principal be permanently

and legally excluded from it. The text that is, the treaties will be

changed to make clear, and I quote, the Treaty represents for an ever

closer union do not apply to the United Kingdom. This is bigger, as a

result of this negotiation, perfect in every part of a European Union

superstate. The council also agreed that ever closer union which has

been referred to, and previous estimates from the European Court of

Justice, does not offer a legal basis, for extending the scope of

any provisions of the charges, or any you secretary the translation.

People used to talk about a multispeed Europe, now we have a

clear agreement that not only are different countries able to travel

at different speeds, but they are ultimately able to head to different

destinations as well. I would argue that that is a fundamental change in

the wait is over additional work. We also strengthen the role of this

house and on national parliament, we already passed a referendum act, to

make sure that no powers can be handed to Brussels without this

house and on national parliament, we already passed a referendum act, to

make sure that no powers can be handed to Brussels with updates with

the consent of the British the position we don't want, we can get

together with other parliaments and block it with a red card. And we

have a new mechanism to enforce the principle that as far as possible,

powers to sit here and Westminster, not to Brussels. The European Union

has to go through the powers of the exercise and work-out which are no

longer needed and should be returned to Michigan State. In recent years

we have also seen attempt to bypass are off out on Justice and home

affairs by bringing forward legislation. The agreements and Les

Bleus Council ensures that this can never happen again. The reforms that

we have secured will be legally binding in international law and

will be deposited as a Treaty at the UN. They cannot be unpacked that the

agreement of the prison every other EU countries. As I have said, I'll

28 member states that the treaty will be changed to incorporate

advertisers for the UK as an economy outside the euro zone, and our

permanent exclusion from ever closer union. Mr Speaker, our special

status means that Britain can have the both best of both worlds. Who

will be in the path of Europe that work for us, and so it's a affect

us, in the driving seat of the worlds biggest single market, and

with the ability to take action to keep our people safe. We will be

out of the parts of Europe that do not work for us. Out of the euro, as

of the euro zone bailouts come out of the passport periods no border

area and permanently and legally protected from ever being part of a

ever closer union. Of course there is still more to do, I am the first

to say, that there is though many ways and was organisation needs to

improve. The task of reforming Europe does not and with plastics

agreement. With the special status that the settlement gives the I do

believe that the time has come to fulfilling the other final

commitment that this government made and that is to hold a referendum. Mr

Speaker, this Speaker, I am today commended the process set out from

our act and to propose that the British people decide our future and

Europe to an in and out referendum on Thursday the 23rd of June. The

Foreign Secretary is late and both houses and the government is

negotiating it. This is built into the duty to publish information, set

out in section six of the European Union referendum and that the

Cabinet agreed on Saturday, the government of Zimbabwe to recommend

that person remains in a reformed European Union. This is a vital

decision for the future of our country, I agree that we should also

be clear that it is a final decision. An idea has been put

forward that in the country votes to leave. We can have a second

renegotiation and perhaps another referendum. I want to vote on the

irony that some people who want to vote to leave, apparently want to

use a leave to remain. Such an approach, also ignores more profound

point about democracy, diplomacy and the galaxy. This is a straight

Democratic position. Staying in or leaving and no government can ignore

that. Having a second renegotiation followed by a second referendum is

not on the ballot paper. And for a promise are to ignore the expressed

will of the British people to leave the EU, we are not just from but it

would be undemocratic. On the diplomacy, the idea that the other

European countries will be ready to start a second negotiation is for

the birds. Many are under pressure for what they have already agreed.

Then there is a legality and I want to start off as point for the house

carefully because it is important. If the British people told to leave,

there is only one way to bring that about. That is to trigger article 50

of the treaties and begin the process of exit. The British people

would rightly expect that that should start straightaway. That may

be absolutely clear about how this works. As triggers a two your time

period to negotiate the residence for an exit. At the end of the

stairs, is no group what is in place, then exit is automatic and

left everybody in the other states agrees to a delay. We should be

clear that this process is not a invitation to rejoin, it is a

process for leaving. I have known a number of couples who have began

divorce proceedings, but I do not know an event begun divorce

proceedings and order to renew their marriage vows. LAUGHTER that may

explain, I want to explain what happens when section 50. We should

also be clear... We should also be clear, what would happen if that

deal to leave was not done within two years. Our current access to the

single market would cease immediately, after two your throat.

The current trade agreements with the difficulties across the world

would lapse. This cannot be described as anything other than

risk, uncertainty and a lead in the dark that could hurt working people

and our country for years to come. This is not some theoretical

question, this is a real decision about peoples lives.

When it comes the people stops, it is simply not enough to say it will

be all right on the night that will work it out. I believe that

intermixed the company to properly face up to the economic consequences

of a choice to leave. Mr Speaker, I believe that Britain will be

stronger, safer and better off by remaining in a reformed European

Union. Stronger, because we can play a leading role in one of the worlds

largest organizations from within. Helping to make sure the big

decisions on trade and security that determine our future. Safer, because

the can work with our European partners to fight cross-border crime

and terrorism. And better off because businesses will have full

access to the free-trade single market, bringing jobs, investment

and lower prices. Mr Speaker, there will be much debate about

sovereignty and rightly so, to me, what matters most is the pattern to

get things done for our people and our country. Leaving the EU may

briefly make us feel more sovereign, but would actually give us more

power or influence and a greater ability to get things done? If we

leave, but we have the power to stop opposite is being discriminated

against? No! But we have the power to insist that Europeans countries

share with us their bold information so that we know what there is that

criminals are doing? No! We have more influence over the decisions

that affect the prosperity and security epistemic? Know we won't!

We are a great country! Whatever it was the make, we will still be

great! I believe the choice, is between being and even greater brain

inside how to reform the EU, or a great leap into the unknown! The

Times is facing the West and how to reform the EU, or a great leap into

the unknown! The Times is facing the West today Vladimir Putin aggression

and eases the most extremism to the south, this is in no time to divide

the web. When faced with challenges, and to our way of life, our values

and freedoms, this is it time for strength in numbers. Mr Speaker, let

me end by saying, I am not standing for reelection. I have no other

agenda I have no other agenda than what is best for our country. I am

standing here telling you what I think. My responsibility as prime

minister is to speak plainly about what I believe is right for our

country. That that is what I will do every day for the next four months.

I commend the statements of the house! Thinking is bigger. I would

like to think the promise of four advanced notice of the statement.

And I visited him in a long time to write it because I receded a but

it's as afternoon. -- I received it at 3pm this afternoon. The people of

Britain face in-store price on the 23rd of June on whether to remain

part of the European Union went to leave. We welcome the fact that it

is now the hands of the people on this issue. We are wanting to stay

and because he believed that the European Union has brought

investment jobs and protection for work of consumers and the

environment. We are convinced that a vote to remain as of the best

interest of the people. And the 21st-century Mr Speaker, as a

country and a consummate and as the human race. We faced with

challenging issues. How to tackle climate change, how to address the

power of global corporations, how to ensure that they pay state taxes.

How to tackle cyber crime and terrorism, I would trade fairly and

protect jobs and pay in an era of globalisation. How we address the

causes of the huge refugee movement across the world. How would add that

to a world where people of all countries, move more frequently to

live, work and retire. All of these issues are serious, pressing and

self-evidently can only be solved by international cooperation. The

European Union will be a vital part of how we as a country meet those

challenges. Therefore Mr Speaker. That is more than disappointing that

the prime Minister Steele has failed to address a single one of those

issues. Last week, like him, I was in Brussels, meeting with heads of

governments and leaders of European Union Socialist party. One of them

said to me, what they said, if the party opposite of what

had to think for a moment about what's going on. One person said to

me, I follows quite profound, he said we are discussing the future of

a continent. And one English Tory has reduced it to the issue of

taking away benefits from workers and children. The reality Mr

Speaker, is that this entire negotiation has not been about the

challenges facing our confidence, neither has it been about the issues

facing the people of Britain it is a theatrical sideshow about trying to

appease or failing to appease the half of the Prime Minister is all

the conservative party. That is not to say that there has not been

somewhat worthwhile changes. The Redcar assist him, to strengthen the

house of national parliament is something we and these mentors have

long back, the labor and elastin last in Iraq's election. It was not

of the conservative man manifesto but we welcome this. We also welcome

the symbolic amendment on ever closer union. Britain's

long-standing position not to join has been such an accepted. We see

the influence of Tory party funders, on a Prime Minister vessel status,

not for Britain but the city of London. It is the same essence of

that caused his the Chancellor to rush to Europe with an army of

lawyers to oppose any regulation of the grotesque level of bankers

bonuses. It is necessary to protect the rights of 9 euros on states, but

not to undermine EU wide efforts to regulate the financial sector,

including the border. Liberals stand for a different approach. That's a

labor. That is why members of the European Parliament is a opposing

the transatlantic trade negotiations was trying to undermine national

sovereignty, push the privatsation of public services, drive down

standards for workers and consumers, Mr Speaker, human rights should be

but part of that treaty. I believe it should be happy feature of all

trade treaties. Then, there is the so-called emergency brake. We

support the principle of Peart Constitution. However, does the

evidence not back-up the claim that an overt benefits are significant

draw for workers who come to Britain from the European Union. The changes

he promised is secured do nothing to address the real challenges of low

pay and prevent undercutting of local rates rates and and is derived

pay agreements, they won't put a penny in the pockets of workers and

Britain nor will they stop the grotesque exploitation of many

migrant workers, or reduce migration to Britain. Will the promised to

tell us what discussions he has had to get European roles and place to

protect the going rates and to stop agencies bragging and cheap labor,

to undercut workers and Britain, while the exploit to undercut

workers and Britain, while exploiting the martyr for his? The

Dees the two of the EU leaders about outlawing the so-called Buddhist

derogation from the edge workers directive for which threatens to

undermine one of the key achievements of the last Labour

government by allowing them to use them agency staff to undercut other

workers? These would have been positive and worthwhile discussions

to tackle low-paid, reduce benefit cost and protect workers. We must on

all of the speaker, be clear that Britain has benefited from

migration. From EU workers coming into wrecking our industry to our

other public services to fill gaps. The thousands of doctors and nurses

who work in our national health service is saving lives every day.

The European Union has delivered protection from workers, it would

labor that made sure that Britain's EU membership if work is right to

make minimum paid leave and protection on working time is ripe

for agency workers, paid maternity and paternity leave, equal pay,

anti-discrimination laws, and protection for the work force with

companies changed ownership. It was labor working partnership with the

parties and unions across Europe that makes of the vehicle promise of

the vehicle promise of attempt to diminish workers rights was kept off

the agenda of these EU negotiations. Labor has supported, move to reduce

child benefits and nonresident children as a reasonable amendment,

however we also welcome protection for 20 and so that families have the

ability of income. The prominence it still includes consignments. But it

a closet and irrelevant to the choice facing the British people.

Not one to go I facing the British people. Not one fickle element that

is a significant impact on the Kevin Kisner and stay in. We welcome

the fact the theatrical sideshow is over. We want to make a real case

that will be put by my friend the Member for who really are camping.

Labor believes the EU is a model framework for European trade and

cooperation in the 21st century. Not only what the EU delivered today but

as a framework through which we can achieve much more in the future. To

deliver these progressive reforms that I have referred to, when he to

work with our partners and Europe to achieve them. Therefore, we must

ensure that remain a member. That is the case are going to be making for

a Europe that is socially cohesive, a Europe that share the benefit of

wealth and prosperity amongst all of its citizens. But as the case we are

making as Labour Party, as a trade union movement in this country and

we look forward to that public debate. By Magomed have the opposite

spin for his contribution. He and I disagree on a lot of things about

economic policy about social policy about welfare policy, and did you

even disagree on the approach we should take within and Europe as a

gas as demonstrated in his the spots, but we do both agree about

one thing, which says that Britain should be in there fighting for a

good deal for our country. I were a little for the ombudsman because he

will be accused of fossils of things. Some of the verism of the

unfair. If the Texas courts will be accused of being a member of the

establishment. That'll be the most unfair attack of all. What he said

about the deal, than they make two points about why I think he should

welcome the deal, the first is that implements, as far as I can see him

as every pledged on Europe and the Labour manifesto, I'm looking at the

former leader. They pledged to complete the former leader. They

pledged to complete physical market, they pledged for budget discipline.

They said that we will ensure that EU rules protect the interest of 9

euros members. He went on and said that people coming to Britain from

the EU to look for work, are expected to contribute to our

economy and to our society so that we will secure is to immigration and

Social Security reform. It also says and I quote," we would work to

strengthen,... I'm just reminding my new friend what they said that the

election. They said this "We will work just as the influence of

national parliaments over Europe in the session by our group for Redcar

mechanism for never states." Excellent. Where I think the right

of him was unfair is that he's said that this deal was really all about

Britain, and not about anyone else. I would point out the Slovakian

Prime Minister said good, the myth about every quote didn't have

followed. The Hungarian prime minister said that the UK managed to

put an end to the practice of creeping power withdraw from

national member states. The former president of the commission said

that the real consequence of the summit is missionary important.

Brussels has an shot a multispeed Europe. This is beneficial to your.

Where I disagreed with the ombudsman is I think that these trade deals

are good for Britain and is to redo them we the better. I think he's

wrong about financial services. That was well received -- and outside of

the southern city of London and five. Crucially, what the single

market means is that with one establishment and Britain, you can

trade throughout the European Union. Booze it and do the job going for

Labor government than the care we have all had our difficulties with

your. We have all went to the debug the damn. But if I want to get

powers in turn, we have all found that because of I love for this

house, we found this process trying but at the end of the day we always

know when it comes to our economy and prosperity we're

will be Prime Minister agree that if he refers to the continental press

he will see that he has demonstrated the influence of a British prime

minister. He has actually -- it will be difficult for the fellow Prime

Minister is to sell to their own political establishment. Does he

agree with me that future generations will benefit from some

of those concessions, particularly those on and marching the single

market, guaranteeing our excess, deregulating, and regular eating

trade deals. Is he agree that it is not the politics of fear to point

out that those who advocate a no vote don't seem to know what a no

vote means? If they continually imply that somehow all of the

benefits that flow from Europe in terms of jobs, investment,

insecurity, will somehow continue to come here when they have swept away

the obligations that previous British governments have always

accepted? I am grateful for my right honourable friend says. In terms of

what... It has been interesting on what some of the four newspapers

have set. I will get you one example. Spanish paper has said that

British execs in reality beaches new heights yesterday. No other country

to its more acceptance in Europe. I am proud of that fact. We do have a

different status in Europe, and that has become more special with the

changes that we have made. I think that the point that my friend makes

is absolutely right. They recognise that there are disadvantages for

being in the European Union, I make no bones about that. I can that be

but his people in the eye and say this is what it is going to be like

if we state them. It was going to be better because of the deal that we

have done. The people that are advising us to leave have to spell

out what the consequences of leaving are, and I think that the absolute

lodestar is that no country has been able to get full access to the

single market without accepting either paying into the EU are

accepting free movement. If you don't want to accept those two

things, I think you have to start accepting that you are not going to

get as good of trade and business position as we have today. People

that want to be going to start making up their mind. Do you want a

Norway deal? A Switzerland deal, a candidate deal? I don't care which

deal you like, but we had to tell people because they deserve an

answer. May I begin by thinking the Prime Minister for advanced side of

the statement. The referendum choice before the electorate is a huge one

which will define our relationship with the rest of Europe, and indeed

the nations of the United Kingdom. Scotland is a European nation, and

the SNP is a European party. We will campaign positively to remain in the

EU, hopefully the Prime Minister can confirm today that he will reject

the tactics of project fear and make a positive case for remaining part

of a reforming European Union. It is hugely important to be a part of the

largest market in the world, and to be able to influence its rules and

laws. In rolling matters that the -- it matters that we can co-operate

for rights. We should also forget the lessons of European history, and

not turn our backs on European neighbours who need help at this

time to deal with a huge challenge including migration. Mr Speaker.

Public opinion in Scotland, a majority, supports membership of the

European Union. Every single Scottish MP -- MP supports

. Does the Prime Minister have any idea what the consequences would be

of Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wish of the Scottish

electorate? I want Scotland and the rest of the UK to remain within the

European Union. However, if we are forced out of the EU, I am certain

about public in Scotland will to read -- demand a referendum on

Scottish independence and we will protect our place in Europe. First

of all, I can confirm that I will make a positive case. A case based

around there and being stronger, safer, and better off. This is a

choice. I think that it is very important that we set out the toys,

and the alternative, to the British people. This is the most important

decision that people are going to make on a political issue

potentially and their lifetimes. I don't want anyone to take a step

into the dark without properly thinking through what the

consequences are. One thing I actually agree with the honourable

gentleman about, is that although Brussels and the institutions can be

frustrating, we should never forget what brought this institution into

being and the first place. Even at the most frustrating time of talks,

you look around the table and think of how these countries fought and

killed each other for so long. The dialogue that they take together is

positive. In terms of the boat in Scotland, this is one UK boat. Hear,

hear! -- vote. My right honourable friend has just spoken about

national parliaments, democracy, and our sovereignty. In the Bloomberg

speech, he made it clear that he regarded our national parliament as

being the root of our democracy. Yesterday, he referred to the

Aleutian of sovereignty. -- illusion of sovereignty. Will he explain and

repudiate that statement and reference to the question before us

in relation to our parliament and democracy in the making of our laws,

which at this moment in time under the European committees act, are

made by a majority vote of other countries, are introduced by it an

unelected commission, and are enforced by a court of justice. This

is not excepted the only way of out of that is to lead the European

Union? First of all, I have huge respect for my European --

honourable friend who has campaigned for many years. One thing that he

will welcome is that we are allowing the British people a choice to stay

in or lead the European Union. Let me confirm that yes, this parliament

is sovereign. We chose to join the the European Union and we can choose

to be. But me explain exactly what I meant by saying that it would be the

illusion of sovereignty. Let me take one issue. We now have safeguards so

that British banks, businesses, cannot be discriminated against if

we state in the European Union. They can't be discriminated against

because we are not in the euro. Where are we to lead, obviously we

would not have that protection. They could discriminate against us, and

frankly I think they would discriminate against us. Therefore,

and that way, we might feel more sovereign, but it would be an

illusion of sovereignty because he would not have the power to protect

the businesses that protect jobs of my ability and our country. Despite

assurances, it is worth saying that this referendum is about the future

of our country not the future of a divided conservative party. With the

Prime Minister agree with me that it is also not just about Britain's

place in the European Union, but also print's place in the world.

President Obama has been crystal clear that if Britain were to be the

European Union, it would weaken not strengthen the special relationship.

The Indians, Chinese, I'm mystified that we are even risking exit from

the European Union. We agree with me that if rain in the teacher wants to

stand tall in New Delhi, Beijing, Washington, and other mobile

cobbles, Britain must continue to stand tall in our own European

neighbourhood. I think that she he is right. We should make this

decision ourselves as a sovereign nation in a sovereign people. I

think that it is worth listening to our friends and listening to what

they think is best for our country. I have to say all of the leaders and

politicians I have backed around the world. I can't think of any of our

friends, Australia, New Zealand, America, Canada. That one is to be

the EU. The only person I think that might want us to leave is Vladimir

Putin, and I don't think that that is someone who has asked for what

the right honourable friend and colleague said about this

referendum. I will make a cheeky point that we are implementing the

2010 Lib Dem manifesto by holding it. Hear, hear! LAUGHTER Can I ask

my right honourable friend, the Prime Minister, to explain to the

House into the country exactly what way this deal returns sovereignty

over any field of lawmaking to the Houses of Parliament? This deal

brings back some welfare powers, immigration powers, bailout powers,

but more than that, because it cards us forever out of ever closer union

it means that the ratchet of the European Court taking power away

from this country cannot happen in future. To those who worry, and

people do worry, that if somehow if we vote to remain and, the

consequence could be more action and Brussels to try and change the

agreements that we have. We have a lot in this house of commons. No

power can be passed from Britain to Brussels without a referendum. We

have a better deal, and a special status, we have a chance to make

sure that we build on what we have to protect our people. We can

enhance our prosperity, and that is the we make. Mr Speaker, let me

think the Prime Minister for quoting and implementing parts of the plane

15 Lib Dem manifesto. I wanted to go to the big picture question, which

is about how we influence things in our national interest. I want to

draw the Prime Minister of the powerful and that his statement,

which is this question of course by being a member of the European Union

we don't always get our own way, but as he said to the right honourable

member on all of the major issues, whether it is trade or climate

change, or terrorism and security, he can tell us because he has been

the Prime Minister what does he believe. We have more influence in

the European Union or outside? Mr Speaker, surely the answer is more

influence inside the European Union, at outside. That is why I

passionately believe must remain in the European Union. I am grateful to

the right honourable gentleman for what he says. I can't promise to

implement any part of the bigger manifesto, but I am glad to have

been an assistant there. I actually agree with him. The big picture is

this, when it comes to getting things done in the world that can

help keep people safe in our country, a bigger, better deal on

climate change, do we get more because we are in the EU? Gas.

Making sure that we have sanctions against Iran that work and getting a

ban on their nuclear programme, to be deducted the EU and other new

bodies? Yes absolutely. Making sure that we stand up to Russian

aggression in Ukraine. We have been the linchpin between the European

Union and the United States of America in making those ancient

town. If we had been outside the European Union, we would have been

waiting at the end of the fund to make out with the decisions were

going to be. Instead, we were making them and them. That is how we get

things done for our people. Mr Speaker, according to the website,

there is a letter and peering into mile's times which has been bitten

by a Chris Hopkins on behalf of organizations across the UK wishing

for us to remain. Chris Hopkins is apparently a civil servant, could be

Prime Minister tell us who that is, which department does he work for,

and what authority does he have as a civil servant to campaign for the

remaining? I can answer very simply. He is a civil servant working and

number ten, and his authority comes from me. He is doing an excellent

job. This is not a free-for-all. The government has a clear view. The

government's view is that we should remain an informed European Union.

The civil service is able to support the government and not roll. Of

course, members of Parliament, members -- common members are middle

to make their own decision. The Cabinet is holding back. We have a

full throated view that we should put Ford in front of the British

people so that they I am tempted to think -- ask the

Prime Minister if bonds have more fun. -- blonds. If does he remember

what the government did in 2014 about the European arrest warrant,

and the conclusions that the European arrest warrant acts as a

deterrent for offenders commit to this country. Katie pointed out to

his pension secretary, and can he ask the home Secretary to bring the

working pension secretary on all the other reasons why Britain is safer

and more secure in the European Union. The European arrest warrant

is a good case in point. I think that all of us who do have this

concern about sovereignty have are concerned about the arrest warrant,

but look at what has happened in practice. In 2005, terrorists tried

to bomb our city for a second time. One of them escaped and was arrested

and returned to Britain within weeks under the European arrest warrant.

Before that, it could have taken years. I think that we can all see

that the practical application of these changes definitely keeps us

more safe. When it comes to this question of fighting terrorism a

cross-border crime, obviously people are going to have different

opinions. I would urge people, listen to the head of the former

director of MIT. Listen to the head of euro poll. These are people who

know what they speak of and are very clear. These measures help us to

stay safe. Thank you Mr Speaker. Having spent the best part of recess

and the Arctic circle with the Royal Marines, I am extremely conscious of

the need to ensure that everyone of our serving military personnel will

be able to cast their vote to leave or to remain in the forthcoming EU

referendum which the Prime Minister has worked so hard to get onto the

statue books for us. Can the Prime Minister please confirm that every

serving member of our armed forces wherever they are in the world, will

be entitled to vote and can they guarantee that they will receive

their ballot papers in good time, and confirm hubby will ensure that

everyone will be counted? My honourable friend clearly had a more

entertaining recess that I did, but I am rather jealous. There were

moments that I wish I was in the Arctic Circle, I can tell you. I

believe that the arrangements are absolutely the same. As for a

general election. We have for months until the referendum, there is

plenty of time to put in place the arrangements that she seeks. I pay

credits to be Prime Minister for delivering a reference to the

British people. I will remember the time that he came to the -- this

house and argue to -- but the referendum. He will know that we are

extremely disappointed in these benches that we don't have as a

result of this deal control over our sovereignty over our borders, or our

finances. He had said to in his statement, and I quote, that is

simply not enough for those in the meat side to say that it will be all

right and that we will work it out. He wants a definite facts. On the of

migrants coming to Britain in the United Kingdom, when will they first

begin to be eligible for some of the darker benefits for quick. What we

have is a phased approach so that over four years they get access to

benefits. No access to benefits to start with, and full access only

after four years. That is a huge advance. If I compare that to a lack

of certainty that we are being offered for people who want to

leave, who can't tell us whether they favour a model like Norway or

Switzerland, where if they want a trade deal like Canada, or if

someone to reclaim a purely WTO position. We need to know the answer

to that, because frankly it is only one me know that that people can

make a proper judgement about the security of staying in any dangers

of getting out. Last week's decision requires it to be changed to be

irreversible and legally binding. When will the ratification procedure

began? I am afraid that my right honourable friend is not right. It

is already legally binding and universal because this is the

decision of 28 governments to reach a legally binding decision that is

deposited as a legal document at the UN. This can only be reversed if all

28 members, including the UK, were to come to a different decision. The

document sets out very clearly that into specific areas, the changes

that we need to the treaty on closer union and safeguards for businesses

and countries outside the euro zone, will be put into the treaty as well.

The mayor of London has been touted of the leader of the lease campaigns

said yesterday that the burden will be able to negotiate a large number

of shady deals at great speed because we used to run the against

Empire and the world. Will he invite the Mayor to wake up to the 21st

century in which the European economy is six times longer than

endure -- took seven years to get Canada to get a trade deal, and with

so much uncertainty in the world's economy it would be deeply disrupted

to increase the risk for British exporters, British manufacturers,

and British shops? Let me say, where I share the frustration of many of

those who are questioning whether B should stay in a separate Britain

does need trade deals to be signed rapidly. We do find it frustrating

that Europe is not moving faster. The Korean free trade agreement has

been excellent, and about to push ahead with Japan, Canada, and

America, and China. Because of this document all of the single more

likely. Where I think that the right honourable lady has a good point is

this. You can't sign trade deals with other countries until you have

determined the nature of your relationship with the EU from the

outside. That would take at least two years, and then you have to

think how long does it take to sign trade deals? The Canada deal is in

its seventh year, and it is still not put in place. I worry that this

is a recipe for uncertainty and risk. Business is literally would

not know what the arrangements were for year after year, and British

business and jobs, and our country would suffer as a result. I have

pamphlets calling for us to address our role in by a referendum on art

EU membership may have escaped the Prime minister's attention. He will

understand why I am absolutely delighted that he is now provided us

an opportunity to resolve this question for a generation. Does he

agree with me that if the country votes to remain we must positively

commit to the institutions of the European Union? To best ensure its

success and to move on from the growth -- grudging tone that has

dominated our discourse. Equally, the establishment that he leads must

positively engaged with a potential decision to lead -- leave and

undertake reasonable contingency planning now. Let me make a couple

of points to my honourable friend. First of all, one of the things of

this renegotiation does is that it does address some of the principal

grudges, that I think that this country has rightly had. Too much of

a single currency club, political union, too much in terms of

migration and a lack of respect for welfare system. Not enough

competitiveness and removing bureaucracy. Having dealt with some

of these grudges, it may, yes, P possible make sure that we get more

things done that says -- sued us. I also agree that something with them

-- agree with the Mayor of London said that we have high-quality

British officials at every part of this organizations that we can help

to drive the agenda. He is right. This should settle this issue for

generation. He is also right that we will be publishing the alternatives

to membership so that people can see what they are, and also people can

see that there are plans that can be made. The Prime Minister has said

that there has been great to perform grant in the renegotiation, why then

did the French president say the European Union has not granted the

United Kingdom any special dispositions from its rules in a

deal struck? He went on to say that the Prime Minister said that the

city of London when I have special status compared to Europe other

stock exchanges? Why is this is a difference between what the French

president is saying and what the Prime Minister is an? What I would

say is that the French Foreign Minister said that the agreement

with the British is a recognition that there is a differentiated

Europe. I have Artie quantity so backend, Hungarian prime ministers,

and the former tying commissioner. Also, Fran ois Hollande said this,

we have recognised British position not in singing, not in the former

tying commissioner. Also, Fran ois Hollande said this, we have

recognised British position not in singing, not in a euro zone. She

does not -- but it has Britain has a special status in Europe. While the

referendum decision is a matter for the British people, as

does the Prime Minister recognised concern from the White House,

Pentagon, State Department, and international players that have

already Bedminster macro mentioned. That's ready to stand together in an

unsafe world? I my honourable friend Nixon point. I don't think

I think that it is based on the fact that they believe that Britain will

be a stronger partner, more able to get things done, more able to bend

at the will of other countries that are in America's directions when it

comes to solving great prices. If you ask yourself how do we need is

to reduce pirate attacks off Somalia, how would go to try to fix

the problems of Libya's border. Yes, we can act unilaterally, and there

are valuable partnerships and Nato, but these EU producers are worth a

lot to. The views that the pound has slipped to its lowest level in seven

years on the news that the honourable member has joined the

league campaign, are the just getting a glimpse of the major

economic upheaval that could follow if we leave the European Union? Is

it's not a timely reminder that the long-term best interest of our

country should come ahead of party politicking or personal ambition?

What I would say to the right honourable gentleman is that I think

that it is important that we looked at in detail the full economic

impact of our staying in the EU were choosing to leave the EU. We will be

setting out that approach in the weeks and months to come so that

people can see what the dangers are, but the risks are, and also at the

cases. Don't be, and agriculture, fishing, and energy policies do

damage to domestic producers and the... What can we do about these

unfairness is if we stay in the European Union? We have made a lot

of progress in recent years. We have made big reforms to the common

fisheries policy is. I would suggest, I know that he studies

these things very closely, of course why we have a deficit with the EU on

goods, we have a substantial surplus when it comes to services. We have

to think about the future, and how we safeguard those services as well

as making sure that opposition and the single market is open. Opening

up the EU market in areas like energy and digital services could

create hundreds of thousands of jobs in the future. The Prime Minister

agree that remaining a part of the EU will give the UK a strong voice

in making sure that the completion of that single market happens, and

that the best deal for British businesses and jobs? I think that

the honourable me lady makes an important part -- point. The

declaration on I think that this is an important

point. If we work there, not only with the EU continue to exist and

have a big impact on our lives, it would probably head and a very

different and more protectionist direction. That would actually

affect us. And in many ways quite badly. Thank you Mr Speaker. My

right honourable friend will know that have been deluged with advice.

On the subject of an ever closer union, can he give us a concrete

example of a single easy case that will provide a different outcome if

the measures that he agreed last week had been agreed at the time?

The ever closer union has been mentioned in a series of judgement

by the European Court of Justice. There are two things that we have

agreed that I think we'll have an impact. Obviously, the most

eye-catching is the fact, and I quote from paragraph one on page

ten, is that the substance of these agreements will be incorporated in

the treaties and the time of his next position. It will make clear

that the references to ever closer union do not apply to the United

Kingdom. That is a call-back for us, but in many ways it is as

significant and something that many other countries do not want is the

next paragraph that says the references in the treaty and the

preambles are creating an ever closer union, do not offer a legal

basis for extending the scope of any provision of the treaties or other

EU secondary legislation. This redefinition of ever closer union I

think is really quite a fundamental change to the way that this

organisation has worked. One way to think of it is that there have been

two threats to our sovereignty, one from treaty change passing powers

for Britain to Brussels, that can't happen now because of our block. The

second one is using terms like the ever closer union to make sure that

the EU grows its powers. It can't be done now that we have the strength.

One of the reason why this deal took whatever it was this because not

everybody likes us. It is not meaningless words, it is worth that

mean something and matter, and make a difference.

The Prime Minister was elected the 37% of the ball. Which means that

even a half these people are to vote in, then this referendum can only be

one of the faces of people have voted Labour mass and D,... There

isn't a reasonable position that these people will be more interested

in the of the case of the case for Europe, then the factual arguments

of Conservative Party, entertaining though they are. What is the promise

of going to put forth that forth that case, that part of the promise

of going to put forth that case, that positive case for Europe? --

one Prime Minister. I do not want to upset him because I'm hoping is

going to be supportive. I will say in the speech that I have made

today, I have sent out a positive case. It is the case of someone who

is Euro sceptical in the genuine sense, I am sceptical about all

organisations. All engagement. We should always question whether

organisations work for us and be doubtful about these things. That is

what is being sceptical means. I come at this from someone who had

their doubts about Brussels and the EU, but I have a clear eyed about

what is best for Britain. If others want to argue this from a more

positive stance about the nature of the EU, fine. Go for it. It is up to

everyone to make their own case. I will make my case in a clear

determination of what is in Britain's interest. I think I did

that today. Can he tell the House, and his estimations, by how much the

welfare changes will reduce immigration for the EU in the coming

years could tell anybody looks at this, and nose at the moment you can

come from the EU and get up to ?10,000 in and work welfare

benefits, and the pressure, knows that that is a big incentive to come

to Britain. Many people said we would never be able to get changes

to in work benefits, and we have got those changes. If we pass this

legislation, were they going to see in 2017 a seven-year period, up to

2024 will be restricting these welfare claims. That plus all the

changes that the Home Secretary has disappeared, and many cases

reversing the CJ judgement. They actually restored to our country

powers over welfare, powers over immigration Baek a real difference.

Best I can. We also support for the reform and will campaign

accordingly. If you're to live, what would happen to mention such as

convergent funding which is provided by the amounts of money for poor

areas? I think the short answer is if we were to leave the EU, and we

would not be able to get those funds, which I made a big difference

in parts of Wales, and parts of England. In other parts of our

country. I also think, I'm someone who was a kid EU but it out and we

achieved that historic decision to cut it, but they wish to befriend

that some of the work that the has done, in poor countries and other

parts of the EU, is actually have economies to grow. They are

customers of ours, and so what is Bulgaria, Romania, or Greece or

whatever, the economic development is in our interests. -- the economic

development. In January, academic bill to try and protect our children

from portable... I pulled the bill this month after discussions, their

official public this is that piece of legislation. Thousands of

directors saw rescued out from Brussels, every gear, that this

government has to comply with. Therefore I will be built. We cannot

even protect our own children on something as fundamental as this

because we do not have the control without the permission of Brussels.

I'll look carefully at the case. I know the state can be frustrated,

and every of foam filled miniature and mattresses, we've taken steps

over and above what other countries are doing, which has kept our own

people safer. The other thing I would say is there are a lot of

different figures going around about this. And she looks in the library,

borrow from being the topic this, it is much more like 15% of loans that

come to us from this direction. -- loss. And I commend the parameter

his statement and congratulate him on the success of persuading his EU

counterpart is signed up for renegotiation. Will he accept gold

renegotiations may have been successful, it is not central to how

most people make up their minds? When we belong to a European single

market, that is where a digg account figure to this country, is a better

in or out? What wear basic facing huge insecurities and badges, I

would bet off alongside our friends or outside on our own? And we face

huge challenges like climate change and the refugee crisis, I would go

working with others or isolated on their own? Will he join with me in

our shared ambition for a Britannic Europe and for the pond ambition

behind him was what -- blonde. . Renegotiation was aimed at dealing

with some of the legitimate businesses that we have had in the

UK for many years about the way it was the EU work. We thought it was

too much of a single currency club, too much political giving, kind is

about competitiveness and not enough production in terms of welfare and

immigration. I believe this renegotiation and agreement goes

long way to lose dealing with each of those problems. Now the time for

the even bigger argument about the future of our country and what sort

of country we want to live in poor heart cells, children, and grilled

children. Of the points that he makes the printer being shown and

wealth, getting things done, I'll try to our membership with Nato

matters, our relationship with the UN, and our relationship with the EU

gives a force of power to get things done. These fences are rightly proud

of our record in the job in unemployment, the... -- these pages.

Production in our deficit. During his many meetings, did he find

anybody, even a single person, am I suggest we will get better terms on

our exit to achieve even better outside the cure Community? --

European Community. I think there is goodwill towards Britain, because of

the contribution we make to the EU. There is understanding other

problems or difficulties that we have had. Therefore, with a huge of

the pharmacy and travel and meetings, it has been possible to

get a good agreement. I do not believe if we were to take over the

table of an eye for a second one, I don't think it is morally feasible.

, work on the equalization is possible, which discriminated

unfairly the British citizens. -- spouse rules. Can ask him to

recommend the work of the Minister for John? I would manage to get on

the job, he has done six. He still retained his sanity. Almost. On the

other big issue, the migration crisis, the British head of your

poll said today that there were 5000 GIs were now within the European

Union area. Many have come from the external border of the EU. Whether

this amount has been given to Greece and Italy in particular is tried

until -- tried to do with protecting the border? Identifies remarks about

the Europe minister. His eyes were set for a minute there. But he has

been done the job for six years as the nation was well. The point about

spousal visas as important, for many years, we are given a dismayed to be

sorted out and for many years to EU stood back, if you want the

collectibles, change her own rules and here we have managed to do that.

In terms of the help that were given to Italy and Greece, the discussions

and Brussels were very intense because the numbers really do have

to be reduced radically and that is why I strongly support and Britain

will contribute to the maritime operation the last song Nato support

as well as EU support. To try and bring together Greece and Turkey

with a comma information picture, common intelligence what is

happening. These, banks operating in the area. Without that, there will

not be the right chance of getting the situation under control. For

decades, British ministers who had involvement with Europe at, to

exaggerate to affluence we bring and conceal our inability to achieve

British interests. Is that why it took freedom of information request

to established over the last two decades, Britain has voted against

72 measures in the European Council? And has been defeated 72 times, and

the patient of the accelerating? It would make the mistake to take the

risk of remaining in the EU, how many defeats that the Prime Minister

is suspect in the next two decades? The frustrations and challenges of

being a member of his organisation, there are challenges. The research

that I have seen his deep analysis of whether a country that its

position, and shows that Britain does in 90% of cases, which even I

think operates the Germans. I did for myself what we were hard we can

get things done. -- I have seen for myself. If we are outside the single

market, the same countries, without us, will write the rules. We will

then have to comply with them, when we show that the government would

have no say over what they are. That to me is the illusions of

sovereignty rather than real sovereignty. I'll accept the

symbolism of removing the phrase ever closer union. I do think the

Prime Minister opposes House to give at least one two examples of where

the sole legal basis for a decision. I am happy to read to her, but it

has been used in a series of cases before us. That's happy to write to

her. On the question of Article 50, cannot first one out that it did not

exist in the treatise until the Lisbon Treaty which my friend used

to oppose and not he agrees with. Can I point out there are many ways

of leading the European gigging, that might article 50. Date that the

power to bind himself and to the Article 50 from work, can he give it

some thought rather than committed himself to a policy that he does not

support? The point I would make to him is that like it or like it not,

I don't particularly like it, but the Treaty of the European and you

can set style of the way that you leave. It is called article 50. --

European Union. I think it should read it. I find it odd that if you

want to leave, leave. If you want to stay, stay. But the idea of going to

leave the try and half day, I don't think the British public will

understand it, I don't think our European partners would understand,

I'm at a loss to understand it. I thought we wanted a referendum to

make a choice. Posted by Minister think that President Clinton would

drop the secret... -- President Putin, would he rather see Bridget

Breakaway for the EU and to seek your potentially break apart? I

think it is true that tournament presented like to see disunity in

the West. -- Vladimir Putin. Whether it is about actions of Sarah

Corporation conduct another issue. There's no in my mind -- doubt in my

mind, that the allies that there is between the Baltic states, Poland,

who see it first-hand the problems being created by Putin, and

countries like Britain is always in my view should stand up to

aggression. But that a life together with the French and Germans, and has

made your's stronger and if we were not there, I don't think you can

guarantee that would be the case. I do not believe that is an

overstepping of the position. In October, Lord Rove said nothing is

going to happen and become how to cure in the first five years

probably. There will be no change. I hope my friend finds that ritual

from the head of the campaign to stay in. What he agree that it is

inevitable after the Vote Leave, there will be a period of informal

discussions before the formal process is driven? I have to say I

have great respect for my Honorable friend who is leading a campaign

with great vim and vigour and passion. But surely if you want

Britain to leave the EU, you want things to change, rather than not

change. The truth is that section, article 50 is the only way to leave

and what it says is that if you spend two years negotiating your

status outside of the EU, and that they cannot be agreed, at the end of

the figures, you leave. That is all of the 27 members agree to extend.

That's unless. If you do not have a deal, he don't know what your

relationship is with a single market, with a 50 days countries

covered by the Trader Joe's, or very much. My argument is that do not

take that risk. Stay in a before European Union. But the delayed

campaign will have to do is explain what it is that you want was to

left. -- the lead campaign. Cannot they be Prime Minister for his

detailed statement. Does he accept that with Arlen and -- Ireland

connected, to a UK exit of the European you can would have

replications for Ireland, North or South. There may be some initial

financial savings for the UK, but huge losses are likely to follow. We

see them impact today are sterling. Yeah, we know that the financial

impact would be negative and slow. Mr Speaker, with recent polls

suggesting that 75% of people in Northern Ireland want to stay in the

EU, as the Prime Minister agree with me that a UK exit from the EU will

have detrimental impact on Northern Ireland's economy and is one peace

process? In terms of Northern Ireland,

everybody and other islands have a vote, every vote counted. I would

urge people to exercise their democratic right. I look forward to

going to another island as part of the campaign to talk directly to

people why I believe we should stay. And I listened that some people

believe that our European neighbours want to do is down at every turn, is

a credible to suppose that the selfsame people, if we were to

leave, could believe that our phone partners, would follow themselves to

give us free access to the single market among which is the vital

foundation for our business and industry to trek across the world?

-- trade across. I feel that very deeply, because having time to build

up the good will for a special status for breaded, within the EU

which we have achieved, I do not believe that will would be dead...

-- be there. The option of that risk is to stay in the reform EU rather

than to take the leap in the dark. Have the Prime Minister Alize the

grave consequences for the UK -- outlined the grave, but perhaps

reflect on the wisdom of the leadership decisions that led us to

be facing those consequences in a few months' time. Besides I want to

leave hapless sovereignty and control at the heart of the

arguments. That's the size. Does he agree with me that it a position

where we are a decision-maker at the timetable, will be moving from

position of being a rule-making to a protected and that is not

sovereignty, it is not controlled, and it is not the best future for

the United Kingdom? I do not agree with what the gentleman said at the

first part. I think it is time for a referendum. I think we had too many

traders passing through this house, where there was no referendum.

Whether it was more strict under the Conservatives or Lisbon, under

labor. I think that sack People's faith and our democracy and our

accountability. I remember the moment when Tony Blair stood here

and said let that of the joint and all the rest and without a

referendum is coming. Then it was taken away. It is right to have this

referendum and we should not be frightened of asking the people

interested the people, but I agree with him that if you want to have to

question how it would have greater control, greater influence, it is by

being in there helping to make the rules, rather than outside simply

taking the rules. Can congratulate the Prime Minister for securing a

written the special status that he talked about earlier? Does he agree

with me, with the debate so far is that those who want leave your are

completely unable to agree on an alternative arrangement for breaded

and the EU, that we get the same sort of economic benefits that his

negotiation skills? What today's discussions have revealed not only

that there is no agreement about what Britain by a future looks like

outside of the EU, but there is an agreement about whether we really

should leave, some that people wanted to both league in over a

different bill. That's not an agreement about how we should leave.

What the Article 50, or some other process that can be followed.

Unclear, the only way I leave. What the Article 50, or some other

process that can be follow. Unclear, the only way of event is to article

50. There is no second renegotiation, second referendum,

the torch is in or mean. -- the choice is in or out. Can the Prime

Minister tell us beyond the areas which are specifically addressed in

the deal agreed last week, and which ways his government plans have been

constrained by European legislation? There's no doubt that we do face

concerns because the way the single market works is a common set of rows

that has to be agreed. As it's been said, was and I was cannot wait.

That's a common set up rules. There are occasions where we lose a vote,

and we are concerned by EU regulation and legislation. The

question that they would be to put in a very hard-headed politics and

if you are outside, does that give you the full control that you seek?

Does not produce up to trade with Europe and accepted rules, don't

think I've done is remove yourself from the conversation and take away

your vote. Common sense that this will set up the issue of her

generation. I am blessed with five grandchildren. I believe it is in

their blessed interest that I should be voted to remain within the EU.

That's part of. There is another generation that is some concern.

Thousands of people are paid UK taxes, an excellent insurance over

the years. They are now living in other parts of Europe. My right

honourable friend knows that I represent the interests of the

people. They're very frightened, and can he tell them what will happen if

we leave the European Union? I am grateful that he has decided to

support the case for remaining in the EU. I think he raises an

important point. We often look at free Will Win in terms of people's

decisions to come here. We do also need to think about the many British

people would have chosen to work, live, retire and other parts of the

EU. The short answer to this question is that I can tell the

window be like if the state. But I cannot be absolutely certain if we

leave. It would depend on a complex and difficult glaciation cannot be

there be a lot of uncertainty. I would urge other people or the right

to vote to make that exercise that right and we should think about

people in Gibraltar, who are all applicable in this referendum.

That's able to vote. To speak plainly about what he

believes is right for our country. As it develops the argument, when

the bear and mind that nine American people voted Labour and general

election? And the sympathies and values don't actually live with his

party and a need to develop a conversation with them as well. I

take on his point. This is not a party political issue. This is not

something for all people, all voters to get involved in. They might vote

conservative and a general election, but decide to vote in, or out, and

dinner with labor a liberal Democrat. -- ditto. This should be

added to the -- giant democratic society and accountability. We are

asking question about something, this is a new sovereign decision by

the British people. That huge sovereign decision. I would say to

Labour voters to decide what you think that government, that rule, or

that law. Think about the future of your country, and think about the

big picture and then make the choice. I am always nice. The Prime

Minister said that crime should be at the forefront of our thoughts

when we are putting in the referendum. And the Prime Minister

tell us how many crimes were committed in the UK by EU nationals

in the given for free movement of people came into effect, and how

many were committed by the EU nationals last year, and how many of

the EU nationals were imbued in the UK prison system before free but

when of people came into operation and how many there are now? I'm sure

he has that information. Debbie has not got it, perhaps he can write to

me with the information. That's if he doesn't have it. I do not have

all the figures, but I can say because of a very harboured by the

Home Secretary, will be able to Barbara, and so, too better. That

hardware. We are solving problems that the EasyJet has put another

way. As for prisoners, the prisoner transfer agreement that was

negotiated will mean that we can get for prisoners out of our prisons and

into the jails. Outside of the EU, they'll be far more difficult to

achieve. -- that will be. I don't remember who was selected the

European Parliament in 1979. -- I think I was the only member. Without

a lot more sense than itself. We were on opposite sides. I was in

favour of a gift membership, his father was in favour of membership.

-- against membership. I changed my mind. At the two gears in the

European Parliament, I saw the benefits. -- after two years. We're

talking about Senate. -- Senate. Were talking about restructuring the

social effect. And people work in the auto industry. I think

anonymously from working with people and other nationalities, the hope is

to emphasise again and again the importance of internationalism. I

think it for her honesty. -- bank. I remember campaigning... Head be

sitting here and we would have been able to hear from him and for the

Maryland. That she would be. -- Mayor of London. Why does the Prime

Minister Bank on so much? -- the bank on? So much about these

European migration, after the polls have a wonderful record of, care and

offer benefits. As a much more worried that Mickens, born an

integer from North Africa and the Middle East that the diamonds have

any idea what proportion of these people were exercise their right to

come here and once they get the German passports? If we remain in,

the as useful as a Macedonian strain to stop them. -- strain to stop. I

promised to go on for the next four months, and to go on considerably

less. I think he makes a good point. We have the advantage of being

outside second, so that foreign nationals, to other countries don't

have the automatic access to the UK. But he stopped coming in. As what

would you European citizens who we think are ever of the country. The

factual answer to this question is if you look at refugees and others

who have arrived in Germany, after ten years, only around 242% have

German citizenship. The evidence to date is there is no huge risk of

early to the table. -- 2.2 oppression. The more likely to have

are involved to try and stop the flow question the flow of migrants

in the first place and would have ingrained now. With this is the lead

operation between Greece and Italy is partly because of the UK

intervention into this debate. Taken by the French, with the times,

because around the table would get things done. Thus the Prime Minister

agreed with me that the claim that staying with the European you can

would make an attack on our shores more likely, is deeply irresponsible

and factually wrong? The Prime Minister has said in a

statement that we are to make a final decision. So the one sentence

of the statement I agree with a final decision to be made in June as

to whether we stay with the valve body on whether we leave and make

our own pot -- pass. As a government's policy basically always

keep a fair punishment the force? -- finding something worse. Obviously,

my friend and I have a profound disagreement about this issue. I

respect his views because he has held them in good faith for many

years. And until my view is that we need to form for years. I'm sure we

can respect each other and the months of debate ahead. Don't think

I would say by doing to take issue with my Honorable friend is about

manifesto delivered. On a run through whole thing but we said we

will legislate for a referendum and we delivered. Which I will protect

our economy from the eurozone, and wanted to pursue power for was from

Brussels cover in the sediment. One problem is to work together to block

unwanted legislation covering the settlement. The one and two ever

closer union. We'll will ensure that defence policies national security

remains firmly under British national control. We assisted the EU

migrants want to claim tax credits must live it here and contribute it

for four years covered in the settlement. Time and time again, we

also noticed manifesto and I'm proud of them in. I'm proud of the team to

put together and implement the good. I say let's have this vigorous

argument, let's not pretend that we have not delivered the manifesto

that was in front of. The bosses of those companies aren't

saying that very publicly, I would invite the Prime Minister during

this election campaign to encourage them to talk to those people whose

jobs depend on that investment, to say what would happen if we left

Europe, because they tell me they would leave Britain. My message to

businesses is if you have a view, make sure you tell people and talk

to customers, and your suppliers. Above all, talk to your employees,

and your staff. This issue is so important, the business voice, large

and small, is very much in favour of Britain staying. Many of them have

said generous things about this renegotiation because they recognise

the dangers, particularly in the area of safeguarding ourselves

against distillation, because we aren't in the Euro, given that I

hope business and enterprise will speak clearly in the next few

months. Much of the protection of the Euro outs in this is set out.

But this requires nothing, as far as I can tell, nothing more than the

discussion to be held about the UK's concerns. Not even European Council.

It leaves Eurozone members free to enforce its will bike UMT. So, can

the Prime Minister explain what beyond the discussion, which can be

ignored, has been achieved by the safeguard mechanism -- QMV. I can

answer that, is an important question. There are two things, it

is a set of principles set out on section A on economic governance,

these principles of non-discrimination, no cost, no

disadvantage, and crucially in paragraph four, a real concern to

the Bank of England, I know it will be a concern to his committee, is

making clear that the financial stability of member states whose

currency is not the Euro is matter for their own authorities and

budgetary responsibilities. These principles are very important. What

I think is exciting is that not only have these been setup for the first

time, not only has Europe accepted for the first time that there are

other currencies in the EU but these changes will be incorporated into

the treaties. The mechanism, if you like, is over and above new way of

making sure issues are raised, should we want to, at the level of

the European Council, a protection we don't have today, but I think

making the treaty, making the principle is part of the treaty,

already an international legally binding decision, is hugely

important and people on behalf of financial services and the Bank of

England and others, they will recognise this is important progress

for Britain. There is still plenty that divides myself and the Prime

Minister politically, but on this, in the national interest, I think

he's right to be campaigning for Britain to remain in the European

Union. I want to put a quote to him, leaving would cause at least some

business uncertainty, while embroiling the government for

several years in a fiddly process of negotiating new arrangements. So

diverging energy from the real problems of this country, that was

on February the 7th. The Mayor of London was right to seven days ago,

wasn't he? What I would say to the honourable gentleman and everyone is

that we have really got to examine what these alternatives are, and how

much uncertainty there would be, how long these processes would take. I

think therein lies the importance of this decision, for businesses,

families, people's prospects as well up and down the country. Does the

promised a group of me that one of the key benefits of his agreement is

to give legal clarity about Britain's special status within the

EU? You would be aware of the uncertainties that have been for

those advising the government about the law in the past, does he also

agree that it is wrong to say that it is not legally binding, it is.

And it is irreversible, unless we choose otherwise. There is a long

opinion by Professor Sir Alan Dashwood, the leading EU

constitutional lawyer in this country, it can be read on the

Henderson Chambers website. I'm grateful for what my right

honourable friend says given that he was a senior law officer in the

government. I listen carefully to what the member for Beaconsfield has

said, they could not have been more clear on this point, I've read the

judgment by Lord Dashwood and the government 's own legal advice. They

say it is legally binding and reversible. People who question it

should look at the Danish protocol, that's been working well for 23

years. Does the Prime Minister share my concerns and worries that after

70 years of peace and prosperity, any nation begins to take it rather

for granted, and take the institutions that created that peace

and prosperity? I was born on the August weekend in London at the

height of the Battle of Britain. My generation, and many people in this

country with longer memories, note that peace and prosperity aren't

guaranteed, unless you work together across Europe to maintain them day

after day, month after month, year after year. I agree with the

honourable gentleman, it is worth remembering why this came about in

the first place. The appalling bloodshed on our continent. For

people of my generation, very much postwar children, we should remember

that and look afresh at the institutions of the EU, and try to

make sure that this organisation works for this century, rather than

the last century. That's part of what the agreement is about. I

remember the meeting we once had at the Cloth Hall in Ypres, you cannot

sit in that building without thinking of the slaughter that

European countries have engaged in in the past. May I to salute my

right honourable friend for honouring his commitment to the

British people, to offer them a referendum? And extraordinary

stamina over the last week or so, where we've been to join the recess.

For me, this is not the fundamental reform we were promised. We've

learned a lot about security in the last few weeks, would he not agree

with me that the security of Europe is dependent on Nato, not the EU? It

is Nato that is protecting us from further incursion by President

Putin, and we do Nato no good by suggesting that somehow the EU has

some competence in this area? I have huge respect for my right honourable

friend, he served brilliantly in the last garment helping to strengthen

defences, perhaps ten or 15 years ago, -- government. Whether it is

our partnership with America, not the EU, considering defence and

security in the run today, the way we fight terrorism yes it depends on

our relationships and what we do through the EU. I see it daily

through the exchange of information. The agreement we reached at this

council, to make sure that there is a strong Nato mission, to try and

help the situation between Greece and Turkey, it is a Nato mission

backing up his point, but where was some of the conversation going on

about it? Where were the Germans, British and French sitting together

and working out what assets we could supply? How to get real power into

it? It was done around the EU Council table. The fact is we need

both to keep safe in the modern world, fight terrorism, criminality,

stand up to evil around the world and use all organisations, not just

some of them. The Prime Minister has played fast and loose with our

cultural, social and economic future in Europe for a consider is -- for a

series of concessions. Will the Prime Minister now guarantee that

his government's case for remaining in the EU will stop appeasing them,

and will instead focus on the many positives of the EU. Can he commit

to ensuring that the public has sufficient information to make a

positive and informed choice? We have certainly been whiting a

positive campaign, and in that there is a series of documents, some were

mandated by the other place, when they had a referendum bill, we have

two set out rights and obligations of things you get out of, and

obligations you have in the EU. We will be talking about the economic

case. All of those issues, I would say to those interested in some

cultural or educational arguments, come forward to. We need from voices

from universities, they have a lot to say on this issue, they get a lot

out of Europe. Cultural organisations should be speaking out

as well. Nick Herbert. Anti-Mr Speaker, would my right honourable

friend agree with me that when this country in our national interest

makes an international agreement of any kind, it may involve a loss of

sovereignty, that may be the case through any trade deal, through Nato

rules, and on the single most important issue that this House of

Commons could take, which is whether or not to engage in military action.

We are treaty bound by Nato to go to the defence under article five of a

country, a fellow member, under armed attack. That obliges us, in

that sense, we've lost sovereignty. That is because we believe it is in

the interests of the country to enter that agreement and has made us

safer. If the claim of sovereignty and the loss of sovereignty were the

trump card, would it not in fact be the case that all of those

international agreements would need to be torn up? I think my right

honourable friend makes an important point, if you're only determination

was never to seek technical sovereignty committee would never

join any organisations or do a trade ill, or be a member of the IMF World

Bank -- trade deal. The question is what maximises power, influence and

ability to get things done. As the Transport Secretary put brilliantly

in the cabinet meeting, I would love to live in Utopia, but I expect the

EU is that as well. You don't abolish the EU by leaving it, you

simply cut yourself off from something, and therefore, possibly

make yourself less powerful rather than more powerful. May I gently

remind the house that people who wish to take part in the exchanges

should have been here at the start, and remain throughout. People who

have gone in and out of the chamber and may have come back in again

should not then be standing. That's pretty much in breach of traditions

of the house. We must be clear on that. Mr Ronnie Campbell. The main

policy for me was a close political union. If this could be voted to

upstate -- stay in the union on the 23rd, could we put it to a treaty,

be written into a treaty? It is already an agreement and will

shortly be deposited at the UN as an international law decision, and

therefore it would already be, by then, legally binding and

irreversible. When it comes to getting out of an ever closer union

and redefining a closer union, I think it is so important it has to

go into the treaties. The agreement here is when those treaties change

they will be written into those treaties. If you like, there's a

double lock on this. A vital point. John Baron? I suspect this is

tinkering, it is not fundamental change, the red card is not a veto,

it won't stop a majority of the EU in forcing unwanted taxes. Should

the Prime Minister accept the possibility that the red card can be

turned against us? It could not stop, or it would stop, rather, UK

sponsored initiatives being blocked by the majority of the EU,

initiatives that could be in our best interests, like access and

further enhancement of the single market? Look, I don't overstate the

red card, what it is is a new mechanism not to delay but properly

block new initiatives available for National Polmont, should they want

to avail themselves of it. For me, it's another thing that makes this

organisation more democratically applicable to national Polmont is.

On some occasions it may work against, I suppose it is

accountability. The point is this organisation will be more democratic

because of my decision rather than less.

Mr Speaker, since the Prime Minister seems to be getting none from his

own side, can I commend him from coming right to cancel a Michael

version of freedom of movement. Can he assure the House that there'll be

no application for the hundreds of thousands of UK citizens living in

the EU for this deal? Of course if we stay in the European Union

British people will continue to be able to live and work abroad as they

do now. It is not for me to set up will happen to them in different

circumstances. I think the league campaign will try and address that

point. You will know with certainty what they get. In his statement the

Prime Minister observed that leaving the EU might briefly make us feel

more sovereign, does he not accept that the issue of parliamentary

sovereignty will be the centre of that central one for parliamentary

debate. So long as we're subject to the European Union we will not be

truly sovereign and erode very little change last week in that

respect. I think would change the last weekend in that respect is that

because we're getting out of ever closing union we now know that we

cannot be forced into folder public again good union against our will.

On this issue of sovereignty I will repeat again, if you leave the EU

you might feel more sovereign because you could pass this law or

pass that law, but on the other hand if you still want to set into Europe

you have to meet all the rules under which you have say. That is a

diminution of sovereignty rather than increase of sovereignty. On the

issue of sovereignty, has been reported in several news media

organizations that the Prime Minister intends to unveil a British

sovereignty bill in the next few days. Will he confirm that that is

the case and if so will he tell us what provision he is going to make

in that bill to recognise the principle of unlimited sovereignty

in parliament and the distinctively English principal which has no

counterpart to Scott a scattered -- constitutional law? We will build a

2011 when we set out that our limited sovereign. Just as they can

join the year they can join the -- Olevia. That is the good for the

whole of the United Kingdom. We do have a sovereign parliament. I do

think there are ways we can add to that. As other countries have done,

I look for to bringing proposals forward in the coming day. On Friday

two and a half thousand people packed the QE Center to see the goal

launch national cross party leaf campaign, many speakers were there,

including a renowned economic commentator, a senior trade

unionist, and very respected Labour in Pete, the co-chairman of

conservatives for Britain, for conservative MPs, and the leader of

respect. In 2014, Bruce Davidson our excellent conservative leader in

Scotland, linked arms with George Galloway in the national interest.

Does the Prime Minister agree that Ruth Davidson was right and does he

agree that sometimes you have to work with people you do not like?

Everyone will have to make the choice about what platform they

appear on and who they appear on those platforms with. I think the

disadvantage of appearing on any platform with either Nigel The

Mirage or George Galloway is what I consider who their friends are. ,

this is going to be something everyone will have to think

carefully about when they to appear. There has been a lot of talk about

the City of London and big multilateral companies working here