Browse content similar to 07/02/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
State and colleagues whose saphenous enabled every would-be contributor | :00:00. | :00:07. | |
to take part -- pickiness. Point of order. I think that the only way we | :00:08. | :00:13. | |
can work is to respect the authority of the Speaker. Otherwise there will | :00:14. | :00:20. | |
be complete chaos. It may be that I have my own personal view, | :00:21. | :00:25. | |
personally, I think that the Queen has issued an invitation to Mr Trump | :00:26. | :00:30. | |
on the advice of her ministers and he is the president of the free | :00:31. | :00:35. | |
world and if we have entertained the president of China, we can entertain | :00:36. | :00:38. | |
him, and that is my view, but at the end of the day, we have to respect | :00:39. | :00:45. | |
and support the office of Speaker. Not sure there is, but I will take | :00:46. | :00:48. | |
it and come back to the honourable gentleman. Point of order. At | :00:49. | :00:53. | |
business questions last week, I raised the inability of ordinary | :00:54. | :00:58. | |
members of this House to express an opinion through the vote on what was | :00:59. | :01:04. | |
an unprecedented quick invitation to a head of state and I believe that | :01:05. | :01:09. | |
we owe you a debt of gratitude for deciding in this case that such an | :01:10. | :01:14. | |
invitation should not be supported by members of this House. We know | :01:15. | :01:21. | |
the reasons why it was done. It was done rapidly in order to avoid | :01:22. | :01:23. | |
political embarrassment for the Prime Minister. But this certainly | :01:24. | :01:30. | |
should not be extended, any invitation, to this House to such a | :01:31. | :01:37. | |
person as Donald Trump. First, in respect of the point of order just | :01:38. | :01:41. | |
raised by the honourable gentleman, can I thank him and add nearly that | :01:42. | :01:48. | |
I responded to a substantive point of order on this matter yesterday | :01:49. | :01:53. | |
and I think it only fair to say there is no need for me to provide a | :01:54. | :01:57. | |
running commentary today? In respect of the honourable gentleman, can I | :01:58. | :02:04. | |
also thank him for what he said? He does not mince his words. He says | :02:05. | :02:11. | |
what he thinks. He always has done. He is respected for that. Across the | :02:12. | :02:16. | |
House. Sometimes he agrees with me, sometimes he doesn't. But his | :02:17. | :02:22. | |
respect for and loyalty to the institutions of the country, | :02:23. | :02:27. | |
including the institutions within Parliament, is, I think, universally | :02:28. | :02:32. | |
acknowledged. I thank him for that and I think others will too. Point | :02:33. | :02:40. | |
of order. I agree entirely with what my right honourable friend has said | :02:41. | :02:44. | |
with respect to the Speaker and I am not always in agreement with the | :02:45. | :02:48. | |
Speaker either but there is a worrying breach of etiquette that | :02:49. | :02:51. | |
has broken out now over the last few months of members clapping in this | :02:52. | :02:56. | |
Chamber. Is there anything within this power to do anything about | :02:57. | :03:02. | |
that? Members should not do so and the answer is that maybe I should be | :03:03. | :03:10. | |
even more robust. I usually am pretty robust. The point was made | :03:11. | :03:14. | |
yesterday about clapping. It should not happen. One has to deal with | :03:15. | :03:18. | |
every situation as it arises and sometimes it is better to let a | :03:19. | :03:22. | |
thing pass and to make a song and dance about it. But I respect the | :03:23. | :03:26. | |
honourable gentleman's commitment to tradition. If people want to change | :03:27. | :03:31. | |
those traditions they should argue the case for such change. I am no | :03:32. | :03:34. | |
stranger to that phenomenon. Point of order. If ever a statement | :03:35. | :03:40. | |
deserved clapping, yours did yesterday, in my opinion. I want to | :03:41. | :03:45. | |
raise the question of irrevocable T because we are about to go into | :03:46. | :03:48. | |
committee of the full House when just about every amendment we will | :03:49. | :03:52. | |
discuss trends on the question of whether clause 50 is irrevocable or | :03:53. | :03:59. | |
not. We have had the Supreme Court silent on that matter. The | :04:00. | :04:05. | |
Government's guidance is, the Brexit Secretary said on committee, I | :04:06. | :04:10. | |
quote, it may not be revocable, I don't know. There is not much | :04:11. | :04:13. | |
guidance from the Government on the matter. Given the importance of the | :04:14. | :04:18. | |
amendments were about to discuss in committee and given they hang on | :04:19. | :04:20. | |
this question of whether or not clause 50 is irrevocable once | :04:21. | :04:26. | |
invoked, is there any way we can get some guidance from the chair or from | :04:27. | :04:32. | |
the government before we move into debate without that basic piece of | :04:33. | :04:35. | |
information which would be important for honourable members? | :04:36. | :04:43. | |
The Right Honourable gentleman raises an important point but I am | :04:44. | :04:49. | |
not convinced it is a point of order for the chair, but I have a sense | :04:50. | :04:58. | |
that on this occasion the right honourable gentleman is perhaps more | :04:59. | :05:02. | |
interested in what he has to say to me than anything I might have to say | :05:03. | :05:07. | |
to him. He has got his point on the record. The reason I am not | :05:08. | :05:11. | |
convinced it is not a matter for me, and I am looking to inspiration for | :05:12. | :05:18. | |
people with legal expertise, is that it is not for the speaker to seek to | :05:19. | :05:23. | |
interpret treaties, that does not fall within my auspices. And so I | :05:24. | :05:29. | |
think my best advice to the right honourable gentleman is that he | :05:30. | :05:36. | |
should follow his own instincts and counsel. He has been doing that for | :05:37. | :05:41. | |
some decades. And if he is dissatisfied with my answer, knowing | :05:42. | :05:45. | |
what persistence fellow he is rather imagine he will be pestering the | :05:46. | :05:50. | |
government front bench on this matter in the upcoming debates. | :05:51. | :05:59. | |
Point of order, Sir Gerald Howard. Further to the point made by my | :06:00. | :06:02. | |
honourable friend the games but are, I entirely support him, I have | :06:03. | :06:06. | |
enjoyed a very good relationship with the chair, yesterday did | :06:07. | :06:13. | |
however caused some of us some concern. It was noticeable there was | :06:14. | :06:20. | |
great enthusiasm on the other side and a rather subdued aspect on this | :06:21. | :06:26. | |
side. We want to support you in the chair. The relationship between the | :06:27. | :06:30. | |
United Kingdom and the United States is extremely important and the Prime | :06:31. | :06:35. | |
Minister in the view of many of us managed to secure a very favourable | :06:36. | :06:39. | |
outcome of what was undoubtedly a tricky visit. And whilst I was keen | :06:40. | :06:46. | |
yesterday not to accuse you of an executive order in respect of | :06:47. | :06:50. | |
another matter, I do hope Mr Speaker that you will help us to ensure that | :06:51. | :06:55. | |
we can have full confidence in your impartiality because that is the way | :06:56. | :06:59. | |
that this house has to proceed. The honourable gentleman is quite right. | :07:00. | :07:08. | |
The only thing I will say to the honourable gentleman and I say it in | :07:09. | :07:17. | |
a very understated way is this, I referred in the course of my | :07:18. | :07:22. | |
response yesterday to the lockers of the Speaker, the responsibility of | :07:23. | :07:26. | |
the speaker in respect of the matter that he was racing with me. They | :07:27. | :07:32. | |
whilst I completely understand that there can be different views about | :07:33. | :07:36. | |
this matter and we have heard some of them, which should always and be | :07:37. | :07:46. | |
treated with respect, I was commenting on a matter which does | :07:47. | :07:51. | |
fall within the remit of the chair. The house has always understood that | :07:52. | :07:54. | |
the chair has a role in these matters. If the honourable gentleman | :07:55. | :08:00. | |
disagrees with the means of my exercising it that is one point, or | :08:01. | :08:05. | |
if he does not approve of my manner, I cannot think he imagines me to | :08:06. | :08:09. | |
robust for his liking as he's no stranger to blunt speaking himself, | :08:10. | :08:15. | |
but if that is his view so it. But I was honestly and honourably seeking | :08:16. | :08:18. | |
to discharge my responsibilities to the house. I think in the interests | :08:19. | :08:23. | |
of the house we should move on to other matters but I thank him for | :08:24. | :08:27. | |
what he has said. If there are no further points of order we come now | :08:28. | :08:32. | |
to the ten minute rule motion, Holly Lynch. Thank you, I beg to move that | :08:33. | :08:38. | |
we'd be given to bring a bill to make certain offences, groovy is our | :08:39. | :08:45. | |
actual bodily harm and common assault, aggravated when perpetrated | :08:46. | :08:49. | |
against a constable, firefighter, doctor, paramedic or nurse and the | :08:50. | :08:52. | |
execution of his or her duty or against a person assisting these | :08:53. | :08:57. | |
people in their duty to make provisions to require those | :08:58. | :09:00. | |
suspected of certain assault which prose I help risk including spitting | :09:01. | :09:05. | |
to undergo blood tests and make it an offence without reasonable excuse | :09:06. | :09:09. | |
to refuse to undergo such tests to make provision about the sentences | :09:10. | :09:13. | |
of those convicted and for connected purposes. I come to the chamber once | :09:14. | :09:18. | |
again Madam Deputy Speaker to raise the profile of the risks facing | :09:19. | :09:23. | |
those working on the front line of our emergency services. I come to | :09:24. | :09:25. | |
seek approval for new legislation which would offer police officers, | :09:26. | :09:30. | |
firefighters, doctors and nurses and paramedics greater protection from | :09:31. | :09:34. | |
harm than existing legislation currently allows. Having been out | :09:35. | :09:38. | |
with all of the emergency services in my constituency can I start by | :09:39. | :09:42. | |
paying tribute to the work they do. Behind the uniform they are | :09:43. | :09:45. | |
dedicated and brave individuals who face risks they should not have do | :09:46. | :09:50. | |
an almost daily basis. They are routinely going above and beyond in | :09:51. | :09:53. | |
order to keep the public safe. Yet when someone sets out to | :09:54. | :09:57. | |
deliberately injure or assault and emergency responder the laws in | :09:58. | :10:00. | |
place must convey how unacceptable this is in the strongest possible | :10:01. | :10:05. | |
terms. This bill sets out to do just that. I want to take the opportunity | :10:06. | :10:09. | |
to thank the many members who on a cross-party basis when support my | :10:10. | :10:15. | |
campaign. I launched the campaign having spent a Friday evening in | :10:16. | :10:17. | |
August out on patrol with West Yorkshire Police. Into the evening I | :10:18. | :10:26. | |
joined a PC who was responding to a 999 col. A routine stop quickly | :10:27. | :10:30. | |
turned nasty and I was so concerned that I rang them a name myself to | :10:31. | :10:33. | |
stress just how urgently needed back-up. Thankfully other officers | :10:34. | :10:42. | |
arrived soon after to manage the situation and no injuries were | :10:43. | :10:45. | |
sustained on that occasion but I saw the dangers for myself and realise | :10:46. | :10:48. | |
how vulnerable officers are out on their own. Following that incident | :10:49. | :10:53. | |
and having secured a debate on this issue police officers from all over | :10:54. | :10:57. | |
the country started to contact me with their own harrowing stories of | :10:58. | :11:01. | |
being attacked whilst on Tuesday. What has most shocked me and | :11:02. | :11:04. | |
depresses police officers is that sentences handed down to offenders | :11:05. | :11:08. | |
for assaulting the police often fail to reflect the seriousness of the | :11:09. | :11:12. | |
crime or more crucially serve as a deterrent. To assault a police | :11:13. | :11:16. | |
officer is to show complete disregard for law and order. Our | :11:17. | :11:21. | |
shared values and democracy itself. That must be reflected in sentencing | :11:22. | :11:26. | |
particularly for those who are repeat offenders. Many officers | :11:27. | :11:30. | |
described feeling like they had suffered an injustice twice. Firstly | :11:31. | :11:33. | |
at the hands of the offender and then in the courts when sentences | :11:34. | :11:38. | |
were unduly lenient. Within two weeks of the incident involving the | :11:39. | :11:42. | |
PC and myself, another PC from Halifax was assaulted when during an | :11:43. | :11:46. | |
arrest and angry male grabbed his radio and used it to strike him | :11:47. | :11:51. | |
repeatedly in the head. I am delighted that that PC can join us | :11:52. | :11:55. | |
today to support this legislation change which would help to give him | :11:56. | :11:59. | |
and his colleagues INAUDIBLE . During the debate in October I | :12:00. | :12:04. | |
outlined the floors with the current system for collecting data about how | :12:05. | :12:07. | |
many assaults there were an Holly Sonders is so I am glad -- there | :12:08. | :12:16. | |
were on police officers. Official statistics produced by the Home | :12:17. | :12:20. | |
Office suggest they just over 23,000 assaults on police officers last | :12:21. | :12:25. | |
year. 450 a week, equating to an officer being assaulted every 22 | :12:26. | :12:30. | |
minutes. Just this week the Police Federation published the results of | :12:31. | :12:34. | |
their welfare survey undertaken by 17,000 serving police officers. It | :12:35. | :12:39. | |
revealed it is actually closer to 6000 assault every day, and assault | :12:40. | :12:45. | |
every 13 seconds with an average police officer being assaulted 19 | :12:46. | :12:49. | |
times a year. In the debate at the end of last year I remember my | :12:50. | :12:53. | |
honourable friend the member for Newport East telling the chamber | :12:54. | :12:58. | |
about the mother she had met who told their children that their dad | :12:59. | :13:02. | |
was the contest man in the world to explain his bruises on coming home | :13:03. | :13:06. | |
from work as a police officer. -- was the clumsiest man in the world. | :13:07. | :13:14. | |
The bill today would not just protect police officers, it would | :13:15. | :13:17. | |
cover all blue light emergency responders. A report published by | :13:18. | :13:22. | |
the Yorkshire Ambulance Service just before Christmas revealed staff | :13:23. | :13:26. | |
based violence and aggression on a weekly basis. A 50% increase in | :13:27. | :13:30. | |
reported incidents of attacks on staff with 606 incidents reported in | :13:31. | :13:38. | |
2015-2016. A paramedic in Leeds told the BBC that he faced three serious | :13:39. | :13:43. | |
assaults in five years. He had been bitten, head-butted and threatened | :13:44. | :13:47. | |
with a knife. West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service have also | :13:48. | :13:51. | |
reported assaults. On bonfire night they received 1043 calls with crews | :13:52. | :13:57. | |
attending 265 incidents. It's disgraceful that on the busiest | :13:58. | :14:01. | |
night of the year with those pressures firefighters in West | :14:02. | :14:04. | |
Yorkshire were subject to 19 attacks overnight. This Bill will ensure | :14:05. | :14:08. | |
anyone who assaults and emergency service responder and is charged | :14:09. | :14:18. | |
with a crime will be eligible for a tougher sentence because an assault | :14:19. | :14:22. | |
on emergency service worker is an assault on society. It is | :14:23. | :14:26. | |
unacceptable public servants working in their communities protecting | :14:27. | :14:29. | |
people and helping the vulnerable would be subject to assault as they | :14:30. | :14:32. | |
go about their jobs and these changes would go some way to | :14:33. | :14:36. | |
reflecting that. The second part of this bill aims to deal with the | :14:37. | :14:40. | |
hideous act of spitting at emergency service workers. As well as being a | :14:41. | :14:45. | |
horrible, spitting blood and saliva add another human being can pose a | :14:46. | :14:56. | |
risk of transmitting a range of infectious diseases. Someone like | :14:57. | :14:57. | |
changing or a lethal consequences. At an event organised by the member | :14:58. | :15:01. | |
for Wolverhampton South West I met two police officers and they both | :15:02. | :15:04. | |
had blood spat in their faces was trying to arrest a violent offender. | :15:05. | :15:09. | |
They both had to undergo anti-viral treatments to reduce the risk of | :15:10. | :15:13. | |
contracting the disease and faced a six-month wait to find out the | :15:14. | :15:16. | |
treatment had been successful. During that time one was advised he | :15:17. | :15:22. | |
could not see his brother who was undergoing cancer treatment because | :15:23. | :15:24. | |
the risk of passing on an infection was too high. He was also advised | :15:25. | :15:29. | |
not to see his parents because they are in such read her contact with | :15:30. | :15:33. | |
his brother. There was a false positive results are happy to be and | :15:34. | :15:37. | |
for six months until conclusive test results came through he was | :15:38. | :15:40. | |
understandably reluctant to be close to his wife or children fearing for | :15:41. | :15:45. | |
their own well-being. I am pleased that both men are also here today to | :15:46. | :15:49. | |
lend their support to these changes. Which had they been in place at the | :15:50. | :15:54. | |
time might have saved them such an agonising wait. In previous speeches | :15:55. | :15:57. | |
I have made on this issue I shared with MP's the story of a police | :15:58. | :16:03. | |
officer in the Ukraine who died after contracting TB from an | :16:04. | :16:06. | |
offender who spat that whilst she was trying to arrest him. At the | :16:07. | :16:10. | |
moment if an emergency service worker is spat at the can only take | :16:11. | :16:14. | |
a blood sample from an individual with permission. Needless to say | :16:15. | :16:21. | |
that in the case I mentioned before in this country the offender was not | :16:22. | :16:25. | |
in a helpful mood so subjected them to treatments and a six-month wait. | :16:26. | :16:31. | |
Laws in Australia where refusal to provide a blood sample can result | :16:32. | :16:35. | |
any fine and custodial sentence. My bill will mean that refusing to | :16:36. | :16:39. | |
provide a blood sample in itself be a crime punished by a fine or | :16:40. | :16:44. | |
custodial sentence. If an emergency service worker, doctor or nurse has | :16:45. | :16:48. | |
had to endure being spat that this measure will hopefully save them | :16:49. | :16:52. | |
having to endure a six-month ordeal to wait to see the consequences are | :16:53. | :16:56. | |
serious. It has been made clear to me Madam Deputy Speaker that the | :16:57. | :17:01. | |
experience I had out on the streets in my constituency was not an | :17:02. | :17:05. | |
isolated incident. It reflects the daily challenge police officers | :17:06. | :17:09. | |
face. Sadly paramedics, firefighters, doctors and nurses | :17:10. | :17:12. | |
also need these protections but it's worth | :17:13. | :17:23. | |
remembering when they find themselves under the attack it is | :17:24. | :17:26. | |
the police who is called. I hope this change in sentencing will go as | :17:27. | :17:29. | |
well weighted givings dedicated public servants the protections they | :17:30. | :17:31. | |
should not require but sadly do. I am not naive to the nature of ten | :17:32. | :17:34. | |
minute rule Bill is nor am I out any allusions about where we are in the | :17:35. | :17:37. | |
parliamentary calendar but I hope my details have been heard today and | :17:38. | :17:40. | |
will be reflected on its merits. I commend this bill to the house. The | :17:41. | :17:48. | |
question is that the honourable member have lead to bring in the | :17:49. | :17:57. | |
bill. The ayes habit. -- habit. Who will prepare and bring in the bill? | :17:58. | :18:02. | |
Con again, live sub Oral Roberts, Michael Dugher, Scott Mann, Hannah | :18:03. | :18:07. | |
Badelj, Tom Blenkinsop, Tracy Braeburn, Jim Shannon, and myself. | :18:08. | :18:31. | |
Second reading what day? 24th March. 24th March. Thank you. | :18:32. | :19:00. | |
The clerk will proceed to read the orders of the day. European Union | :19:01. | :19:05. | |
notification of withdrawal Bill committee. Order. | :19:06. | :19:32. | |
Order. European Union Notification of Withdrawal Bill. We begin with | :19:33. | :19:43. | |
new clause one which it will be convenient to consider the new | :19:44. | :19:47. | |
clauses and amendments considered on the selection paper. Point of order. | :19:48. | :19:53. | |
Thank you. I would be grateful if you could explain to the House, not | :19:54. | :19:58. | |
just to the House, but to the country of of all the amendments | :19:59. | :20:03. | |
that have been grouped for debate today, the House will only be voting | :20:04. | :20:08. | |
on new clause 1 later. I think the honourable gentleman knows what the | :20:09. | :20:12. | |
answer will be to this. This is a very early start for points of order | :20:13. | :20:17. | |
before we've started, but as he knows, the way that the grouping has | :20:18. | :20:21. | |
been arranged was the subject of a programme motion which was debated, | :20:22. | :20:27. | |
which was voted on last week. So in fact, the grouping of the amendments | :20:28. | :20:31. | |
is as was on the programme motion. As he says the lead amendment will | :20:32. | :20:37. | |
be put for a division and subsequent amendments depends on what happens | :20:38. | :20:42. | |
in the rest of the debate. So we begin with new clause 1 which | :20:43. | :20:47. | |
will be it will be convenient to consider new clauses. Keir Starmer | :20:48. | :20:54. | |
to move new clause 1. Thank you. I rise to move new clause 1 in doing | :20:55. | :21:00. | |
so, I will obviously touch on other new clauses in the bucket. It is | :21:01. | :21:07. | |
important, I think, as we go lieu this debate today which is probably | :21:08. | :21:11. | |
the most important of the debates that we've had thus far and are | :21:12. | :21:17. | |
going to have in relation to these amendments that we remind ourselves | :21:18. | :21:21. | |
of the context. The negotiations that will take place under Article | :21:22. | :21:26. | |
50 will be the most difficult and the most complex and the most | :21:27. | :21:31. | |
important for decades. Arguably since the Second World War. Amongst | :21:32. | :21:38. | |
other things it's important that we ensure the best outcome for our | :21:39. | :21:43. | |
economy and jobs, the trading agreements and as I've said on a | :21:44. | :21:48. | |
number of occasions, what that entails is very clear. That we must | :21:49. | :21:56. | |
have access, tariff-free access to the single market, barrier-free | :21:57. | :22:00. | |
access, regulatory alignment and full access for services as well as | :22:01. | :22:04. | |
goods and in the White Paper, that was published last Thursday, the | :22:05. | :22:07. | |
Government accepts the strengths of those arguments about the trading | :22:08. | :22:12. | |
agreements. It's also important that we have the right ongoing future | :22:13. | :22:15. | |
relationship with our EU partners and Labour's has been forceful in | :22:16. | :22:18. | |
arguing for maintaining close collaboration with our parten nears | :22:19. | :22:23. | |
the fields of medicine, science, research, education, culture and | :22:24. | :22:26. | |
security as well as policing and counter-terrorism. Now, although | :22:27. | :22:32. | |
both the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State maintain the idea | :22:33. | :22:36. | |
that all this can be agreed within two years, leaving just an | :22:37. | :22:40. | |
implementation stage, the reality is that we will two deals. The Article | :22:41. | :22:48. | |
50 agreement and a new UK-EU treaty setting out the new arrangements | :22:49. | :22:51. | |
along with transitional arrangements. But to be clear, we | :22:52. | :22:58. | |
all have a vested interest on behalf of all our constituents in getting | :22:59. | :23:03. | |
the right outcome. And that raises the proper role of Parliament in | :23:04. | :23:08. | |
this process. And that's why I've consistently argued for three | :23:09. | :23:12. | |
elements of scrutiny and accountability and this is the | :23:13. | :23:15. | |
debate that in a sense has been going on for the last three months. | :23:16. | :23:21. | |
The first element, the element I started the argument for last | :23:22. | :23:26. | |
October was that at the start we should have a plan or White Paper, a | :23:27. | :23:30. | |
formal document setting out the negotiating objectives. That we | :23:31. | :23:33. | |
should then have a system for reporting back during the course of | :23:34. | :23:38. | |
the negotiations and that we should have a vote at the end of the | :23:39. | :23:41. | |
exercise, they are the three elements. They are three elements of | :23:42. | :23:47. | |
scrutiny and accountability I have. I will give way. Is it the case that | :23:48. | :23:54. | |
if all his amendments are rejected by the Government, the Labour Party | :23:55. | :23:58. | |
are simply going to endorse the third reading and support the | :23:59. | :24:01. | |
Government? What's the point in making this case for these | :24:02. | :24:07. | |
amendments he's going to cave in to what the Government want in Article | :24:08. | :24:11. | |
50? I'm not sure how helpful interventions are like that to a | :24:12. | :24:15. | |
debate which is actually really important about the scrutiny and | :24:16. | :24:21. | |
accountability. And just to be sure, just to be clear, nagging away, | :24:22. | :24:25. | |
pushing votes, making the argument over three months, we have got a | :24:26. | :24:31. | |
White Paper. And it is important. Nagging away, making the arguments, | :24:32. | :24:35. | |
we have got commitments about reporting back. Nagging away and | :24:36. | :24:40. | |
making the arguments we have got a commitment to the vote at the end of | :24:41. | :24:45. | |
the exercise. So when the charge is levelled at the Opposition that they | :24:46. | :24:50. | |
have not made the case and are not succeeding on the case for scrutiny | :24:51. | :24:53. | |
and accountability that simply doesn't match what has happened over | :24:54. | :24:59. | |
the last three months. Thank you. And he's right to point out that | :25:00. | :25:03. | |
progress has been made, but does he agree with me that in order to make | :25:04. | :25:08. | |
a vote at the end of the process meaningful, we have to have | :25:09. | :25:12. | |
meaningful scrutiny as the process is going on? And we have as a | :25:13. | :25:16. | |
Parliament to have the chance to say to the Government you must go back | :25:17. | :25:21. | |
and try to do better. Having an all or nothing vote at the end when all | :25:22. | :25:26. | |
of the discussions and negotiations are over is not in my definition | :25:27. | :25:31. | |
meaningful scrutiny. Does he agree with me? I'm grateful for that | :25:32. | :25:35. | |
intervention and I will come to this, but the central theme of the | :25:36. | :25:39. | |
case I will seek to make this afternoon is that a vote in this | :25:40. | :25:43. | |
House must be before the deal is concluded. That is the dividing line | :25:44. | :25:48. | |
that makes the real difference here, but I will make progress because - I | :25:49. | :25:56. | |
will give way. I'm grateful to the Secretary of State and I think that | :25:57. | :26:04. | |
this maybe helpful - forgive me. The Shadow Secretary of State. I | :26:05. | :26:10. | |
hope that this will be helpful to him because he has mentioned the | :26:11. | :26:14. | |
fact that the Government has made a commitment to a vote at the end of | :26:15. | :26:17. | |
the procedure. Later when I address the House I will be outlining what I | :26:18. | :26:22. | |
intend that vote shall be, but it maybe of assistance to him to know | :26:23. | :26:27. | |
what is proposed. First of all, we intend that the vote will cover not | :26:28. | :26:32. | |
only the withdrawal arrangements, but also the future relationship | :26:33. | :26:36. | |
with the European Union. We furthermore, I can confirm that the | :26:37. | :26:39. | |
Government will bring forward a motion on the final agreement to be | :26:40. | :26:43. | |
approved by both Houses of Parliament before it is concluded | :26:44. | :26:48. | |
and we expect and intend that this will happen before the European | :26:49. | :26:51. | |
Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement. I hope that's of | :26:52. | :26:59. | |
assistance. I'm very grateful for that | :27:00. | :27:05. | |
intervention. That is a huge and very important concession about the | :27:06. | :27:10. | |
process that we are to embark on. The argument I have made about a | :27:11. | :27:16. | |
vote... The argument I've made about a vote over the last three months is | :27:17. | :27:23. | |
that the vote most cover both the Article 50 deal on any future | :27:24. | :27:26. | |
relationship and I know for my colleague that's very important and | :27:27. | :27:29. | |
that that vote must take place before the deal is concluded and I | :27:30. | :27:33. | |
take that from what has just been said. I will give way. Thank you | :27:34. | :27:42. | |
very much. Would my Right Honourable and learned gentleman, I nearly said | :27:43. | :27:46. | |
friend, but I have to be careful, first of all would he agree with me | :27:47. | :27:50. | |
it's really important that as a nation and a House we now come | :27:51. | :27:54. | |
together, putting aside all the party political differences to do | :27:55. | :27:58. | |
the right thing by our country, but most importantly perhaps on the very | :27:59. | :28:02. | |
point he makes. Does he share my concern in the event of no deal | :28:03. | :28:09. | |
being reached, that this House must also decide what happens next? | :28:10. | :28:15. | |
I'm grateful for that intervention and I do agree and have made, I do | :28:16. | :28:20. | |
agree that we all have a responsibility to bring this country | :28:21. | :28:25. | |
back together. We are a deeply divided... The United Kingdom... I'm | :28:26. | :28:31. | |
dealing with this intervention if you don't mind. It what is | :28:32. | :28:37. | |
significant about what has just been said is that it covers the Article | :28:38. | :28:42. | |
50 agreement and it covers any future relationship. That is the | :28:43. | :28:47. | |
first time we've heard this. It is a very significant position by the | :28:48. | :28:50. | |
Government and I'm grateful that it has been made and it is very | :28:51. | :28:53. | |
important that it has been made because certainly I think across the | :28:54. | :28:57. | |
House there has been real anxiety that it should cover both bases. | :28:58. | :29:02. | |
Whether it goes far enough for the full-back position I'll reflect on | :29:03. | :29:06. | |
and ideally one would want that covered, but I don't want to under | :29:07. | :29:09. | |
play the significance of what has just been said about the two deals | :29:10. | :29:15. | |
because it is the first time that clarity has been given. It's the | :29:16. | :29:19. | |
first time that has been conceded. It's an argument I've been making | :29:20. | :29:22. | |
for three months and it's very important that it has now been | :29:23. | :29:26. | |
conceded. It's important for my colleagues and I'm sure it's | :29:27. | :29:29. | |
important for people across the House. Equally important, equally | :29:30. | :29:37. | |
important, is the timing in that it should be before the deal is | :29:38. | :29:41. | |
concluded. The great fear is there would be a concluded deal which | :29:42. | :29:46. | |
would make any vote in this House meaningless. Now, what I hope can | :29:47. | :29:56. | |
now happen on the back of that concession is what I anticipate will | :29:57. | :30:01. | |
happen in the European Parliament. That is by regularly reporting up, | :30:02. | :30:06. | |
updating the House, setting ot the direction of travel, there can be | :30:07. | :30:09. | |
agreement about progress and that what happens at the end doesn't come | :30:10. | :30:13. | |
as a surprise to any of us in this House. But what has been said by the | :30:14. | :30:20. | |
minister is a very significant statement of position which meets in | :30:21. | :30:25. | |
large part everything I have been driving at in new clause 1. I will | :30:26. | :30:33. | |
give way. I welcome as my honourable friend does the concession from the | :30:34. | :30:36. | |
Government benches, but does he agree as well as timing it is the | :30:37. | :30:40. | |
scope of that vote which is going to be absolutely vital? If we're faced | :30:41. | :30:47. | |
with a choice between a hard Brexit and WTO, that is no choice. The | :30:48. | :30:50. | |
Government will have to go back and renegotiate. | :30:51. | :30:59. | |
At the moment I agree that we should have as big a say as possible on all | :31:00. | :31:05. | |
of this, but I don't want to under state what has been conceded in the | :31:06. | :31:11. | |
last ten minutes. I do take the point, but I think where we have | :31:12. | :31:16. | |
made significant progress on scrutiny and accountability we | :31:17. | :31:20. | |
should recognise where we've got to. I will give way. Whilst I echo what | :31:21. | :31:27. | |
the honourable gentleman has said would you agree that instantly | :31:28. | :31:31. | |
leaping on a concession maybe a little unwise until we're quite | :31:32. | :31:36. | |
clear what is amounts to. I record a concession on a plan led to a speech | :31:37. | :31:41. | |
in Lancaster House which didn't take us much furtherment I would like to | :31:42. | :31:46. | |
be persuaded that a major concession has been made. Does he agree with me | :31:47. | :31:51. | |
that it would be helpful because we don't know what we're debating if we | :31:52. | :31:56. | |
continue from now on if the minister would try to catch the chairman's | :31:57. | :32:00. | |
eye after the Right Honourable gentleman has sat down so he can | :32:01. | :32:05. | |
explain in more detail what he's proposing than the subsequent debate | :32:06. | :32:11. | |
on this group of amendments and we will be altogether better informed. | :32:12. | :32:14. | |
I'm grateful for that intervention and I accept the point and I think | :32:15. | :32:19. | |
far be it from me to say what the procedure would be, but that would | :32:20. | :32:22. | |
be helpful because some of what has been said has been heard for the | :32:23. | :32:28. | |
first time today and we need to reflect on it. If indeed it is a | :32:29. | :32:38. | |
significant concession then shouldn't it be added to the face of | :32:39. | :32:43. | |
the Bill? So as it can be properly examined and analysed and come to | :32:44. | :32:48. | |
the House in a report stage with every member having the ability to | :32:49. | :32:50. | |
look at it? I recognise the strength of the | :32:51. | :33:06. | |
points made and there are of course other opportunities to examine what | :33:07. | :33:14. | |
has been conceded and ensure it might find its way onto the face of | :33:15. | :33:18. | |
the legislation. So I think it would be sensible if we recognise what has | :33:19. | :33:26. | |
been said. Here a little more detail if we can, and reflect on that | :33:27. | :33:30. | |
during the course of this afternoon and of course this bill does not | :33:31. | :33:34. | |
complete its passage today or in this house. I will give way. It is a | :33:35. | :33:41. | |
fair point, if somebody says do something in good faith you take it | :33:42. | :33:47. | |
on board. And don't push too hard and take what is a valuable | :33:48. | :33:52. | |
concession INAUDIBLE . I am grateful for that | :33:53. | :34:00. | |
intervention, I think it is, when an assurance is given in a debate such | :34:01. | :34:05. | |
as this it is a significant assurance. That having been said, of | :34:06. | :34:09. | |
course something on the face of a statute at some later point is even | :34:10. | :34:18. | |
better. I will give way. I am grateful, I came into this chamber | :34:19. | :34:22. | |
with a full intention of supporting Amendment one and I still feel we | :34:23. | :34:26. | |
need to push this to a vote. However I feel what is being said and that | :34:27. | :34:30. | |
he wants to trust and believe this government. If we saw a manuscript | :34:31. | :34:36. | |
amendment before the end of the afternoon I would find it much more | :34:37. | :34:40. | |
easy to not vote on amendment one than I do at the moment. Does he | :34:41. | :34:44. | |
agree that a manuscript amendment would be helpful? I would take that | :34:45. | :34:51. | |
point. Can I make some progress because we have not got very far. So | :34:52. | :34:56. | |
far as the White Paper, I have not got very far! As far as the White | :34:57. | :35:03. | |
Paper is concerned, I am looking at the big picture and this is | :35:04. | :35:07. | |
important for trade unions and working people and constituents who | :35:08. | :35:12. | |
have raised these points, in the White Paper there is the commitment | :35:13. | :35:17. | |
to convert all EU derived rights including workers' rights into | :35:18. | :35:19. | |
domestic law of paragraph 7.1 and I don't think that commitment has been | :35:20. | :35:26. | |
heard loudly enough and we certainly intend to hold the government that | :35:27. | :35:30. | |
every step of the way along with other EU rights such as | :35:31. | :35:33. | |
environmental rights and consumer rights. I have also consistently | :35:34. | :35:38. | |
argued that the Prime Minister cannot in the Article 50 | :35:39. | :35:41. | |
negotiations negotiate to change domestic law or policy which would | :35:42. | :35:48. | |
require primary legislation. In paragraph 1.8 of the White Paper it | :35:49. | :35:54. | |
is made clear that the government does not accept that the Prime | :35:55. | :35:58. | |
Minister would have that authority and expressly references separate | :35:59. | :36:04. | |
bills on immigration and on customs. I highlight that because there is a | :36:05. | :36:08. | |
huge concern amongst my colleagues about the threat made by the Prime | :36:09. | :36:11. | |
Minister to alter our social and economic model and turn the UK into | :36:12. | :36:18. | |
a tax haven. That cannot happen. That cannot happen without primary | :36:19. | :36:21. | |
legislation. It is important we note that. I rather agree with the other | :36:22. | :36:33. | |
members, given the government's position just outlined, would my | :36:34. | :36:36. | |
honourable friend agree that the only substantial reason for the | :36:37. | :36:39. | |
government not to agree to the new clause one is to deny the other | :36:40. | :36:44. | |
house vote on a resolution and therefore the minister should | :36:45. | :36:51. | |
explain why that is the position? I think we will have to wait and hear | :36:52. | :36:55. | |
from the Minister, I hear what is said in the intervention. So far as | :36:56. | :37:01. | |
the vote is concerned, there has been a change of position and it's | :37:02. | :37:07. | |
important I just set that out. Initially the Secretary of State was | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
saying back in October that he would observe the requirements of treaty | :37:12. | :37:16. | |
ratification. Then in December at this dispatch box he almost said we | :37:17. | :37:20. | |
would get a vote using the word that it was inconceivable that we would | :37:21. | :37:25. | |
not. Then just before Christmas at the liaison committee the Prime | :37:26. | :37:28. | |
Minister seemed to back away from that altogether under questioning | :37:29. | :37:31. | |
from the chairman of the Brexit select committee and the fact of a | :37:32. | :37:36. | |
vote was only conceded after Christmas. And then in paragraph | :37:37. | :37:42. | |
1.12 of the White Paper there was a commitment to a vote on the final | :37:43. | :37:46. | |
deal. Today it takes us a lot further forward and I think that | :37:47. | :37:49. | |
demonstrates how by chipping away and arguing away we are making | :37:50. | :37:53. | |
progress on accountability and scrutiny. I will. I thank my | :37:54. | :38:00. | |
honourable friend forgiving way, he may have been listening and had the | :38:01. | :38:03. | |
detail of what the ministers said in more detail than I did but could you | :38:04. | :38:07. | |
tell me was it clear whether or not we would actually get a vote in this | :38:08. | :38:13. | |
house if there was no deal? If the government failed to get a deal with | :38:14. | :38:18. | |
the EU, which none of us want to see, but if that happens was it | :38:19. | :38:21. | |
clear to him from what the Minister said whether or not we would get a | :38:22. | :38:27. | |
vote in parliament in those circumstances? No and I think we | :38:28. | :38:30. | |
need to press the Minister on that when he rises to his feet. I will. | :38:31. | :38:39. | |
He has just very ably outlined what the government position has been to | :38:40. | :38:44. | |
date, showing us all very ably that the government have made quite major | :38:45. | :38:48. | |
changes in positions today. Against the background of the situation | :38:49. | :38:51. | |
about that change of position appears to have taken place when we | :38:52. | :38:58. | |
are debating so many different venue -- differently nuanced amendments, | :38:59. | :39:05. | |
is it agreeable that the government should... Can I ask that | :39:06. | :39:13. | |
interventions be a bit more brief, we only have four hours and a lot of | :39:14. | :39:16. | |
people to get through. Just to make intervention is a bit more brief. | :39:17. | :39:23. | |
Here Starmer. I am grateful for that intervention, I think it it would be | :39:24. | :39:30. | |
helpful if we had both clarification and a written form if possible of | :39:31. | :39:35. | |
the gym session which has been made so we can all see -- of the | :39:36. | :39:41. | |
concession which has been made so we can all see what it is. Madam Deputy | :39:42. | :39:47. | |
Speaker, given that we do as the honourable lady was saying require | :39:48. | :39:51. | |
some sort of information as to what it is the government have actually | :39:52. | :39:55. | |
put forward, is there any way you can require the government to put | :39:56. | :39:59. | |
before us a manuscript amendment so we actually know what it is we are | :40:00. | :40:02. | |
debating for the rest of the afternoon? The Minister will be | :40:03. | :40:06. | |
speaking and I am sure he will explain them. Keir Starmer. Thank | :40:07. | :40:16. | |
you. I am sure the Minister hears what is being said, what has been | :40:17. | :40:22. | |
said this morning is significant, it is a concession and it does no need | :40:23. | :40:26. | |
to be reduced to writing. I think a great deal of this debate should be | :40:27. | :40:33. | |
spent probing the concession which has been made. I'm going to make | :40:34. | :40:37. | |
progress because I have barely got through two or three sentences | :40:38. | :40:40. | |
before giving way so I do not think anyone could accuse me of not | :40:41. | :40:45. | |
conceding. In the end this comes down to a very stark choice for this | :40:46. | :40:55. | |
house, if we are to have a vote. Either it is before the deal is | :40:56. | :41:02. | |
concluded or it is afterwards in which case it would be a feature | :41:03. | :41:08. | |
complete. And this concession appears to suggest it is before it | :41:09. | :41:11. | |
is concluded and I think that timing is critical. I recognise there are | :41:12. | :41:17. | |
other issues which come off the back of that but the timing is critical. | :41:18. | :41:22. | |
Because the sequence of events at the end of the exercise is extremely | :41:23. | :41:26. | |
important in terms of what this house can meaningfully say or do | :41:27. | :41:32. | |
about the agreement which is put to us for a vote. I thank my honourable | :41:33. | :41:38. | |
friend forgiving way. Does he agree with me it's not just the issue of | :41:39. | :41:46. | |
the timing of the vote, it's what happens if this house declines to | :41:47. | :41:50. | |
accept the deal the government has put forward, the Prime Minister said | :41:51. | :41:54. | |
on the 25th of January if this parliament is not willing to accept | :41:55. | :41:59. | |
a deal that has been decided upon with the European Union then as I | :42:00. | :42:03. | |
have said we will have to fall back on other arrangements. That does not | :42:04. | :42:07. | |
guarantee this house has the final decision on our future relationship | :42:08. | :42:12. | |
with the EU. I am grateful for that intervention, I think that exchange | :42:13. | :42:18. | |
which was referred to as the cause of concern about the vote being | :42:19. | :42:23. | |
before the deal is concluded. But we will need greater clarification | :42:24. | :42:34. | |
about the extent of the vote. I'm going to press on because I am not | :42:35. | :42:38. | |
sure that me trying to explain what the Minister is going to tell us is | :42:39. | :42:41. | |
working particularly well. If it's of any assistance to the | :42:42. | :42:52. | |
honourable gentleman and to the committee, with your leave I would | :42:53. | :42:58. | |
very much hope to be able to speak immediately after the Shadow | :42:59. | :43:03. | |
Secretary of State for Health. -- Secretary of State. I have made the | :43:04. | :43:10. | |
case for a White Paper, made the case for reporting back, made the | :43:11. | :43:15. | |
case for a vote, we have now got this concession. I think the most | :43:16. | :43:18. | |
helpful thing is if honourable members are given the opportunity to | :43:19. | :43:22. | |
test what the Minister has said this morning. Thank you. New clause one, | :43:23. | :43:28. | |
parliamentary approval for agreements with the union. The | :43:29. | :43:33. | |
question is that new clause one B read a second time, Minister David | :43:34. | :43:41. | |
Jones. I am very grateful, I had hoped to speak at the end of this | :43:42. | :43:46. | |
debate but I think it may be of assistance to the committee if I | :43:47. | :43:50. | |
deal with some of the matter is the shadow secretary of state touched on | :43:51. | :43:55. | |
in his speech. However I don't want to go into the details of the | :43:56. | :44:00. | |
various amendments which other members will wish to speak to win. | :44:01. | :44:04. | |
With your consent I would like to address those at the end of the | :44:05. | :44:10. | |
session. Could I first of all repeat what I said to the honourable | :44:11. | :44:14. | |
gentleman when I intervened on him a few moments ago, the government has | :44:15. | :44:20. | |
repeatedly from this dispatch box committed to a vote on the final | :44:21. | :44:24. | |
deal, a vote in both houses before the deal comes into force. And this | :44:25. | :44:29. | |
I repeat and confirm will cover not only the withdrawal agreement but | :44:30. | :44:35. | |
also the future arrangement that we propose with the European Union. And | :44:36. | :44:40. | |
I can confirm again that the government will bring forward a | :44:41. | :44:45. | |
motion on the final agreement, if I can just finish the sentence. It's | :44:46. | :44:52. | |
rather important. A motion on the final agreement to be approved by | :44:53. | :44:56. | |
both houses of parliament before it is concluded and we expect and | :44:57. | :45:01. | |
intend that this will happen before the European Parliament debates and | :45:02. | :45:04. | |
votes on the final agreement. I give way to the Right honourable | :45:05. | :45:08. | |
gentleman. Stressed to the house again that this applies only to the | :45:09. | :45:13. | |
withdrawal agreement and a final agreement on the future relationship | :45:14. | :45:18. | |
between the UK and EU. It is my view the former is feasible within two | :45:19. | :45:29. | |
years, the latter is highly unlikely within two years, can he tell the | :45:30. | :45:32. | |
house what will happen in that case, I withdrawal agreement is agreed but | :45:33. | :45:34. | |
not a new future agreement between the UK and the EU? I must preface | :45:35. | :45:38. | |
that we do not expect we will not achieve such agreement. But my right | :45:39. | :45:44. | |
honourable friend the Prime Minister has already made clear that if we | :45:45. | :45:48. | |
cannot come to an agreement then clearly we will have to fall back on | :45:49. | :45:51. | |
other arrangements. That is something upon which... That is | :45:52. | :45:57. | |
something upon which the government has consistently been clear, I give | :45:58. | :46:03. | |
way. The conversation we had yesterday about the importance of | :46:04. | :46:08. | |
transitional arrangements, he cannot guarantee the trade agreement will | :46:09. | :46:11. | |
be concluded within two years so if you don't have a transitional | :46:12. | :46:14. | |
agreement it's like jumping out of an aeroplane without a parachute, | :46:15. | :46:19. | |
why will he not agree to negotiate the transitional arrangement now in | :46:20. | :46:25. | |
case we need it? What the honourable lady says is of course very true. | :46:26. | :46:32. | |
But clearly, an agreement is a matter which has to be no goatee -- | :46:33. | :46:39. | |
negotiated by two sides and it's always possible we cannot achieve | :46:40. | :46:43. | |
such an agreement but I believe the will. But we have also made it clear | :46:44. | :46:46. | |
that what we do see as important is during the course of the | :46:47. | :46:50. | |
negotiations for what ever the new arrangements are that we consider | :46:51. | :46:53. | |
what implementation period may be necessary at the end of those | :46:54. | :46:57. | |
agreements. Again we have made that clear already. I give way to my | :46:58. | :47:04. | |
right honourable friend. I am grateful for intervening at this | :47:05. | :47:07. | |
stage and allowing us to have this process. He says that Parliament | :47:08. | :47:13. | |
will have a vote before the agreement is concluded, does that | :47:14. | :47:19. | |
mean before agreement has been reached with the other 27 or after a | :47:20. | :47:24. | |
agreement has been reached but before it's been put into effect? I | :47:25. | :47:29. | |
think what parliamentary sovereignty requires is that Parliament should | :47:30. | :47:35. | |
have the ability to influence the government's position before it | :47:36. | :47:38. | |
concludes the deal so that those with whom the government is dealing, | :47:39. | :47:43. | |
the other parties of the negotiation, now that the British | :47:44. | :47:46. | |
government has got to be able to produce an agreement which will get | :47:47. | :47:50. | |
the support of parliament. If you just wait until everything, hands | :47:51. | :47:55. | |
have been shaken with all the other Europeans, then you come here, then | :47:56. | :47:59. | |
it means Parliament is told if you reject it you have nothing. It's a | :48:00. | :48:05. | |
disaster. Which would give a government a majority but not a very | :48:06. | :48:07. | |
satisfactory conclusion. I fully appreciate the points. This | :48:08. | :48:17. | |
is clearly going to be a complex, lengthy and difficult. Can I deal | :48:18. | :48:21. | |
with my Right Honourable friend's point first? It will be a difficult | :48:22. | :48:26. | |
and complex agreement and it will be, of course, a matter that will a | :48:27. | :48:32. | |
negotiation that will from time to time be subject to reports to this | :48:33. | :48:35. | |
House, to the Brexit Select Committee and so on. But what we are | :48:36. | :48:42. | |
proposing and what I'm committing to from this dispatch box today is that | :48:43. | :48:46. | |
before that final agreement is concluded and it would, if you like, | :48:47. | :48:50. | |
but the final draft agreement, it would be put to a vote of this House | :48:51. | :48:55. | |
and a vote of the other place and that we intend will be before it is | :48:56. | :48:59. | |
put to the European Parliament and I think that that, I hope, is as clear | :49:00. | :49:05. | |
as I can be. I will give way to the honourable gentleman The EU 27 will | :49:06. | :49:11. | |
decide a deal in their interests. If that deal comes to this House and we | :49:12. | :49:14. | |
vote it down and subsequently the commission and the European | :49:15. | :49:17. | |
Parliament agree it and say like it or lump it, what will we do then? | :49:18. | :49:23. | |
I would have thought that in the circumstance that this House had | :49:24. | :49:27. | |
voted it down it would be highly unlikely that it would be put to the | :49:28. | :49:30. | |
European Parliament, but there are all sorts of sin aur yos that... I | :49:31. | :49:38. | |
give way. Just for clarification, I think the minister said there would | :49:39. | :49:42. | |
be a vote on the final draft agreement. I wanted to check I heard | :49:43. | :49:47. | |
him correctly when he said that? Before the agreement is finally | :49:48. | :49:50. | |
concluded in other words. That's the intention of this Parliament. I want | :49:51. | :49:59. | |
to come back to the point made about the two deals that are being | :50:00. | :50:03. | |
negotiated in parallel, the exit deal and the framework for our | :50:04. | :50:06. | |
future relationship about the timing. I think we're being | :50:07. | :50:12. | |
optimistic than the Right Honourable gentleman. In Article 50 it | :50:13. | :50:15. | |
envisages in the negotiation for the exit agreement that can only be done | :50:16. | :50:19. | |
taking into account the framework for the future relationship. So | :50:20. | :50:24. | |
Article 50 itself envisages those two agreements being negotiated in | :50:25. | :50:27. | |
parallel so I think what the minister set out has every prospect | :50:28. | :50:35. | |
of coming to fruition. Can I just implore members to keep | :50:36. | :50:40. | |
interventions short. I just implore people to just to keep it a bit | :50:41. | :50:45. | |
briefer. My Right Honourable friend is right Article 50 on the face of | :50:46. | :50:51. | |
it says the negotiations for the withdrawal, that the negotiations | :50:52. | :50:54. | |
for the withdrawal agreement should be set against the framework of the | :50:55. | :50:59. | |
continuing relationship. So on the face of Article 50, a twin track | :51:00. | :51:05. | |
approach is envisaged. I give way to the honourable gentleman. Could he | :51:06. | :51:13. | |
be clear, he raised our hopes for a second and I felt myself debated | :51:14. | :51:18. | |
when he said we will fall back on other arrangements. Can he be clear | :51:19. | :51:23. | |
about what he means by, "We would fall back on other arrangements"? If | :51:24. | :51:29. | |
there were no agreement at all which is a scenario I think is extremely | :51:30. | :51:34. | |
unlikely then ultimately it would be falling back upon World Trade | :51:35. | :51:38. | |
Organisation arrangements and this again is nothing new. It has been | :51:39. | :51:43. | |
made very clear previously including by my Right Honourable friend the | :51:44. | :51:52. | |
Prime Minister. I'm grateful to the minister. Can he clarify a point | :51:53. | :51:57. | |
which came up with from the Shadow Secretary of State which is | :51:58. | :52:00. | |
important to all of us here and that is, an agreement at the end of the | :52:01. | :52:04. | |
process might be an agreement that there isn't an agreement at all that | :52:05. | :52:08. | |
we go to the default position. What I believe he has announced from the | :52:09. | :52:11. | |
front bench covers the situation which will give the House a vote if | :52:12. | :52:15. | |
there is a deal or if indeed there is no deal. And I wonder if he could | :52:16. | :52:22. | |
confirm that the House would get the vote in these circumstances which is | :52:23. | :52:25. | |
what I understand the assurance to be? It's very hard to see what | :52:26. | :52:30. | |
meaningful vote could be given in a circumstance in which there what | :52:31. | :52:33. | |
been no deal at all, but I have, having said that, I have no doubt at | :52:34. | :52:39. | |
all that if the absence of any agreement whatever, that absence of | :52:40. | :52:42. | |
agreement would be the subject of statements to this House. | :52:43. | :52:49. | |
The minister's inflating and deflating people as he goes along. | :52:50. | :52:53. | |
Can he get back to this manuscript amendment? It really is important if | :52:54. | :52:59. | |
the concession is as significant as the minister is leading us to | :53:00. | :53:03. | |
believe. It comes forward as an amendment and if the Government is | :53:04. | :53:06. | |
not prepared to do that, then surely the message to the other place is | :53:07. | :53:12. | |
what the minister has said should be encapsulated in an amendment that | :53:13. | :53:16. | |
should be properly redebated here. I think that we are actually debating | :53:17. | :53:26. | |
this at considerable length now. I have on behalf of the Government | :53:27. | :53:30. | |
made what I believe is a serious commitment and I believe that it | :53:31. | :53:36. | |
should be accepted as such and frankly in those circumstances I see | :53:37. | :53:42. | |
no need for a further amendment. I'm grateful to the Minister for | :53:43. | :53:45. | |
giving way. Isn't the issue and the problem that the Government has and | :53:46. | :53:50. | |
indeed the House has that we don't know what at what stage the | :53:51. | :53:55. | |
negotiations could be concludedment they could be concluded with months | :53:56. | :54:00. | |
to go within the two year time frame. This House would be able to | :54:01. | :54:05. | |
consider the agreement before it was agreed with the Commission because | :54:06. | :54:08. | |
there was no time pressure, but we could end up with a situation where | :54:09. | :54:12. | |
the agreement is one minute to midnight at the end of the two year | :54:13. | :54:16. | |
period and if the Government doesn't conclude an agreement to bring it to | :54:17. | :54:20. | |
the House before, but before it goes to the European Parliament we | :54:21. | :54:25. | |
couldnd up with no deal. I feel, my honourable friend may agree with me, | :54:26. | :54:28. | |
the Government has a real dilemma and it is important that the House | :54:29. | :54:32. | |
should understand those limitations because they go to the question of | :54:33. | :54:36. | |
whether in fact an amendment can be reasonably crafted to meet that. | :54:37. | :54:42. | |
I think that my Right Honourable friend makes a very fair point. I | :54:43. | :54:48. | |
think that as we proceed we have to keep reminding ourselves that we are | :54:49. | :54:51. | |
where we are because the United Kingdom has voted to leave the | :54:52. | :54:55. | |
European Union. And what we are seeking to achieve is a departure | :54:56. | :55:00. | |
from the European Union on the best possible terms and I believe very | :55:01. | :55:05. | |
strongly that what the Government is proposing is as much as possible in | :55:06. | :55:09. | |
terms of a meaningful vote at the end of the process. I'd like to make | :55:10. | :55:15. | |
a little bit... I give way to the honourable gentleman. I thank the | :55:16. | :55:22. | |
Minister for giving way. Timing is only significant if it further | :55:23. | :55:28. | |
empowers Parliament to have a meaningful say on the negotiations. | :55:29. | :55:33. | |
So can I ask the minister again, what will happen if the House | :55:34. | :55:40. | |
declines to approve the draft agreement which he's intending to | :55:41. | :55:44. | |
bring before us? I think that I've already answered that extremely | :55:45. | :55:48. | |
clearly. There will be a meaningful vote. The | :55:49. | :55:52. | |
vote will be either to accept the deal that the Government will have | :55:53. | :55:57. | |
achieved and I repeat that that process of negotiation will not be | :55:58. | :56:02. | |
without frequent reports to this House or no deal and frankly that is | :56:03. | :56:07. | |
the choice that this House will have to make. That will be the most | :56:08. | :56:10. | |
meaningful vote that one could imagine. | :56:11. | :56:19. | |
I'd like, I will take one further intervention. I will take it from | :56:20. | :56:23. | |
the honourable gentleman. I think the point here is for this to be a | :56:24. | :56:28. | |
meaningful concession, what the House wants is the opportunity to | :56:29. | :56:33. | |
send the Government back to our EU partners to negotiate a deal if one | :56:34. | :56:38. | |
hasn't been reached. Going on to WTO rules I say to the minister will be | :56:39. | :56:43. | |
deeply damaging for our economy and wholly unacceptable. Well, I hear | :56:44. | :56:48. | |
what the honourable gentleman says, but frankingly I can't think of a | :56:49. | :56:52. | |
greater signal of weakness than for this House to send the Government | :56:53. | :56:57. | |
back to the European Union and to say we want to negotiate further. I | :56:58. | :57:03. | |
think that that would be seized upon as a sign of weakness and therefore, | :57:04. | :57:11. | |
I can't agree with it at all. I would like to make further progress. | :57:12. | :57:19. | |
I think I've taken a large number of interventions and I'm sure that | :57:20. | :57:23. | |
other honourable members wish to speak. Let me say this. This will be | :57:24. | :57:31. | |
a meaningful vote. It will be the choice between leaving the European | :57:32. | :57:35. | |
Union as I've said with a negotiated deal or not and as I've said to send | :57:36. | :57:39. | |
the Government back to the negotiating table would be the | :57:40. | :57:45. | |
surest way of undermining our negotiating position and delivering | :57:46. | :57:51. | |
a worst deal and in any case we can't extend our... I give way for | :57:52. | :57:56. | |
the final time to the Right Honourable gentleman. | :57:57. | :58:01. | |
Giving way. When he first revealed his concession to my honourable and | :58:02. | :58:05. | |
learned friend, there was a bit which he hasn't read out in the | :58:06. | :58:10. | |
speech he has just been giving which referred to timing intention and the | :58:11. | :58:14. | |
position of the European Parliament. Co please repeat what he said the | :58:15. | :58:19. | |
first time round? I think it is important that the House is able to | :58:20. | :58:25. | |
hear that. If it is of assistance to the honourable gentleman I read out | :58:26. | :58:30. | |
the same words twice, but nevertheless I will read them again | :58:31. | :58:33. | |
just so that he fully understands the commitment that the Government | :58:34. | :58:39. | |
has made. The Government has committed to a vote on the final | :58:40. | :58:42. | |
deal in both houses before it comes into force. This will cover both the | :58:43. | :58:46. | |
withdrawal agreement and our future relationship with the European | :58:47. | :58:50. | |
Union. I can confirm that the Government will bring forward a | :58:51. | :58:53. | |
motion on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses of | :58:54. | :58:58. | |
Parliament before it is concluded. We expect and intend that this will | :58:59. | :59:02. | |
happen before the European Parliament debates and votes on the | :59:03. | :59:08. | |
final agreement and I hope - I will not take any further, I think I have | :59:09. | :59:14. | |
been more than generous. If I could turn to the amendments in | :59:15. | :59:19. | |
question and the honourable gentleman has referred to his | :59:20. | :59:24. | |
amendment, new clause 1, but new clauses 18, 19, 20, 110, 137, 175 | :59:25. | :59:31. | |
and 182 and they all seek in one way or another to ensure that Parliament | :59:32. | :59:35. | |
will have a vote on the final deal that we agree with the European | :59:36. | :59:40. | |
Union. Let me assure the House again as I've ensured in answer to | :59:41. | :59:44. | |
interventions that will be involved throughout the entire process of | :59:45. | :59:48. | |
withdrawal and again, let me remind the House, what the extent of the | :59:49. | :59:57. | |
Secretary of State's engagements. A very brief question to the minister. | :59:58. | :00:03. | |
If the European Parliament votes down the deal, then Europe will | :00:04. | :00:08. | |
carry on negotiating. He is saying if the British Parliament votes down | :00:09. | :00:11. | |
the deal that's the end of the negotiations. We pride ourselves on | :00:12. | :00:17. | |
our sovereignty in this House, Madam Deputy Speaker and his position | :00:18. | :00:20. | |
seems to be a denial of that sovereignty. I'm not entirely sure | :00:21. | :00:26. | |
that the Right Honourable gentleman understands the process. The role of | :00:27. | :00:30. | |
the European Parliament would be to grant or withhold consent to the | :00:31. | :00:34. | |
deal that had been agreed by the European Council and there could be | :00:35. | :00:37. | |
no assurance that there would be further negotiations. May I say this | :00:38. | :00:42. | |
- we are come considerable way away from that position. As the | :00:43. | :00:48. | |
negotiations proceed, as I've said, there will be very many more | :00:49. | :00:52. | |
opportunities, many more, many more opportunities for this House and for | :00:53. | :00:55. | |
the other place to consider the negotiations. I'm afraid not because | :00:56. | :01:05. | |
I've already been very generous. I was reminding the honourable House | :01:06. | :01:08. | |
of What the Secretary of State has done. He made six oral statements | :01:09. | :01:11. | |
and there have been more ten debates, four in Government time. | :01:12. | :01:15. | |
There are over 30 Select Committee inquiries going on at the moment. | :01:16. | :01:20. | |
There will be many more votes on primary legislation to between now | :01:21. | :01:23. | |
and departure from the European Union. I suggest that the amendments | :01:24. | :01:28. | |
that I've referred to are unnecessary. I reiterate that both | :01:29. | :01:32. | |
House will get a vote on the final deal before it comes into force and | :01:33. | :01:37. | |
I can confirm once again that it will cover both the withdrawal | :01:38. | :01:40. | |
agreement and our future relationship, but we are confident | :01:41. | :01:44. | |
that we will bring back a deal which Parliament will want to support and | :01:45. | :01:47. | |
the choice will be meaningful and that choice will be whether to | :01:48. | :01:51. | |
accept that deal or to move ahead without a deal. | :01:52. | :02:00. | |
Can I move new clause 180 and amendment 50 in the name of my | :02:01. | :02:05. | |
honourable friends and myself and could I speak favourably about new | :02:06. | :02:11. | |
clause 110 in the name of the honourable member for Nottingham | :02:12. | :02:14. | |
East which is the strongest of a range of amendments albeit that any | :02:15. | :02:18. | |
amendments in this section which are put to the vote will have our | :02:19. | :02:23. | |
support because they are all trying to increase Parliamentary | :02:24. | :02:27. | |
supervision over the process. Now before the minister led us through | :02:28. | :02:32. | |
the dance of the seven veils I was trying to find out, I was going to | :02:33. | :02:38. | |
question him on the question of irrockability of Article 50 and I | :02:39. | :02:44. | |
still think goes to the heart of what we're debating. Can I say to | :02:45. | :02:49. | |
the minister in terms of what he described as a serious announcement. | :02:50. | :02:53. | |
If you make serious announcements in the course of a committee stage of a | :02:54. | :03:00. | |
Bill of this importance then these serious announcements should be | :03:01. | :03:05. | |
followed by an amendment. If we are here debating the Dangerous Dogs | :03:06. | :03:11. | |
Bill, and a serious announcement was made in the middle of the Dangerous | :03:12. | :03:15. | |
Dogs Bill then that serious announcement would be followed by an | :03:16. | :03:19. | |
amendment on the face of the Bill. If it was good enough for a Bill of | :03:20. | :03:23. | |
that description then how much more is it important to have such an | :03:24. | :03:28. | |
amendment in the biggest constitutional change facing this | :03:29. | :03:33. | |
country for half a century? So we thank the Minister for His | :03:34. | :03:39. | |
announcement. We thank him for the apparent concession. We don't doubt | :03:40. | :03:43. | |
for a second the seriousness with which he makes this serious | :03:44. | :03:46. | |
announcement, but I think most of us, I think the minister himself, | :03:47. | :03:50. | |
would think that such an announcement should be followed by | :03:51. | :03:54. | |
an amendment on the face of the Bill so this Bill can then go through its | :03:55. | :03:59. | |
proper processes with honourable members able and willing to debate | :04:00. | :04:04. | |
an announcement of such seriousness in the proper way. I give way to the | :04:05. | :04:08. | |
former Chief Whip. Who seems anxious to regain his | :04:09. | :04:20. | |
previous position. I can assure the right honourable gentleman I am | :04:21. | :04:24. | |
content to speak in the house on these matters. The question is, the | :04:25. | :04:29. | |
reason why it may not be sensible to have a detailed amendment, listening | :04:30. | :04:32. | |
to the range of interventions from colleagues there are clearly a large | :04:33. | :04:37. | |
number of scenarios which may arise, ones which will need to be dealt | :04:38. | :04:41. | |
with politically, I do not want detailed legislation so that this | :04:42. | :04:46. | |
goes back into the courts, I wanted debated in this house, not by a | :04:47. | :04:53. | |
judge. At least he is consistent, when he was Chief Whip he did not | :04:54. | :04:56. | |
want detailed amendments either in case democracy prevailed in terms of | :04:57. | :05:02. | |
these matters. I will give way in a second, but most people saying a | :05:03. | :05:06. | |
serious announcement from the front bench would expect it to be followed | :05:07. | :05:11. | |
by an amendment so the matter can be properly debated and tested. I give | :05:12. | :05:16. | |
way. I thank the honourable gentleman forgiving way and I agree | :05:17. | :05:20. | |
with the point about the manuscript amendment it would make things a lot | :05:21. | :05:24. | |
cleaner, but does he agree with me that having an announcement that we | :05:25. | :05:29. | |
may have a Hobson 's choice at the end of something is not really a | :05:30. | :05:34. | |
proper choice? I very much agree with the honourable lady and she has | :05:35. | :05:37. | |
conveniently led me right onto the next point I was going to make, I | :05:38. | :05:43. | |
think her point goes to the heart of the dilemma the house is going to | :05:44. | :05:47. | |
find itself in unless we find ourselves taking action to the | :05:48. | :05:51. | |
contrary. That does strike at the matter of whether clause 50 is | :05:52. | :05:59. | |
irrevocable or not. I tried to give a flavour of the government's | :06:00. | :06:02. | |
confusion in this matter but it was a brief point of order and therefore | :06:03. | :06:08. | |
I want to give the full flavour of the government 's confusion because | :06:09. | :06:13. | |
this Brexit secretary said when asked the specific point, he said, | :06:14. | :06:17. | |
and I quote, one of the virtues of the Article 50 process is that it | :06:18. | :06:23. | |
sets you own way. It is very difficult to see it being revoked, | :06:24. | :06:27. | |
we do not intend to the baulk it. It may be revoked the ball, I do not | :06:28. | :06:34. | |
know. That is the basis we are being asked to take this fundamental | :06:35. | :06:38. | |
decision affecting the future of this country. We have been all these | :06:39. | :06:41. | |
things because it determines the position the house will find itself | :06:42. | :06:51. | |
in. If it is, unless there is an agreement from the 27 members of the | :06:52. | :06:56. | |
European Union, negotiations stop, the guillotine comes down and you | :06:57. | :07:00. | |
are left with a bad deal or no Deal, then any vote in the house against | :07:01. | :07:04. | |
that sort of Damocles hanging over the house will not be a proper | :07:05. | :07:14. | |
informed judgment. Would he agree with me that triggering the Article | :07:15. | :07:22. | |
50 on the basis of possible Reebok ability is like walking down the M4 | :07:23. | :07:25. | |
in the middle of the night and hoping you won't get killed. You | :07:26. | :07:29. | |
might not but better not to walk down there in the first place? I | :07:30. | :07:38. | |
think the analogy is there, and we now that the noble Lord Kerr | :07:39. | :07:47. | |
believes it to be revoke a ball. The judgment was based on that | :07:48. | :08:16. | |
proposition so does he agree it is irrevokable? I give way. The purpose | :08:17. | :08:25. | |
was for the purpose of those proceedings and I have to say that | :08:26. | :08:31. | |
we can derive nothing from that as to whether it is irrevokable or not | :08:32. | :08:37. | |
and indeed there is powerful legal argument that it is capable of being | :08:38. | :08:42. | |
revoked. The honourable gentleman should talk among themselves before | :08:43. | :08:48. | |
they come to a house with an agreed position but both of these people | :08:49. | :08:51. | |
are on the backbenches so it does not matter if they have alerted | :08:52. | :08:57. | |
debate after proceedings, what matters is a confusion in the front | :08:58. | :09:01. | |
bench and whatever the right Honourable member thinks, the Brexit | :09:02. | :09:12. | |
secretary did not know... One last time. The right honourable gentleman | :09:13. | :09:17. | |
is pursuing this relentlessly, but can he explain why he is doing so, | :09:18. | :09:19. | |
may I suggest that it is because he knows... To be said I am pursuing | :09:20. | :09:39. | |
something relentlessly is a component indeed, I shall treasure | :09:40. | :09:48. | |
it. It's about this house having a genuine choice at some stage and | :09:49. | :09:55. | |
looking at what the government has negotiated and then being able to | :09:56. | :09:56. | |
say yes bringing us back to where we are now | :09:57. | :10:29. | |
in terms of the referendum. An astute point. If I may say so, I | :10:30. | :10:35. | |
think the issue is even more fundamental, I think we have to know | :10:36. | :10:38. | |
what happens when we say no before we go ahead at the present moment. | :10:39. | :10:46. | |
We make a new effort in new clause 180, new clause 180 is called the | :10:47. | :10:50. | |
reset amendment and when I asked We will only approve the deal once | :10:51. | :11:10. | |
the terms are such that we believe they are in the interest of this | :11:11. | :11:15. | |
country. The Prime Minister should be prepared not to present us with a | :11:16. | :11:19. | |
bad Deal or no Deal, not a bad deal for world trade terms, but a deal | :11:20. | :11:25. | |
that we know is going to be in the interest of our constituents and the | :11:26. | :11:30. | |
country. I think that's absolutely fundamental to this debate. I know | :11:31. | :11:37. | |
and understand political leadership but at the end of March, it came | :11:38. | :11:44. | |
about the Tory conference, people were getting flappy about whether | :11:45. | :11:48. | |
the Prime Minister was a born-again Brexit supporter or still a secret | :11:49. | :11:54. | |
submarine remain, I cannot understand why people think even | :11:55. | :11:59. | |
from the Brexit side, because presumably they want success for the | :12:00. | :12:03. | |
country and its economy, thinking it's a good idea to invoke article | :12:04. | :12:07. | |
50 and till you know what the end destination is going to be. | :12:08. | :12:13. | |
Similarly I cannot believe it's a good idea to leave the European | :12:14. | :12:16. | |
economic area which is governed by different areas and different | :12:17. | :12:19. | |
instruments until you know what the alternative is going to be. Instead | :12:20. | :12:25. | |
of giving these points away and putting all of the negotiating power | :12:26. | :12:29. | |
into the hands of those you are negotiating with and they are our | :12:30. | :12:33. | |
partners now but any negotiation is a tension between two parties. Any | :12:34. | :12:38. | |
negotiation depends on a card you will have in your hand and if the | :12:39. | :12:42. | |
other side know that after two years the sword of Damocles comes down it | :12:43. | :12:47. | |
puts them in a much more powerful position in terms of the | :12:48. | :12:51. | |
negotiation. That is why we try... I give way. I thank you forgiving way, | :12:52. | :12:57. | |
I agree with most of what he said which is why it is important we get | :12:58. | :13:01. | |
an amendment on this so the house and the public know exactly where we | :13:02. | :13:05. | |
are going. Why don't we put the government front bench on a course | :13:06. | :13:12. | |
with the TUC to learn how to negotiate. And astute point, I think | :13:13. | :13:18. | |
a lot could be learnt in terms of negotiating position and the prying | :13:19. | :13:22. | |
point is to not put yourself in a position of weakness. Do not put | :13:23. | :13:24. | |
yourself in a position of weakness with the European Union who are on | :13:25. | :13:31. | |
the whole honourable people and want what is in the interest of the | :13:32. | :13:34. | |
continent of Europe and it's not a good idea for the government to put | :13:35. | :13:37. | |
themselves in a position of weakness with the new president of the United | :13:38. | :13:42. | |
States who will take every possible advantage from an opponent he senses | :13:43. | :13:46. | |
as he will sense is negotiating from a position of weakness. In | :13:47. | :13:54. | |
conclusion, I would argue strongly for the new clause and the | :13:55. | :13:58. | |
amendments we put down. To secure the position at the end of the | :13:59. | :14:03. | |
negotiations before we embark on something which is going to leave | :14:04. | :14:08. | |
this house not just with a bad Deal or no Deal, but with the | :14:09. | :14:11. | |
metaphorical gun pointed at its head when it comes to address these | :14:12. | :14:18. | |
serious questions. We have to know the end position before we embark on | :14:19. | :14:25. | |
the fundamentally dangerous course. John Redwood. Thank you, I agree | :14:26. | :14:29. | |
fully with the right honourable member for Gordon that we should not | :14:30. | :14:34. | |
wish to do anything which weakens or undermines the British are | :14:35. | :14:36. | |
bargaining position and that all the efforts of this house as we try to | :14:37. | :14:43. | |
knit together should be designed to maximise the leverage as a newly | :14:44. | :14:49. | |
independent nation and securing the best possible future relationship | :14:50. | :14:52. | |
with our partners in the European Union which is why I find myself in | :14:53. | :14:57. | |
disagreement with many of the well-intentioned amendments before | :14:58. | :15:00. | |
us today. I think they are all trying to undermine or damage the UK | :15:01. | :15:07. | |
negotiating position, maybe inadvertently. One of my honourable | :15:08. | :15:11. | |
friend says nonsense, let me explain why it is dangerous if some of these | :15:12. | :15:20. | |
amendments were adopted. We are invited to believe that if the House | :15:21. | :15:24. | |
of Commons decided it did not like the deal which the government had | :15:25. | :15:27. | |
negotiated for our future relationship with the EU and voted | :15:28. | :15:31. | |
it down the rest of the EU would turn around and say sorry and offer | :15:32. | :15:37. | |
us a better deal. I just don't think it's practical politics, I don't | :15:38. | :15:41. | |
understand how they believe that is going to happen. What could happen | :15:42. | :15:44. | |
is that those in the rest of the EU who want to keep the EU and her | :15:45. | :15:49. | |
contributions in the EU might think it was a good idea to offer a very | :15:50. | :15:53. | |
poor deal to try to tempt Parliament into voting the deal down so that | :15:54. | :15:57. | |
then there was no Deal at all which might suit their particular agenda. | :15:58. | :16:03. | |
Why is he so worried about the House of Commons INAUDIBLE | :16:04. | :16:08. | |
? Isn't it right and proper we have a choice, informed or otherwise? I | :16:09. | :16:16. | |
am supporting the government offering the house vote and the | :16:17. | :16:19. | |
government cannot neither house a vote of the house wants to vote, the | :16:20. | :16:24. | |
house will vote. But it's important that those who want to go further | :16:25. | :16:29. | |
and press the government even more should understand it could be, let | :16:30. | :16:33. | |
me deal with one point at a time, it could be deeply damaging to the | :16:34. | :16:37. | |
United Kingdom negotiating position and is based on a completely unreal | :16:38. | :16:42. | |
view of how multinational negotiations go when a country is | :16:43. | :16:47. | |
leaving the European Union. I find it disappointing that those | :16:48. | :16:49. | |
passionate advocates of the European Union in this house who have many | :16:50. | :16:53. | |
fine contacts and networks across the continent and access to the | :16:54. | :16:59. | |
councils and wisdom of our European partners make no contribution to | :17:00. | :17:03. | |
these debates at all in the form of explaining to us more about the | :17:04. | :17:07. | |
attitudes of the other member states, what the weaknesses of their | :17:08. | :17:10. | |
negotiating position is and what their aims are in the negotiation, | :17:11. | :17:14. | |
to better inform the government position so we can do better for | :17:15. | :17:20. | |
them and for us. I give way. Making an articulate case as ever about the | :17:21. | :17:24. | |
dangers of a vote at the end of the process but could he explain why on | :17:25. | :17:30. | |
November 20, 2012 in a very interesting blogger post entitled | :17:31. | :17:36. | |
the double referendum on the EU, he advocated a second referendum with | :17:37. | :17:40. | |
the following question, do you want to accept the new negotiated | :17:41. | :17:44. | |
relationship with the EU or not? How on earth and why on earth has he | :17:45. | :17:49. | |
changed his mind since then? I do not disagree with that at all, I am | :17:50. | :17:53. | |
happy to have a vote on whether the new Deal is worth accepting or not | :17:54. | :17:57. | |
but that is within the context of leaving the European Union. I agree | :17:58. | :18:01. | |
with the Prime Minister that no deal is better than a bad deal and if the | :18:02. | :18:05. | |
best the government can do is a bad deal and might well want to vote | :18:06. | :18:08. | |
against that deal in favour of leaving without a deal and that is | :18:09. | :18:12. | |
exactly the choice which government ministers are offering this house. | :18:13. | :18:17. | |
It's a realistic choice, a democratic choice. It is no choice | :18:18. | :18:22. | |
to pretend that the house can rerun the referendum in this pulpit and | :18:23. | :18:26. | |
fought to stay in the EU. We will send the article 50 letter, the | :18:27. | :18:32. | |
public have voted to leave so if this house voted to stay in what | :18:33. | :18:35. | |
significance does that have and why should the member states turn around | :18:36. | :18:37. | |
and agree? I give way. Wouldn't it be better to delay | :18:38. | :18:46. | |
Article 50 until after the new German Government is elected in | :18:47. | :18:49. | |
October and the French in May because we've only got two years and | :18:50. | :18:53. | |
then we would have the power of time of the negotiation and the power of | :18:54. | :18:57. | |
being a member rather than giving it in and finally going back to his | :18:58. | :19:03. | |
former position, if we offered a referendum of the people before | :19:04. | :19:07. | |
Article 50 was triggered they would think perhaps we may stay in and | :19:08. | :19:10. | |
therefore, would come to the table before Article 50 was triggered. The | :19:11. | :19:18. | |
issue is the future relationship and I think this House is capable of | :19:19. | :19:23. | |
dealing with whether we accept the future relationship with the | :19:24. | :19:25. | |
Government which has negotiated or not, but the point that the | :19:26. | :19:30. | |
Opposition amendments and many of the Opposition MPs are missing is | :19:31. | :19:34. | |
that it is the case that once you have sent the Article 50 letter you | :19:35. | :19:38. | |
have notified your intention to leave and after two years if there | :19:39. | :19:42. | |
is no agreement we are out of the European Union. And the Right | :19:43. | :19:47. | |
Honourable gentleman raised the issue of is it irrevocable? He | :19:48. | :19:51. | |
didn't give his own answer to that. I find it disappointing that the SNP | :19:52. | :19:56. | |
who take a strong interest in these proceedings have no party view on | :19:57. | :20:02. | |
whether it is irry vokcable or not? I accept the testimony of the | :20:03. | :20:07. | |
Attorney-General and the noble lord who was the advocate for the remain | :20:08. | :20:11. | |
side in the Supreme Court case that it is irry vokcable and the House | :20:12. | :20:14. | |
has to take its decision in the light of that. And as far as I'm | :20:15. | :20:19. | |
concerned, it is irrevocable for another democratic reason and that | :20:20. | :20:23. | |
is that the public was told they were making the decision about | :20:24. | :20:25. | |
whether we stay in or leave the European Union. And 52% of the | :20:26. | :20:31. | |
public, if not others, are expecting this House to deliver their wishes. | :20:32. | :20:35. | |
That was what ministers told this House when we passed the referendum | :20:36. | :20:40. | |
Act. That is what every voter in the country was told by a leaflet at our | :20:41. | :20:46. | |
expense sent by the Government to that you the people are making the | :20:47. | :20:50. | |
decision and so this House rightly, when it was under the Supreme | :20:51. | :20:53. | |
Court's guidance given the opportunity to have a specific vote | :20:54. | :20:57. | |
on this matter, over whether we send the letter to leave the European | :20:58. | :21:03. | |
Union, it voted by a majority of 384 with just the SNP and a few others | :21:04. | :21:07. | |
in disagreement because it fully understood that this was a decision | :21:08. | :21:12. | |
the British people had already taken and it fully understood this House | :21:13. | :21:15. | |
of Commons has to do their bidding. I give way. I thank the Right | :21:16. | :21:21. | |
Honourable member. Isn't he assuming that all of the people in Europe | :21:22. | :21:27. | |
that we have been negotiating with are add var series which is perhaps | :21:28. | :21:32. | |
the wrong standing point to take. Isn't it the case that a vote, a | :21:33. | :21:37. | |
meaningful vote on the substance of any deal my equally focus the | :21:38. | :21:41. | |
Government's mind on what it can sell to this House and unite this | :21:42. | :21:44. | |
House and the people we represent in a very divided country. | :21:45. | :21:49. | |
Well, he has won that argue. We are going to have a vote on whether we | :21:50. | :21:53. | |
accept the deal or not. I hope it works out well. My criticism is not | :21:54. | :21:57. | |
of the Government decision to make that offer. I think it was a very | :21:58. | :22:00. | |
good offer to make in the circumstances the my criticism was | :22:01. | :22:05. | |
and is of those members who do not understand that constantly seeking | :22:06. | :22:11. | |
to undermine expose alleged weaknesses and do damage to the | :22:12. | :22:14. | |
United Kingdom case is not helpful and it would be very helpful because | :22:15. | :22:20. | |
many of them have talent and expertise from their many links with | :22:21. | :22:23. | |
the EU to do more talking about how we can meet the reasonable | :22:24. | :22:27. | |
objectives of the EU and deal with the unreasonable objectives that | :22:28. | :22:30. | |
some in the Commission and some member states hold. I give way to | :22:31. | :22:34. | |
the former leader of the SNP. The position is, despite the right hon | :22:35. | :22:42. | |
Raja's certainty about irrevok kabletity. The Right Honourable | :22:43. | :22:48. | |
member to his right-hand side former Attorney-General is not sure, but | :22:49. | :22:52. | |
doesn't agree with the honourable gentleman and the minister, the | :22:53. | :22:56. | |
Brexit minister doesn't know. Does this remind you of a certain | :22:57. | :23:00. | |
question in European history where one mass mad and one was dead and | :23:01. | :23:07. | |
the other had forgotten. Is that the basis on which the Right Honourable | :23:08. | :23:12. | |
gentleman wants to take us over a cliff edge? I note that the SNP | :23:13. | :23:22. | |
hasn't a clue and doesn't want to specify whether it is irrevocable or | :23:23. | :23:28. | |
not. Can I just remind him that the | :23:29. | :23:32. | |
Supreme Court did not rule on the matter. | :23:33. | :23:36. | |
It clearly did rule on the matter because the reason it found against | :23:37. | :23:43. | |
the Government was because they deemed it to be irrevocable. | :23:44. | :23:53. | |
On this supreme red herring it doesn't matter whether the ECJ think | :23:54. | :23:59. | |
Article 50 is irrevocable or not, the British people have determined | :24:00. | :24:06. | |
that it is an irrevocable decision. I think that was a helpful | :24:07. | :24:11. | |
intervention. This legal wrangle is fascinating how those who wish to | :24:12. | :24:15. | |
resist or delay or cancel our departure from the EU are now | :24:16. | :24:20. | |
flipping their legal arguments since three or four weeks ago when they | :24:21. | :24:26. | |
were clear it was irrevocable. He is a man of coverage and he has a | :24:27. | :24:31. | |
long fine history of supporting sovereignty of this place. He says | :24:32. | :24:35. | |
that the Government is going to give us a vote in the event of a deal. | :24:36. | :24:40. | |
But why doesn't he agree with us, me, whoever, over here and indeed | :24:41. | :24:46. | |
over there, who want the same vote, sovereignty of this place in the | :24:47. | :24:52. | |
event of no deal being struck by the Government despite their finalest | :24:53. | :24:56. | |
efforts? That's the vote we have on second reading of this Bill. If you | :24:57. | :25:01. | |
are at all worried about leaving the EU, you should clearly not have | :25:02. | :25:05. | |
voted for this Bill on second reading. And that's the point of the | :25:06. | :25:11. | |
irrevocable debate. I give way. Can I just clarify and take him back | :25:12. | :25:17. | |
to his comments on his blog post in November 2012 when he argued in | :25:18. | :25:21. | |
favour of a referendum at the beginning of the process and at the | :25:22. | :25:25. | |
end. He just said he didn't think there should be a referendum on | :25:26. | :25:28. | |
whether we should leave the European Union. However, he did not | :25:29. | :25:32. | |
therefore, exclude his view perhaps still being that there should be a | :25:33. | :25:35. | |
referendum on the terms of the deal. Will he clarify whether he thinks | :25:36. | :25:38. | |
the people should have the final say? | :25:39. | :25:42. | |
No, I don't think on this occasion, 2012 is 2012 and we were trying all | :25:43. | :25:46. | |
sorts of things to try and get us out of the European Union and we | :25:47. | :25:49. | |
found one that worked and I'm grateful that we found one that | :25:50. | :25:52. | |
worked and now is now and you have to speak to the current conditions | :25:53. | :25:59. | |
and the state of the argument. It depends on what the two options | :26:00. | :26:03. | |
are. The honourable gentleman over to the other side of the House is | :26:04. | :26:07. | |
clear, his choices are you accept the deal or you stay in the European | :26:08. | :26:11. | |
Union. Although I was on the Remain side of the argument, there was an | :26:12. | :26:14. | |
unconditional question on that ballot paper. It said leave or | :26:15. | :26:17. | |
remain. My side of the argument lost. I accept that. We are leaving. | :26:18. | :26:23. | |
He really wants to re-run the referendum all over again and I | :26:24. | :26:29. | |
don't think that's acceptable. My final point is I do think people | :26:30. | :26:34. | |
are trying to make the negotiations far more complicated and long-winded | :26:35. | :26:39. | |
than we need. Because of the Prime Minister's admirable clarity and the | :26:40. | :26:43. | |
12 points we don't need to negotiate borders, money, taking back control | :26:44. | :26:49. | |
and sorting out our own laws and getting rid of ECJ jurisdiction. | :26:50. | :26:53. | |
That's mandated by the British people and that's something we do. | :26:54. | :26:55. | |
What we are going to be negotiating is just two things. One is there any | :26:56. | :26:59. | |
Bill at the end of it when we leave that we have to pay? May answer is | :27:00. | :27:04. | |
simply no, of course, there isn't. There is no legal power in the | :27:05. | :27:09. | |
treaties to charge Britain by bill and there is no legal power for any | :27:10. | :27:13. | |
minister to make a payment to the EU over and above the legal payment of | :27:14. | :27:17. | |
our contributions up to the date of our exit and the other thing that | :27:18. | :27:21. | |
the Government needs to sort out is, our future trading relationship with | :27:22. | :27:25. | |
the European Union where we will offer them the generous offer let's | :27:26. | :27:29. | |
carry on as we are and register it as a Free Trade Agreement. If they | :27:30. | :27:33. | |
don't like that, most favoured nation terms under the WTO is fine. | :27:34. | :27:37. | |
That's how we trade with the rest of the world. Very successfully at a | :27:38. | :27:42. | |
profit, at the moment, and so they should relax understand it could be | :27:43. | :27:48. | |
a lot easer why and there will not be economic damage. The Government | :27:49. | :27:53. | |
has taken an admirable position and it made wonderful concessions to the | :27:54. | :27:56. | |
other side and I hope they will accept them because they have had an | :27:57. | :28:02. | |
impact on this issue. I'd like to speak to new clauses 28, | :28:03. | :28:07. | |
54 and 99 standing in my name and that of other honourable and Right | :28:08. | :28:13. | |
Honourable colleagues. New clause 28 is about the sequencing of votes on | :28:14. | :28:18. | |
final terms. It's the issue on which we've had a concession this | :28:19. | :28:23. | |
afternoon from the minister. New clause 54 is about how to secure | :28:24. | :28:27. | |
extra time if we need it in our negotiations with the EU and new | :28:28. | :28:33. | |
clause 99 embeds Parliamentary sovereignty in the process. I was | :28:34. | :28:40. | |
disappointed, I'm pleased to follow the honourable member for Wokingham, | :28:41. | :28:45. | |
but I was disappointed that he didn't come clean to the House on | :28:46. | :28:51. | |
the fact that he has alternative an alternative Parliamentary process | :28:52. | :28:54. | |
which he hopes to use to secure the kind of Brexit he wants. He has not | :28:55. | :28:59. | |
referred to another blog which he has written recently in which he | :29:00. | :29:02. | |
wrote, "Being in the EU is a bit like being a student in a college. | :29:03. | :29:06. | |
All the time you belong to the college you have to pay fees. When | :29:07. | :29:11. | |
you depart, you have no further financial obligations. ." ." Putting | :29:12. | :29:23. | |
that to one side, he has not read the excellent paper by Alex Barker | :29:24. | :29:27. | |
of the Financial Times which points out the obligations that we will | :29:28. | :29:35. | |
fall into three categories, legally binding budget commitments and | :29:36. | :29:37. | |
contingent liabilities which indeed are arguable. I'm going to make a | :29:38. | :29:45. | |
little bit more progress. What the honourable member for Wokingham has | :29:46. | :29:49. | |
also pointed out and he's right about this, ministers can only | :29:50. | :29:53. | |
authorise spending and sign cheques with Parliamentary approval. He's | :29:54. | :29:57. | |
right about that. And it's right that we should have that say, but, | :29:58. | :30:02. | |
of course, what it means is that he's hoping that he can use that | :30:03. | :30:08. | |
moment to veto the withdrawal arrangements and scupper the kind of | :30:09. | :30:13. | |
future relationship which might be more constructive and more | :30:14. | :30:22. | |
productive. In second reading, the honourable member said like all | :30:23. | :30:27. | |
divorces it will be a trade off between access and money, but for | :30:28. | :30:32. | |
the honourable member for Wokingham and his friends, there isn't a trade | :30:33. | :30:36. | |
off, he doesn't want access and he doesn't want money either. Now, if I | :30:37. | :30:42. | |
can just return to new clause 54 which calls for extra time. | :30:43. | :30:49. | |
Honourable members have raised the need for extra time if Parliament | :30:50. | :30:55. | |
has declined the final terms. One in which the Government has not managed | :30:56. | :31:00. | |
to complete the negotiations within 24 hours specified in Article 50. | :31:01. | :31:05. | |
This is more likely than not. Almost everyone who has looked at this | :31:06. | :31:10. | |
matter in detail is incredulous at the idea that we can complete the | :31:11. | :31:14. | |
negotiations in 24 months. The record for completing trade deals is | :31:15. | :31:18. | |
not good and there are many more strands to this negotiation. It | :31:19. | :31:25. | |
would be patently absurd to flip to a damaging situation without an | :31:26. | :31:29. | |
agreement if we could see once we got into the negotiations and we | :31:30. | :31:34. | |
have the detailed work schedule that a further six or 12 months would | :31:35. | :31:38. | |
bring us to a successful conclusion. Similarly, it's possible that the | :31:39. | :31:44. | |
minister's optimism is well founded, but the while the negotiation have | :31:45. | :31:47. | |
been completed the Parliamentary process hasn't and in that instance | :31:48. | :31:55. | |
too we ought to have extra time. New clause 99 addresses a different | :31:56. | :31:59. | |
matter. It embeds Parliamentary sovereignty in the approval of the | :32:00. | :32:04. | |
final terms of withdrawal. It ensures that the UK with draws on | :32:05. | :32:10. | |
terms approved by Parliament. This was a major plank of the Brexit | :32:11. | :32:15. | |
campaign bringing back control and restoring Parliamentary sovereignty. | :32:16. | :32:19. | |
New clause 99 is the fulfilment of that promise, the working out in | :32:20. | :32:24. | |
practise of what was promised. The Prime Minister has already said that | :32:25. | :32:27. | |
Parliament should have a vote at the end of the process. New clause 99 | :32:28. | :32:34. | |
strengthens that promise by requiring primary legislation to | :32:35. | :32:39. | |
give effect to any agreement on arrangements for withdrawal and even | :32:40. | :32:41. | |
more importantly, on the future relationship. This is important as | :32:42. | :32:47. | |
it means Parliament does not just have to give a metaphorical | :32:48. | :32:50. | |
thumbs-up which as my Right Honourable friend the member has | :32:51. | :32:57. | |
said could be meaningless. Instead, Parliament can undertake line by | :32:58. | :33:04. | |
line scrutiny. Brexit has major constitutional political economic | :33:05. | :33:07. | |
and social consequences. It is right that Parliament approves the way it | :33:08. | :33:09. | |
is done. Article 50 paragraph one states that | :33:10. | :33:28. | |
a member state may decide to withdraw from the union in | :33:29. | :33:31. | |
accordance with its own constitutional requirements. The | :33:32. | :33:37. | |
Supreme Court said in their judgment withdrawal makes a fundamental | :33:38. | :33:42. | |
change to the UK's constitutional arrangements. The UK constitution | :33:43. | :33:48. | |
requires such changes to be affected by Parliamentary legislation. In | :33:49. | :33:51. | |
line with the Supreme Court judgment new clause 99 in Parliamentary | :33:52. | :33:56. | |
approval as a constitutional requirement which the EU must | :33:57. | :34:04. | |
respect. New clause 99 also deals with the issue raised by the | :34:05. | :34:07. | |
Honourable member at the beginning of the debate, what we do in the | :34:08. | :34:16. | |
absence of any agreement. Either the Prime Minister's negotiations will | :34:17. | :34:18. | |
succeed in reaching a satisfactory conclusion or they will not. New | :34:19. | :34:25. | |
clause 99 provides for both scenarios. Legislation in the second | :34:26. | :34:30. | |
as well as the first. So that Parliament is in control and decides | :34:31. | :34:35. | |
the basis for leaving. The new clause does not block Brexit, it | :34:36. | :34:40. | |
does not slow down the negotiations, I voted to give the Bill a second | :34:41. | :34:45. | |
reading, my constituents are Leave voters, this is about Parliament | :34:46. | :34:50. | |
having sovereign control over the process. I am grateful for tabling | :34:51. | :34:58. | |
and speaking to this amendment, I think it's very important in terms | :34:59. | :35:01. | |
of the concerns expressed on all sides of the house about the | :35:02. | :35:07. | |
so-called concession offered early, can she confirmed she will push her | :35:08. | :35:12. | |
amendment to the vote? I may wish to test the will of the house on this | :35:13. | :35:16. | |
new clause when we come to the end of the debate. I think most rational | :35:17. | :35:25. | |
people would say the new relationship is more important than | :35:26. | :35:33. | |
the terms of withdrawal. She said a moment ago that new clause 99 does | :35:34. | :35:38. | |
not seek to delay our derail the leaving process. In the event of | :35:39. | :35:43. | |
section B of her new clause coming about, namely no deal, if Parliament | :35:44. | :35:48. | |
voted against it doesn't be effective new clause 99 clearly mean | :35:49. | :35:54. | |
that we would actually stop the process of leaving and thereby deny | :35:55. | :35:59. | |
the effect of the referendum? I do not think it does mean that and I | :36:00. | :36:02. | |
think that depends on whether extra time had been agreed with the | :36:03. | :36:08. | |
European Union or not. I think if he refers back to article 50 he will | :36:09. | :36:12. | |
see that we may get an extension of the other member states agree to | :36:13. | :36:17. | |
give us that unanimously. They may, they may not. As we stand here today | :36:18. | :36:24. | |
it's quite difficult to project ourselves forward into the situation | :36:25. | :36:32. | |
we will find in two years' time. Doubly grateful, but doesn't she | :36:33. | :36:36. | |
agree that in the event they do not give us extra time by mutual | :36:37. | :36:39. | |
agreement and in the event that Parliament has rejected withdraw | :36:40. | :36:43. | |
without an agreement, then the effect of section B of her new | :36:44. | :36:47. | |
clause is very clearly that the referendum result will be negated by | :36:48. | :36:50. | |
Parliament and doesn't that go against what she is voting for? I | :36:51. | :36:56. | |
don't think it does because it allows open the possibility of the | :36:57. | :37:00. | |
government going back to the drawing board and making a further new | :37:01. | :37:09. | |
arrangement. But as I say, I think for us now, when we have not | :37:10. | :37:12. | |
embarked on this, when we don't know what the deals are, it's extremely | :37:13. | :37:20. | |
difficult... Isn't it the case and that she agree with me that many of | :37:21. | :37:26. | |
the other 27 countries will be going to their Parliament's for approval, | :37:27. | :37:31. | |
for their approach to these negotiations and surely it would | :37:32. | :37:35. | |
strengthen our government's hand if the government involved themselves | :37:36. | :37:38. | |
in a process within this Parliament that could maximise the support | :37:39. | :37:44. | |
coming on all sides of the house for the government's approach and why | :37:45. | :37:51. | |
isn't that seen as a strength? I could not agree more, we know Angela | :37:52. | :37:55. | |
Merkel has to get parliamentary mandate for the way she conducts | :37:56. | :38:00. | |
herself in all her negotiations in the European Union and some of us | :38:01. | :38:04. | |
have tried over the years to improve the quality of our European | :38:05. | :38:08. | |
scrutiny. But it seems we are now only focusing it when we are about | :38:09. | :38:18. | |
to leave. I am grateful, assuming the house agrees this amendment, and | :38:19. | :38:23. | |
we do trickle Article 50 on the 31st of March and we do vote against the | :38:24. | :38:28. | |
deal and the commission and the European Parliament say sorry that | :38:29. | :38:32. | |
the deal you have, like it or lump it, what can we do about it? They | :38:33. | :38:37. | |
don't care, we haven't got these powers to stop them imposing the | :38:38. | :38:41. | |
deal they want to put on us once we've triggered Article 50. I think | :38:42. | :38:47. | |
what the Honourable gentleman is arguing is the same as the | :38:48. | :38:50. | |
Honourable member for walking, that Article 50 is irrevocable. If you | :38:51. | :39:03. | |
look at Article 50 paragraph three you will see it says unless the | :39:04. | :39:06. | |
European Council in agreement with the member states unanimously decide | :39:07. | :39:10. | |
to extend the period, this can happen. It will depend on how the | :39:11. | :39:17. | |
negotiations are undertaken, where we have got to and on the torn. -- | :39:18. | :39:25. | |
on the torn. The Treaty of Lisbon sets out the term, whether it is | :39:26. | :39:35. | |
irrevocable or not is down to the weakness of the Treaty of Lisbon. | :39:36. | :39:39. | |
But some of the best deals reached in the EU have been at the 11th hour | :39:40. | :39:43. | |
and the one thing which will concentrate the minds of all | :39:44. | :39:46. | |
involved in these negotiations are the fact they had to happen by March | :39:47. | :39:55. | |
2019 or it will go on and on and on? Well, I don't think the threat of | :39:56. | :40:01. | |
the cliff edge is a positive in these negotiations. And I note the | :40:02. | :40:05. | |
Chancellor of the Exchequer has described this as a second-best | :40:06. | :40:09. | |
option and the white paper also says that crashing out is a second-best | :40:10. | :40:15. | |
option. Actually I think it's the worst option. What new clause 99 | :40:16. | :40:20. | |
does is to level up the playing field so as well as having the vote | :40:21. | :40:24. | |
on the withdrawal terms and the money we will also be able to have | :40:25. | :40:31. | |
detailed scrutiny for this house on the future relationship. I have | :40:32. | :40:35. | |
consulted my constituents on the Brexit they want. They do not want | :40:36. | :40:40. | |
the cliff edge option, there are all sorts of things about Europe which | :40:41. | :40:45. | |
they light even though it was a majority leave voting constituency. | :40:46. | :40:50. | |
They like the customs union, the social chapter, cooperation and | :40:51. | :40:53. | |
collaboration. They particularly like the arrest warrant. Indeed. She | :40:54. | :41:02. | |
says she would like collaboration and supporting the government is | :41:03. | :41:05. | |
negotiation, does she think it's a good idea in a negotiation to say we | :41:06. | :41:10. | |
think we owe you a lot of money, tell us how much or is it better to | :41:11. | :41:13. | |
say I don't think we owe you anything. My experience of | :41:14. | :41:20. | |
negotiating is that one of the most important thing is that we | :41:21. | :41:22. | |
understand what the people on the other side of the table thank and I | :41:23. | :41:27. | |
think that's absolutely profound to making a success of this. It's not | :41:28. | :41:31. | |
to say we are going to give the person on the other side of the | :41:32. | :41:34. | |
table everything they want but we do need to be open to listening to what | :41:35. | :41:43. | |
they want as we go forward. Going back to a point about the different | :41:44. | :41:47. | |
approaches the European states adopted a negotiation, my | :41:48. | :41:50. | |
understanding, I am not a lawyer so I hesitate in the face of such | :41:51. | :41:55. | |
eminent legal presence in this chamber, but isn't it because in | :41:56. | :42:00. | |
countries like Germany where they have a legal culture where when they | :42:01. | :42:02. | |
make treaties they are directly applicable without further | :42:03. | :42:10. | |
legislation, but we have to legislate things into effect so is | :42:11. | :42:14. | |
that why they take a tougher approach for the authorise things | :42:15. | :42:17. | |
because once the government has signed up to the treaty it | :42:18. | :42:21. | |
automatically becomes law? I don't think this is an opportunity for a | :42:22. | :42:25. | |
seminar on the political institutions of the Federal | :42:26. | :42:31. | |
Republic. What I think is that new clause 99 is about embedding what is | :42:32. | :42:37. | |
basic to the British constitution as bound by the Supreme Court which is | :42:38. | :42:42. | |
parliamentary sovereignty throughout the process. In the end the | :42:43. | :42:48. | |
referendum was about trust. It was about the kind of settlement that | :42:49. | :42:53. | |
most voters want. I know what kind of Brexit deal my voters want, I | :42:54. | :42:59. | |
think new clause 99 is the best way to give it to them. Thank you ladies | :43:00. | :43:07. | |
and gentlemen. I hope the house will allow me to just mention the fact | :43:08. | :43:12. | |
that today is indeed the 7th of February which is 25 years to the | :43:13. | :43:16. | |
day from the signing of that fateful Maastricht Treaty and I am glad, I | :43:17. | :43:23. | |
see my right honourable friend looking over at me with a wry smile | :43:24. | :43:28. | |
on his face because of course I don't doubt for a minute he will | :43:29. | :43:33. | |
recall he once said, I hope I am not mistaken, that he had not read the | :43:34. | :43:37. | |
treaty but maybe he never said anything of the kind. I would be | :43:38. | :43:42. | |
more than happy to accept that. But I did eventually put down that | :43:43. | :43:47. | |
something like a or so amendments and I voted against it 47 or 50 | :43:48. | :43:56. | |
times. I have to say I am not going to vote against this under any | :43:57. | :44:00. | |
circumstances whatsoever and indeed it's the first occasion in relation | :44:01. | :44:06. | |
to any European legislation since 1986 which included the single | :44:07. | :44:10. | |
European act where I put down a sovereignty amendment and I was not | :44:11. | :44:16. | |
even allowed to have it selected for debate which I found very difficult | :44:17. | :44:19. | |
to accept that the time. But the reality is we are now, we have moved | :44:20. | :44:26. | |
well ahead, we have now had a referendum which was accepted by 6-1 | :44:27. | :44:34. | |
in this house. We have also had a vote on this very bill which was | :44:35. | :44:40. | |
passed by 498, 500 if you include the tellers, to 114 to agree the | :44:41. | :44:51. | |
principal of this bill. That is why I now move onto the next question, I | :44:52. | :44:57. | |
would like to make this other point that when I look at these new | :44:58. | :45:02. | |
clauses and I think in deference to other people who wish to speak, | :45:03. | :45:06. | |
going through the intricacies of these vast number of new clauses is | :45:07. | :45:10. | |
not going to help us very much. For a very simple reason that the bottom | :45:11. | :45:16. | |
line is that it would effectively give a veto to override the result | :45:17. | :45:21. | |
of a referendum. It's as simple as that. I would be happy to. Did he | :45:22. | :45:29. | |
not just say he had put down 150 amendments of his own back? Surely | :45:30. | :45:33. | |
he is diffusing his own argument? The whole point of this places to | :45:34. | :45:37. | |
challenge other point of principle things we don't believe in and that | :45:38. | :45:40. | |
is what we are trying to do and he should be supporting us. I am so | :45:41. | :45:44. | |
glad that the honourable lady has made that point because of course | :45:45. | :45:50. | |
the difference between what I was doing in those days and what is | :45:51. | :45:55. | |
happening now is that we were actually arguing against the | :45:56. | :45:59. | |
government's policy to implement European government which is what | :46:00. | :46:02. | |
the Maastricht treaty said and which by the way the electorate in the | :46:03. | :46:09. | |
referendum have now accepted. And the second point is that we were | :46:10. | :46:13. | |
arguing for a referendum which we've now got. So my amendments were | :46:14. | :46:16. | |
moving in the right direction in line with what the government have | :46:17. | :46:24. | |
now agreed and what the people themselves have also agreed. I will | :46:25. | :46:33. | |
give way. Clearly enjoying his day in the sun. I did not vote for the | :46:34. | :46:37. | |
referendum legislation like the right honourable member, but could | :46:38. | :46:41. | |
he tell us of his 40 years of campaigning what regard he has had | :46:42. | :46:46. | |
to the two thirds of people who when he started actually voted for the UK | :46:47. | :46:51. | |
to remain in the European Union? I can only say that in our democratic | :46:52. | :46:57. | |
system when 6-1 of this house and the House of Lords as well vote in | :46:58. | :47:00. | |
favour of a referendum by sovereign act of Parliament and give the | :47:01. | :47:03. | |
people in his constituency as well as in mine, not to mention | :47:04. | :47:08. | |
Stoke-on-Trent on which there is going to be quite an interesting | :47:09. | :47:12. | |
test in a few days' time, that the fact is that the decision was given | :47:13. | :47:17. | |
to those people by act of Parliament and they made that choice to leave. | :47:18. | :47:22. | |
That is definitive and I do not see any purpose I have to say and I am | :47:23. | :47:28. | |
not going to waste time on some of the intricate arguments we have | :47:29. | :47:32. | |
heard so far, many of which I think are going round in circles. The | :47:33. | :47:36. | |
question is do we implement the decision of the United Kingdom or | :47:37. | :47:40. | |
not, the answer is that we do and we must and that was conceded by this | :47:41. | :47:49. | |
house and all, almost everybody, I say with great respect to my right | :47:50. | :47:52. | |
honourable friend who did not, but the bottom line is we are giving | :47:53. | :47:57. | |
effect to the decision of the United Kingdom electorate. | :47:58. | :48:03. | |
He himself was one of these two-thirds back in 1975 when he | :48:04. | :48:11. | |
voted for the European Community. So all of these years he was | :48:12. | :48:14. | |
campaigning against the sovereignty against that decision and indeed he | :48:15. | :48:18. | |
was campaigning against his own sovereignty and against his own | :48:19. | :48:21. | |
decision! That's politics! As the honourable | :48:22. | :48:25. | |
gentleman knows only too well because he has a similar experience | :48:26. | :48:29. | |
with respect to his position with regard to Scotland. So the bottom | :48:30. | :48:42. | |
line is this, we are faced with a simple decision which is going to be | :48:43. | :48:47. | |
decided at a vote later today. I imagine. It maybe it will be p nart | :48:48. | :48:53. | |
tomorrow as well and then there will be a third reading and all these | :48:54. | :48:58. | |
attempts in my judgment to produce different versions of delay will | :48:59. | :49:03. | |
effectively, I hope, be overridden by the vote that's taken by this | :49:04. | :49:07. | |
House as a whole in line with a decision that was taken by the | :49:08. | :49:10. | |
British people which is the right way to proceed. I would just like to | :49:11. | :49:14. | |
add one other point though with respect to the Bill itself. I'm in | :49:15. | :49:21. | |
no way criticising the selection of amendments because I think it is | :49:22. | :49:25. | |
entirely right that we should have an opportunity to look at a variety | :49:26. | :49:30. | |
of perm tass before that vote is cast, but I have to remind the House | :49:31. | :49:37. | |
that this Bill, which was passed by 498 to 114 simply says to confer | :49:38. | :49:44. | |
power on the Prime Minister to notify under Article 50 of the | :49:45. | :49:48. | |
treaty and European Union, the United Kingdom's intention as | :49:49. | :49:52. | |
expressed by the referendum itself, to withdraw from the EU. And clause | :49:53. | :50:01. | |
1 simply says and no more, "The Prime Minister may notify under | :50:02. | :50:07. | |
Article 50 (2) on the treaty of the European Union the United Kingdom's | :50:08. | :50:11. | |
intention to withdraw interest the EU. It goes on to say to put this | :50:12. | :50:19. | |
matter to bed in case anyone tries to argue this could be overridden by | :50:20. | :50:24. | |
some other European Union gambit. This section which we've passed | :50:25. | :50:30. | |
already in principle has effect despite any provision made by or | :50:31. | :50:35. | |
under the community Communities Act 1972 or any other enactment. In | :50:36. | :50:42. | |
other words nothing is to stand in its way about which emulates from | :50:43. | :50:46. | |
the European Union and that's a very simple proposition and this Bill is | :50:47. | :50:52. | |
short because it should be short. I would like to make this last point | :50:53. | :50:56. | |
and that's to look back at what the Supreme Court said. The Supreme | :50:57. | :51:02. | |
Court made a judgment on one simple question - should it be by | :51:03. | :51:06. | |
prerogative that we express this intention to withdraw and notify | :51:07. | :51:11. | |
under Article 50 or should it be Bill? There was a big battle. Many | :51:12. | :51:16. | |
people took differing views. We respect the outcome of the Supreme | :51:17. | :51:20. | |
Court's decision and that is why we've got this Bill. The fact is | :51:21. | :51:27. | |
that that is final. But in paragraphs 2 and 3 of that very | :51:28. | :51:34. | |
judgment the court itself made it clear what this Bill was meant to be | :51:35. | :51:38. | |
about and it was whether it should be by Bill or prerogative and they | :51:39. | :51:42. | |
said by Bill. What they also added and these are my last words for the | :51:43. | :51:46. | |
moment on this subject and it's this - they said it was about one | :51:47. | :51:51. | |
particular issue and that's the one I mentioned. They then said it has | :51:52. | :51:55. | |
nothing to do with the terms of withdrawal. It has nothing to do | :51:56. | :52:00. | |
with the method. It has nothing to do the timing and it has nothing to | :52:01. | :52:03. | |
do with the relationship between ourselves and the European Union. A | :52:04. | :52:11. | |
new clause 1 spends its entire wordage going into the very | :52:12. | :52:15. | |
questions the Supreme Court said this decision was not about. So this | :52:16. | :52:22. | |
new clause and the other ones are all inconsistent both with the | :52:23. | :52:25. | |
Supreme Court decision, also with the decisions that were taken on the | :52:26. | :52:31. | |
second reading of the Bill, of course... Point of order. Surely new | :52:32. | :52:44. | |
clause 1 which we're debating is in order or we wouldn't be debating it? | :52:45. | :52:55. | |
This is a matter for the chair. I'm sure it is in order, the problem is | :52:56. | :53:00. | |
whether we vote for it or not of the and there is extremely good reasons | :53:01. | :53:06. | |
for not doing so. In addition, every single element of new clause 1 and | :53:07. | :53:11. | |
the other amendments are all designed and these are all | :53:12. | :53:15. | |
honourable people, all honourable gentlemen on both sides of the | :53:16. | :53:17. | |
House, some of them are Right Honourable. I simply make this point | :53:18. | :53:21. | |
that they know perfectly well what they're doing. They're trying to | :53:22. | :53:25. | |
delay, obstruct and prevent this Bill from going through and I say | :53:26. | :53:33. | |
shame on you. Thank you very much. An honour to | :53:34. | :53:41. | |
follow the honourable gentleman who has fought his corner for 40 odd | :53:42. | :53:46. | |
years. I intend to fight mine, but not for as long as that. I beg to | :53:47. | :53:52. | |
move in the name of my Right Honourable. Amendment 43 concerns | :53:53. | :53:58. | |
democracy at the end of this process as well as the beginning of it. It | :53:59. | :54:01. | |
would require the Prime Minister to look at the overwhelming case for a | :54:02. | :54:05. | |
people's vote on the final exit package that this Government | :54:06. | :54:09. | |
neglects with Brussels after triggering Article 50. On 23rd June | :54:10. | :54:14. | |
last year, a narrow majority voted to leave the European Union although | :54:15. | :54:19. | |
I deeply regret that outcome, I am a democrat, I accept it, but voting | :54:20. | :54:24. | |
for departure is not the same as voting for destination. So now, the | :54:25. | :54:30. | |
Government should give the British people a decision referendum to be | :54:31. | :54:33. | |
held when the EU negotiation is concluded. Now, I will admit that | :54:34. | :54:39. | |
mandate referendum and decision referendums are not phrases that I | :54:40. | :54:43. | |
have used before in this context. Because they're not really my words | :54:44. | :54:48. | |
at all. They are the words used by the current Secretary of State for | :54:49. | :54:51. | |
Exiting the European Union who himself made the case very | :54:52. | :54:56. | |
eloquently in 2012 for the Liberal Democrat policy today for there to | :54:57. | :55:01. | |
be a referendum on the deal at the end of the process. I will happily | :55:02. | :55:04. | |
give way. On 11th May of last year, that this | :55:05. | :55:10. | |
was a once in a generation decision, was he doing straightforward with | :55:11. | :55:15. | |
voters? The Government is intending it to be a once in a generation | :55:16. | :55:22. | |
opportunity as the honourable peb has proved. Sometimes you have to | :55:23. | :55:27. | |
fight for two generations or the thing thaw believe in. If you have | :55:28. | :55:31. | |
the courage of your convictions then you keep going. Can I quote the | :55:32. | :55:37. | |
Brexit Secretary directly? I would not want to para phrase or risk | :55:38. | :55:42. | |
misquoting him. To quote him directly, the aim of this strategy a | :55:43. | :55:47. | |
strategy of two referendums on a mandate referendum and a decision | :55:48. | :55:51. | |
referendum is to give the British people the final say. But it is also | :55:52. | :55:58. | |
to massively reinforce the legitimacy and negotiating power of | :55:59. | :56:00. | |
the British negotiating team. I don't think I'll say this all that | :56:01. | :56:09. | |
often during this process, but I completely and utterly agree with | :56:10. | :56:12. | |
the Brexit Secretary and indeed as we have learned earlier on, that | :56:13. | :56:18. | |
those words were endorsed the following day on his blog by the | :56:19. | :56:23. | |
member for Wokingham who we have discovered didn't really mean it. He | :56:24. | :56:27. | |
was just saying it at the time as a ruse. | :56:28. | :56:34. | |
Can I tell him why he's wrong in this matter? If we were to give on | :56:35. | :56:39. | |
the face of the Bill a second referendum at this stage that would | :56:40. | :56:45. | |
tie the hands of negotiators. We could only be offered a bad deal | :56:46. | :56:48. | |
because it would be in the hands of the people we were negotiating with | :56:49. | :56:52. | |
to drive the British people to reject it and it would be a failed | :56:53. | :56:56. | |
policy from the start. I'm grateful to him for his intervention. I have | :56:57. | :57:00. | |
to say though that the logic of his argument is that the minister | :57:01. | :57:03. | |
shouldn't have made the offer for this House to have a say either at | :57:04. | :57:09. | |
the end of the deal. And if you are in a position where you're about to | :57:10. | :57:13. | |
go over a cliff to not give yourself the opportunity to not go over the | :57:14. | :57:18. | |
cliff that's the ultimate negotiating weakness as the Brexit | :57:19. | :57:22. | |
Secretary rightly pointed outed four and a bit years ago. | :57:23. | :57:28. | |
He really must correct the record. I did not make the offer flippantly or | :57:29. | :57:33. | |
not intending to see it through in 2012. It was a fair offer which was | :57:34. | :57:37. | |
not taken up. I with all my colleagues then made a different | :57:38. | :57:40. | |
offer in 2015 which was accepted and we are pursuing. | :57:41. | :57:49. | |
We would no way which to impune the Right Honourable's integrity. It was | :57:50. | :57:59. | |
a method to get the outcome. He is therefore, I guess, the hard Brexit | :58:00. | :58:03. | |
equivalent of Malcolm X by any means necessary. If I can make a little | :58:04. | :58:09. | |
bit of progress I would be grateful. I would be very grateful. I think it | :58:10. | :58:14. | |
is true that this is an argument that absolutely began with | :58:15. | :58:19. | |
democracy. It cannot now in all honesty end with a stitch-up. This | :58:20. | :58:26. | |
it was especially true given that the Lee campaign offered no plans, | :58:27. | :58:32. | |
no instructions, no prospectus, no vision of what out would look like. | :58:33. | :58:47. | |
I was a Remainor as well. I regret the result. Does the honourable | :58:48. | :58:53. | |
gentleman agree with Vince Cable, the former Business Secretary, that | :58:54. | :58:57. | |
a second referendum raises a lot of fundamental problems? We are dealing | :58:58. | :59:05. | |
with a lot of fundamental problems in any event. The bottom line is | :59:06. | :59:10. | |
this - the reality is we are not talking about a second referendum. | :59:11. | :59:13. | |
One would argue that the referendum on 23rd June was a second | :59:14. | :59:17. | |
referendumment we are arguing for a referendum on the terms of the deal. | :59:18. | :59:21. | |
Something that has not been put to the British people even once. | :59:22. | :59:27. | |
I'm grateful for the honourable member giving way. He says we'll get | :59:28. | :59:31. | |
to a cliff edge. His offer of a referendum is no choice. He would | :59:32. | :59:35. | |
either have to vote for it or vote for against it. If you voted against | :59:36. | :59:41. | |
it, you would have that cliff edge that people are trying to avoid? We | :59:42. | :59:44. | |
are offering an opportunity for them not only to have the final say of | :59:45. | :59:47. | |
the deal, but having looked over that cliff edge to say no thanks and | :59:48. | :59:52. | |
to remain in the European Union. That's aly jt mat and democratic | :59:53. | :59:59. | |
offer for a party to make. Whilst it is legitimate to take an alternative | :00:00. | :00:02. | |
point of view, it is fully democratic. I want to make a clear | :00:03. | :00:06. | |
point here and I'll make progress if colleagues do not mind. You see I | :00:07. | :00:10. | |
want to give credit here, there is a few of them here now. A little bit | :00:11. | :00:14. | |
of credit to our SNP colleagues in this House here today. Because | :00:15. | :00:19. | |
during the Scottish independence referendum they were able to produce | :00:20. | :00:26. | |
a 670 page paper, a White Paper, on exactly what leaving the United | :00:27. | :00:29. | |
Kingdom would look like. Now, of course, I didn't agree with them, | :00:30. | :00:33. | |
but at least the people of Scotland knew what it was they were voting | :00:34. | :00:36. | |
for and what it was they would be rejecting. If that vote had gone the | :00:37. | :00:41. | |
other way in 2014, there would have been no need for a second vote then | :00:42. | :00:45. | |
on the independence deal away from the United Kingdom. Now, this | :00:46. | :00:51. | |
Government is going to take some monumental decisions over the next | :00:52. | :00:54. | |
two years. I still believe that it will be impossible for them to | :00:55. | :00:58. | |
negotiate a deal that is better than the one we currently have inside the | :00:59. | :01:02. | |
European Union. But these negotiations will happen and a deal | :01:03. | :01:07. | |
will be reached. And when all is said and done, someone will have to | :01:08. | :01:10. | |
decide whether the deal is good enough for the people of Britain. | :01:11. | :01:15. | |
Surely the only right and logical step is to allow the people to | :01:16. | :01:19. | |
decide whether it is the right deal for them, their families, their | :01:20. | :01:24. | |
jobs, and our country, not politicians in Whitehall or | :01:25. | :01:27. | |
Brussels, not even this House, but the people. No one in this | :01:28. | :01:32. | |
Government, no one in this House, no one in this country has any idea | :01:33. | :01:37. | |
what the deal the Prime Minister will agree. It is completely | :01:38. | :01:42. | |
unknown. I'll give way. Does he share my surprise at the resistance | :01:43. | :01:47. | |
to his perfectly sensible suggestion of a ratification referendum given | :01:48. | :01:50. | |
that the whole hallmark of a leave campaign was about taking back | :01:51. | :01:53. | |
control? Surely that means control for the British people, not just | :01:54. | :01:59. | |
control for the MPs? That's an excellent point. It seems bizarre | :02:00. | :02:04. | |
that having tried to claim, take back control, that very effective | :02:05. | :02:09. | |
slogan that was used, they now wish to seed control to those occupying | :02:10. | :02:15. | |
the 21st century of smoke filled rooms in Brussels and Whitehall to | :02:16. | :02:19. | |
have a stitch-up imposed on the British people. He will remember his | :02:20. | :02:25. | |
predecessor produced a leaflet saying only the Liberal Democrats | :02:26. | :02:28. | |
will offer a real referendum. I presume they had no idea of the | :02:29. | :02:33. | |
implications if the people voted to come out at that stage he said it | :02:34. | :02:36. | |
was a once in a generation vote. He is saying we should have a mandate | :02:37. | :02:39. | |
referendum and a terms referendum. So when will he be saying if those | :02:40. | :02:43. | |
two go through, we should have a are you really sure about that | :02:44. | :02:44. | |
referendum? He seems to be under the impression | :02:45. | :02:54. | |
that democracy is a one-hit game. Somehow if you believe passionately | :02:55. | :02:57. | |
in what you believe in, you have to do give in. He and I both sat on | :02:58. | :03:02. | |
this side of the chamber during the last five years of the Labour | :03:03. | :03:07. | |
administration. When the Labour Party won its big majorities in 97, | :03:08. | :03:13. | |
2001 and 2005, did he give in and say it would be frustrating for | :03:14. | :03:17. | |
people to stop fighting the Conservative cause? He didn't. It's | :03:18. | :03:22. | |
right to respect the will of the people, but it's to disrespect the | :03:23. | :03:27. | |
will of democracy when you give in. I have said before, his approach is | :03:28. | :03:34. | |
Hotel California, you can check out but never leave. He wants people to | :03:35. | :03:39. | |
vote and vote again until he gets a result he agrees with. The British | :03:40. | :03:43. | |
people have voted and we have to leave the European Union and | :03:44. | :03:45. | |
implement the will of the British people. I will come onto that in a | :03:46. | :03:52. | |
moment. I don't think it is in any enacting the will of the British | :03:53. | :03:56. | |
people to consistently refused the British people to have the right to | :03:57. | :04:00. | |
have the say on the deal that will affect generations to come and which | :04:01. | :04:03. | |
none of us here know what it will look like. He will know that I | :04:04. | :04:11. | |
support the position that he is articulate in in amendment 43, but | :04:12. | :04:14. | |
in light of the concession we have heard from the government today, | :04:15. | :04:19. | |
does he share my concern that at the end of this negotiation the choice | :04:20. | :04:23. | |
this Parliament will have is between accepting the deal that the | :04:24. | :04:27. | |
government offers, possibly a bad deal, or falling out of the European | :04:28. | :04:34. | |
Union on WTO terms at a cost of ?45 billion of our GDP. Do you not think | :04:35. | :04:37. | |
the British people might be worried about that and might want to have a | :04:38. | :04:44. | |
say about it? He continues to make a very strong case and be bold and | :04:45. | :04:47. | |
putting it across, not just today. There is no doubt whatsoever that | :04:48. | :04:50. | |
whatever the British people voted for on the 23rd of June, for | :04:51. | :04:54. | |
certain, they did not vote to make themselves poorer and it would be | :04:55. | :04:58. | |
absolutely wrong for that game of poker to end up as a consequence, a | :04:59. | :05:04. | |
dropping off the cliff edge without the British people having the right | :05:05. | :05:09. | |
to have their say. I will give way. His argument would have force if the | :05:10. | :05:13. | |
question on the 23rd of June had been, to give the government a | :05:14. | :05:19. | |
mandate to negotiate bring back a deal. It wasn't. It was a | :05:20. | :05:24. | |
conditional question, do you want to leave or remain. People listened to | :05:25. | :05:28. | |
the arguments about the risks and they decided to leave. He can't | :05:29. | :05:32. | |
accept that and I think a Democrat should be able to. I think he's | :05:33. | :05:37. | |
quite wrong. Undoubtedly, I have said clearly, the majority of people | :05:38. | :05:40. | |
voted to leave the European Union on the 23rd June. The government has a | :05:41. | :05:46. | |
mandate to go along at that point. What they didn't do, because they | :05:47. | :05:51. | |
were not asked, was to decide that the destination. As the current | :05:52. | :05:56. | |
Brexit secretary quite rightly said in his speech four years ago, | :05:57. | :05:59. | |
destination and departure are different things. It's right for | :06:00. | :06:03. | |
Democrats to make the case of the British people not to have their | :06:04. | :06:05. | |
world taken from them and have a stitch up imposed upon them. I will | :06:06. | :06:14. | |
give way one more time. What would happen if we did have a second | :06:15. | :06:18. | |
referendum and the British people rejected that offer. Where would | :06:19. | :06:23. | |
that leave us? The wording on that ballot paper would be up for | :06:24. | :06:28. | |
discussion. Our vision is we would accept the terms of the governments | :06:29. | :06:32. | |
negotiation, or the United Kingdom would remain in the European Union. | :06:33. | :06:37. | |
I will give way last time. We have no problem in supporting his new | :06:38. | :06:41. | |
cause, if as the UK Government believes in the White Paper, that | :06:42. | :06:44. | |
they have 65 million people behind their negotiating position, what are | :06:45. | :06:49. | |
they afraid of? It seems to me people who have been arguing for the | :06:50. | :06:53. | |
sovereignty of Parliament in this country, and to enforce the will of | :06:54. | :06:57. | |
the people and all of that, to now be so scared of the people troubles | :06:58. | :07:00. | |
me and it makes me worried they don't have the courage of their | :07:01. | :07:04. | |
convictions. Looking forward, and I want to make some progress now | :07:05. | :07:07. | |
because others need to get in, the deal must be put to the British | :07:08. | :07:10. | |
people for them to have their say because that's the only way to hold | :07:11. | :07:14. | |
the government to account. We already know in all likelihood that | :07:15. | :07:25. | |
48% of the British people will not like the outcome of the deal, and we | :07:26. | :07:28. | |
now know the kind of Brexit this Prime Minister intends to pursue, | :07:29. | :07:30. | |
you can pretty much bet that perhaps half of the 52% will not like it | :07:31. | :07:33. | |
either. They will feel betrayed and ignored. The only way to achieve | :07:34. | :07:36. | |
democracy and closure for both leave and remain voters is for there to be | :07:37. | :07:41. | |
a vote at the end. The government claims to be enforcing the will of | :07:42. | :07:45. | |
the people, but I would put you that is nonsense. If I was being very | :07:46. | :07:48. | |
generous, the best you could say is that the government is interpreting | :07:49. | :07:51. | |
the will of the people. Some would say they are taking a result and | :07:52. | :07:54. | |
twisting it to mean something quite different. The Conservatives won a | :07:55. | :08:02. | |
mandate in the mate with teeth -- in the May 2015 general election. In a | :08:03. | :08:11. | |
manifesto they pledged a referendum but also to keep Britain in the | :08:12. | :08:16. | |
single market. That second pledge, to keep us in the single market was | :08:17. | :08:24. | |
not caveat it, not contingent on the outcome of any referendum. It was a | :08:25. | :08:27. | |
clear pledge. The government are now breaking that pledge. They are | :08:28. | :08:32. | |
making a choice. I have given way an awful lot. They are making a choice. | :08:33. | :08:39. | |
They choice that the British people have not given them permission to | :08:40. | :08:43. | |
make. And a choice that isn't just damaging to our country, but also | :08:44. | :08:50. | |
divisive. The Prime Minister had the opportunity to pursue a form of | :08:51. | :08:55. | |
Brexit that United our country, that achieved consensus and reflected the | :08:56. | :08:59. | |
closeness of the vote, that sought to deal with and heal the divisions | :09:00. | :09:04. | |
between Leave and Remain. Instead, she chose to pursue the hardest and | :09:05. | :09:08. | |
most divisive and destructive form of Brexit. I would say she is | :09:09. | :09:14. | |
tearing us out of the single market and leaving us isolated against the | :09:15. | :09:19. | |
might of world superpowers. I passionately believe that ending our | :09:20. | :09:24. | |
membership of the world's biggest free market will do untold damage to | :09:25. | :09:29. | |
this country, to the prospect and opportunities, especially for young | :09:30. | :09:32. | |
people who voted heavily to remain in this country. It's vital for our | :09:33. | :09:36. | |
economy, and that's why my party refuses to stop making the case that | :09:37. | :09:42. | |
this deal must include membership of the single market. Those who settle | :09:43. | :09:46. | |
for access to the single market rather than membership, are, I | :09:47. | :09:50. | |
respectfully suggest, waving the white flag to this assault on | :09:51. | :09:52. | |
British business and the cost of living for every family in the | :09:53. | :09:57. | |
country. But giving the government is making a set of extreme and | :09:58. | :10:01. | |
arbitrary choices that were not on the ballot paper last June, the only | :10:02. | :10:05. | |
thing a democrat can do is to give the people the final say. If the | :10:06. | :10:10. | |
Prime Minister is so confident that what she is planning is what people | :10:11. | :10:14. | |
voted for, then why would she not give them a vote on the final deal? | :10:15. | :10:21. | |
I won't give way, I have given away plenty of times and will bring my | :10:22. | :10:26. | |
remarks to an end for everyone else's say. The final deal will not | :10:27. | :10:30. | |
be legitimate. It will not be consented to, and our country will | :10:31. | :10:35. | |
not be achieving closure if it is imposed on the British people | :10:36. | :10:38. | |
through a stitch up in the corridors of power in Brussels and Whitehall. | :10:39. | :10:41. | |
Democracy does mean accepting the will of the people at the beginning | :10:42. | :10:48. | |
of the process and at the end of the process. Democracy means respecting | :10:49. | :10:52. | |
the majority and democracy also means not giving up on your beliefs, | :10:53. | :10:56. | |
rolling over and conceding when the going gets tough. You keep fighting | :10:57. | :11:00. | |
for what you believe is right and that is what Liberal Democrats will | :11:01. | :11:04. | |
do. We agree with the Brexit secretary, let's let the people have | :11:05. | :11:08. | |
their say, let's let them take back control. Oliver Letwin. May I just | :11:09. | :11:16. | |
start by correcting the record. I had something to do with the | :11:17. | :11:19. | |
production of the manifesto the Right Honourable gentleman was | :11:20. | :11:22. | |
clearly unable to read in the time available to him. It made no such | :11:23. | :11:27. | |
assertion. It was perfectly clear that what it said about the single | :11:28. | :11:33. | |
market was to be superseded where a referendum results, which we didn't | :11:34. | :11:37. | |
anticipate, but the British people would take is out of the EU as a | :11:38. | :11:44. | |
whole. And I regret that. I voted to remain, I campaigned to remain. But | :11:45. | :11:47. | |
the fact is the British people voted to leave. What is interesting, I | :11:48. | :11:59. | |
think, about this debate, and it has been very interesting, is that it is | :12:00. | :12:05. | |
one of those moments in which the cloak of obscurity is lifted from an | :12:06. | :12:09. | |
issue and it becomes clear what is actually the dynamic going on. And | :12:10. | :12:13. | |
what is actually going on here, is we have reached the crunch issue. We | :12:14. | :12:18. | |
have reached the point at which we are discussing whether the effect of | :12:19. | :12:22. | |
the Supreme Court judgment should be that Parliament has the option at | :12:23. | :12:27. | |
some date in the future of overruling the British people and | :12:28. | :12:31. | |
cancelling the leaving of the EU, or whether it should not have that | :12:32. | :12:36. | |
ability. My right honourable friend, the minister, has made it perfectly | :12:37. | :12:44. | |
clear that there will be a vote. But the vote, he has also made it | :12:45. | :12:47. | |
perfectly clear is the vote between the option of accepting it | :12:48. | :12:52. | |
particular set of arrangements negotiated by Her | :12:53. | :12:55. | |
Majesty'sgovernment, and not excepting those arrangements and | :12:56. | :12:58. | |
thereby leaving the EU without either in the one case a withdrawal | :12:59. | :13:03. | |
agreement, or in the other case, an arrangement for the future. My right | :13:04. | :13:06. | |
honourable friend is right. I think we can be optimistic we can reach | :13:07. | :13:11. | |
such agreements, but we don't know if we will. Following the logic of | :13:12. | :13:17. | |
the referendum decision, that the judgment of this house should simply | :13:18. | :13:24. | |
be about whether the deal is good enough. To warrant doing a deal, or | :13:25. | :13:28. | |
whether, on the contrary, we should leave without a deal. That is a | :13:29. | :13:33. | |
completely different... To the proposition which, in various | :13:34. | :13:37. | |
guises, some are exempt entirely from this the opposition front | :13:38. | :13:44. | |
bench, but some on the opposition benches are putting, which is that | :13:45. | :13:48. | |
Parliament should instead by one means or another be given the | :13:49. | :13:52. | |
ability to countermand the British people's decision to leave your Mac | :13:53. | :13:55. | |
by giving a vote on whether we should leave or shouldn't leave, or | :13:56. | :14:00. | |
in the proposition of the leader of the Liberal Democrats, whether the | :14:01. | :14:02. | |
people should have a second referendum on whether we should | :14:03. | :14:07. | |
leave or not to leave. Either of those propositions is a clear | :14:08. | :14:12. | |
determination to undo the effect of the referendum. And we have now | :14:13. | :14:14. | |
reached the point at which that has come out into the open. I will give | :14:15. | :14:20. | |
way to the former leader of the SNP. Can we just instruct the government | :14:21. | :14:24. | |
to negotiate a better deal? The phrase in the Conservative manifesto | :14:25. | :14:28. | |
which he didn't write was, we say yes to the single market. That | :14:29. | :14:35. | |
sounds pretty unequivocal. We were at that moment a member of the EU | :14:36. | :14:38. | |
and we said yes to the single market and I campaigned for the single | :14:39. | :14:41. | |
marketing campaign to remain part of the EU. That was the government's | :14:42. | :14:47. | |
position in the referendum. But we'll is committed to a referendum | :14:48. | :14:50. | |
and the point of committing to the referendum, and we made that | :14:51. | :14:54. | |
perfectly clear in able range of speeches and the manifesto, was that | :14:55. | :14:58. | |
if the British people voted to leave, we would leave. It seems to | :14:59. | :15:01. | |
me perfectly clear that the word leave means leave. It does not mean | :15:02. | :15:06. | |
remain. And what the right honourable gentleman, who is an | :15:07. | :15:09. | |
expert parliamentarian has been arguing, in many ways over a long | :15:10. | :15:13. | |
time, more explicitly the leader of the Liberal Democrats has been | :15:14. | :15:17. | |
arguing, is that leave ought to be translated as remain. I deny this is | :15:18. | :15:21. | |
a translation that fits the in the site which is susceptible. It seems | :15:22. | :15:26. | |
to me perfectly clear that those of us who campaign to leave and those | :15:27. | :15:29. | |
who campaigned to remain have a choice, we can either accept the | :15:30. | :15:33. | |
referendum result rejected. I accept it. The gentleman opposite, maybe | :15:34. | :15:38. | |
some honourable members who are not gentleman, but winning, opposite, | :15:39. | :15:44. | |
also take that view. It may be that some take the view we should reject | :15:45. | :15:48. | |
the referendum result. It's a perfectly honourable view. The | :15:49. | :15:51. | |
leader of the Liberal Democrats was in effect offering that we should | :15:52. | :15:55. | |
reject the result openly. I don't decry his ability to argue that, but | :15:56. | :16:00. | |
everybody arguing that should come out openly, as he did, and not | :16:01. | :16:04. | |
pretend they are trying to present some method of parliamentary | :16:05. | :16:07. | |
scrutiny. It's nothing of the kind. They are trying to present a means | :16:08. | :16:10. | |
of undoing the result of the referendum. This house has actually | :16:11. | :16:14. | |
voted conclusively not to undo the result of the referendum and I think | :16:15. | :16:17. | |
the house was right to do that. Whether it was right not to do that | :16:18. | :16:21. | |
with its eyes open, and should not be dialled by anyone into passing | :16:22. | :16:26. | |
amendments that have an effect that it has not been signed up to buy | :16:27. | :16:34. | |
anybody. Can I just point out to him that it is absolutely clear, and I | :16:35. | :16:37. | |
want to clarify from my point of view, that this place, and indeed | :16:38. | :16:40. | |
Parliament as a whole, and indeed the courts, have no right whatsoever | :16:41. | :16:44. | |
to bar the will of the people. It would be absolutely wrong to | :16:45. | :16:48. | |
overturn the outcome of the referendum last June. I am merely | :16:49. | :16:50. | |
asking for the British people to have a final say on the deal and | :16:51. | :16:54. | |
should they reject the deal, to stay in the EU. And voting to say you | :16:55. | :17:01. | |
vote to leave the EU does not mean voting to leave the single market. | :17:02. | :17:05. | |
It didn't for Norway or Switzerland. There are two issues here. One is | :17:06. | :17:09. | |
whether the question of leaving the EU means leaving the single market. | :17:10. | :17:13. | |
It doesn't. I argued in a referendum when I was persuading those to | :17:14. | :17:19. | |
remain, I continue to take the view and of all is taken the view that | :17:20. | :17:22. | |
leaving the EU does entail leaving the single market, which I regret, | :17:23. | :17:26. | |
but in my view it doesn't tail it. Leaving that aside, I accept that | :17:27. | :17:30. | |
the proposition of the Liberal Democrats is that it should not be | :17:31. | :17:34. | |
this house directly that countermand is the referendum, but there should | :17:35. | :17:37. | |
be a second referendum to countermand it. One of the points | :17:38. | :17:43. | |
made is right. The proposition The Right Honourable made, a Beverley | :17:44. | :17:49. | |
decent proposition, however many times it takes, the British people | :17:50. | :17:53. | |
should go on being asked to reverse their original decision, because one | :17:54. | :17:56. | |
should never go on giving up to do so because the right answer is to | :17:57. | :18:00. | |
remain. As a Beverley respectable proposition but not the proposition | :18:01. | :18:05. | |
of a Democrat. It's the proposition of eight Kwarasey that knows the | :18:06. | :18:09. | |
answer and believes the people that vote otherwise are misguided and | :18:10. | :18:14. | |
they need to be misled time after time to revise their opinion by | :18:15. | :18:17. | |
whatever means until at last they give the answer which is required. | :18:18. | :18:23. | |
That is unfortunately, I point out to the right honourable gentleman, | :18:24. | :18:27. | |
the very dynamic that has given rise to this whole problem. We are at | :18:28. | :18:32. | |
this juncture today because there was a government that passed the | :18:33. | :18:35. | |
Maastricht Treaty against the will of the British people without | :18:36. | :18:38. | |
consulting them, that took us into a form of the European Union to which | :18:39. | :18:41. | |
they had never consented, that has led to a set of results that have | :18:42. | :18:44. | |
eventually produced a democratic result that the right honourable | :18:45. | :18:48. | |
gentleman and I both dislike, and his answer to that is to go on with | :18:49. | :18:52. | |
that logic until at last the British people totally lose faith in any | :18:53. | :18:56. | |
semblance of democracy in this country. I personally cannot accept | :18:57. | :19:01. | |
that proposition. In the end, much as I would have preferred to remain, | :19:02. | :19:06. | |
I prefer to be in a country run as a democracy, and which has faith in | :19:07. | :19:09. | |
its governance and we can only achieve that today by fulfilling the | :19:10. | :19:10. | |
terms of the referendum. It is a minor point, but I want to | :19:11. | :19:21. | |
come just braefl to the question of the various knew clauses that are | :19:22. | :19:25. | |
before us. And they do seem to me to differ. New clause 1 actually is a | :19:26. | :19:35. | |
fairly innocuous item. I'm delighted that my Right Honourable friend seem | :19:36. | :19:38. | |
to be indicating that we won't actually be accepting new clause 1 | :19:39. | :19:42. | |
and I'm delighted we won't be accepting it because there is doubt | :19:43. | :19:49. | |
about whether it is just issuable. It states in it that what has to be | :19:50. | :19:54. | |
accepted is the statement of the proposed terms of the agreement. If | :19:55. | :19:59. | |
that's written into the law I suppose that a very clever lawyer | :20:00. | :20:04. | |
and Lord Pannick and others are very clever lawyers might be able to | :20:05. | :20:08. | |
mount some kind of judicial review of the question whether the | :20:09. | :20:11. | |
Government had in fact brought forward a statement of the proposed | :20:12. | :20:16. | |
terms of the agreement that it was adequate to the intent of the Bill | :20:17. | :20:22. | |
or the Act. I doubt that that would acurd and therefore, I don't | :20:23. | :20:26. | |
personally have any very strong feelings about new clause 1. New | :20:27. | :20:33. | |
clause 99 and new clause 110 about which some honourable members | :20:34. | :20:38. | |
opposite have spoken are entirely different in character because each | :20:39. | :20:42. | |
of them actually makes it perfectly clear in two different ways that the | :20:43. | :20:48. | |
House of Commons would actually be called upon to make a set of | :20:49. | :20:54. | |
decisions which are both issuable and undermine the leaving of the EU. | :20:55. | :21:01. | |
In the case of new clause 99, I think notwithstanding the exchange I | :21:02. | :21:05. | |
had with the honourable lady that it is perfectly clear that if | :21:06. | :21:09. | |
Parliament found itself in a position in which it had not | :21:10. | :21:16. | |
approved in her section B the withdrawal without agreement, then | :21:17. | :21:20. | |
Parliament would have created an appalling conflict of laws because | :21:21. | :21:24. | |
Article 50 is very explicit. It says the treaty has seize to apply to the | :21:25. | :21:28. | |
state in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal | :21:29. | :21:32. | |
agreement or failing that two years after notification. If the EU by | :21:33. | :21:38. | |
consensus had not extended the period, then the treaties would | :21:39. | :21:42. | |
seize it apply, but Parliament would prospectively have voted not to | :21:43. | :21:46. | |
leave. Now, if Parliament has voted not to leave and the treaties don't | :21:47. | :21:53. | |
apply I'd like to know who in this House could say which of the laws is | :21:54. | :21:59. | |
superior to the other? So I think new clause 99 is clearly deficient | :22:00. | :22:05. | |
as a piece of legislation and I hope therefore that those who are | :22:06. | :22:09. | |
proposing it will take that point and not press it. New clause 110 is | :22:10. | :22:18. | |
not as bad as 99, though it is very odd, it is very odd because it says | :22:19. | :22:22. | |
that any new treaty or relationship with the EU mustn't not be concluded | :22:23. | :22:26. | |
unless the proposed terms have been subject to approval by resolution of | :22:27. | :22:31. | |
each House of Parliament. Now, it is possible to be subject to approval | :22:32. | :22:35. | |
without being approved. It seems entirely unclear on the face of new | :22:36. | :22:39. | |
clause 110 whether it is referring to approval or to the process that | :22:40. | :22:44. | |
might have led to approval and that itself, of course, would be just | :22:45. | :22:49. | |
issuable. Quite apart from that bad drafting it is a legal minefield | :22:50. | :22:53. | |
that it creates because it makes it clear that it is any knew treaty or | :22:54. | :23:00. | |
relationship request the EU which mustn't be concluded. One possible | :23:01. | :23:04. | |
relationship is the relationship of not being in the EU and therefore, | :23:05. | :23:10. | |
it itself arguably at least and this could be contested in court, is | :23:11. | :23:16. | |
again an opportunity for Parliament to reverse the intent of the | :23:17. | :23:21. | |
referendum and deny leaving. So what we have in new clauses 99 and 110 | :23:22. | :23:26. | |
which look on the face as if they are as innocuous as new clause 1 are | :23:27. | :23:32. | |
measures which are neither innocuous and well drafted. They fulfil the | :23:33. | :23:35. | |
purposes which I have been referring to in the earlier part of my remarks | :23:36. | :23:42. | |
namely to put Parliament in the position of potentially reversing | :23:43. | :23:45. | |
the decision of the British people. And therefore, I very much hope that | :23:46. | :23:52. | |
if my Right Honourable friend is at any time remotely tempted to accept | :23:53. | :23:57. | |
new clause 1, he will never accept new clause 99 or 110 and we will | :23:58. | :24:02. | |
resist such amendment should they appear here or in the other place. I | :24:03. | :24:10. | |
I have two concerns with new clause 1. It is clear the Government needs | :24:11. | :24:15. | |
to involve Parliament throughout the whole process. The second is we | :24:16. | :24:20. | |
cannot know all the permutations around which agreement and exit | :24:21. | :24:23. | |
maybe affected and therefore to legislate for it now before we know | :24:24. | :24:26. | |
how it is going to end up is premature and would end up risking | :24:27. | :24:32. | |
binding the hands of the negotiators and the Government. I share my | :24:33. | :24:38. | |
honourable friend's preference for not legislating in that respect. | :24:39. | :24:42. | |
There are good reasons why over a very, very long historical evolution | :24:43. | :24:47. | |
the House of Commons has always resisted legislation that governs | :24:48. | :24:52. | |
its own proceedings. We have a number of authorities about our | :24:53. | :24:59. | |
constitution written that the nearest proxmation is the standing | :25:00. | :25:03. | |
orders of the House of Commons. And that is not a frivolous remarks by | :25:04. | :25:07. | |
those authorities, it is a true remark and the reason it has arisen | :25:08. | :25:13. | |
is because we have resisted having legislation that governs the House | :25:14. | :25:17. | |
of Commons and the reason we've resisted it so avoid the judges | :25:18. | :25:20. | |
becoming the judges of what should happen in the House of Commons. And | :25:21. | :25:25. | |
we have in fact invented over a very long period the principle that the | :25:26. | :25:30. | |
judges don't intervene in the legislature and the legislature | :25:31. | :25:34. | |
doesn't intervene in the decisions of the judiciary and to legislate | :25:35. | :25:39. | |
about how the House of Commons proceeds is therefore moving over a | :25:40. | :25:43. | |
very dangerous line and I'm therefore with my honourable friend | :25:44. | :25:47. | |
in hoping that we won't accept new clause 1. I'm just saying that if we | :25:48. | :25:52. | |
were tempted at all to introduce any piece of new legislation at any | :25:53. | :25:56. | |
stage, it should certainly look like new clause 1 and not new clauses 99 | :25:57. | :26:01. | |
and 110. Those would be to subvert the referendum and that, we cannot | :26:02. | :26:09. | |
allow. I do have some respect for the | :26:10. | :26:16. | |
honourable member for West Dorset and I have been in enough Bill | :26:17. | :26:21. | |
committees to hear some of the arguments. When I hear honourable | :26:22. | :26:24. | |
members resorting to the oh well, the drafting of this particular | :26:25. | :26:29. | |
phrase particularly when it came to this question about subject to the | :26:30. | :26:32. | |
approval of both Houses is somehow an alien concept and something that | :26:33. | :26:37. | |
we must resist in all circumstances. I hear the last refuge of the | :26:38. | :26:44. | |
Parliamentary barrel scraper, I think if the honourable member has | :26:45. | :26:49. | |
arguments against new clause 110 which I would like to move, it is | :26:50. | :26:57. | |
the amendment in my name, if he has substantive arguments against it, | :26:58. | :27:01. | |
better engage with those rather than dance around and find second or | :27:02. | :27:06. | |
third order against. It has been a very interesting debate so far. | :27:07. | :27:12. | |
There was a moment of excitement I suppose, well in Parliamentary terms | :27:13. | :27:17. | |
excitement at the beginning when the Brexit minister stood up and said | :27:18. | :27:21. | |
well, let me in a breathless way give you a concession, I'll indicate | :27:22. | :27:26. | |
that there is something here that is substantively different and he did | :27:27. | :27:31. | |
come to the dispatch box and did clarify a little bit further, not | :27:32. | :27:33. | |
much further than the Prime Minister had done in her speech to Lancaster | :27:34. | :27:40. | |
House, something about the timing of the vote that Parliament will have, | :27:41. | :27:48. | |
but of course, the Right Honourable member for Rushcliffe quickly | :27:49. | :27:53. | |
spotted in the definitions of when a negotiation is concluded, when it is | :27:54. | :27:57. | |
signed off, there is still a bit of a grey area there when that timing | :27:58. | :28:02. | |
would come and so, for some small mercies I suppose, many honourable | :28:03. | :28:06. | |
members might say well, this is some level of progress. However, having | :28:07. | :28:11. | |
marched us up to the hill in expectation this was a great | :28:12. | :28:15. | |
concession, I'm afraid as the time has ticked by, as the machines have | :28:16. | :28:18. | |
gone past, we've kind of marched back done the hill again because | :28:19. | :28:23. | |
through the probing of many honourable members on both sides of | :28:24. | :28:27. | |
the House we have since discovered a number of things about that | :28:28. | :28:29. | |
particular vote. Don't forget what we're trying to do today in this | :28:30. | :28:34. | |
whole section is secure a meaningful vote, a properly meaningful vote so | :28:35. | :28:40. | |
Parliamentry sovereignty can come first as the Supreme Court | :28:41. | :28:43. | |
emphasised in their particular judgment. First of all, when | :28:44. | :28:49. | |
pressed, the ministers did have to admit that if we ended up in a | :28:50. | :28:55. | |
situation of no deal the House wouldn't be getting a vote on that | :28:56. | :29:00. | |
circumstance. That is deeply regrettable because new clause 110 | :29:01. | :29:04. | |
is deliberately drafted to talk about new treat quay or a | :29:05. | :29:07. | |
relationship and a relationship talks about the connection between | :29:08. | :29:10. | |
two entities, that connection can be a positive and new one, it can also | :29:11. | :29:14. | |
be one which has a disjoint within it and so we should have a vote if | :29:15. | :29:20. | |
that relationship is to include the circumstance of no deal. The | :29:21. | :29:24. | |
minister said, I will give way in a moment, but the minister said that | :29:25. | :29:28. | |
we wouldn't be what having a vote on no deal. That's extremely | :29:29. | :29:32. | |
disappointing of the it is not what I would regard as in the spirit of | :29:33. | :29:36. | |
the concession that should be sought because we were lobing not just for | :29:37. | :29:40. | |
a concession on the timing of that Parliamentary vote, but on the scope | :29:41. | :29:45. | |
of that vote. In other words, the circumstances in which having gone | :29:46. | :29:48. | |
through the negotiations we would find ourselves being able to vote. | :29:49. | :29:53. | |
It is a little bit as though you could imagine two years of travel, | :29:54. | :29:57. | |
journey down the road of negotiation, we get to the edge of | :29:58. | :30:03. | |
the canyon and we have a point of decision. Are we going to have that | :30:04. | :30:08. | |
bridge across the cash which might be the new treaty? It might take us | :30:09. | :30:13. | |
to the new future or are we going to decide to jump off into the unknown, | :30:14. | :30:19. | |
into the abyss and Parliament should have the right to decide that point. | :30:20. | :30:23. | |
This is the concession that I think many honourable members were seeking | :30:24. | :30:27. | |
and it is not the concession that we received. I'll give way to the | :30:28. | :30:32. | |
honourable gentleman. He made an extraordinarily important | :30:33. | :30:35. | |
clarification of his amendment and it is as I suspected and expected | :30:36. | :30:39. | |
relationship includes the potential of no relationship and therefore, he | :30:40. | :30:44. | |
is, is he not, putting forward the proposition that Parliament should | :30:45. | :30:48. | |
be able to reverse the effect of the referendum and seize the United | :30:49. | :30:53. | |
Kingdom being able to leave the EU? No, it is quite clear that as we saw | :30:54. | :30:58. | |
in second reading and it is quite clear I think to all concerned that | :30:59. | :31:01. | |
we will be leaving the European Union. The referendum made that | :31:02. | :31:04. | |
judgment. That was the question on the ballot paper. The House came to | :31:05. | :31:08. | |
that particular point of view, but it is important that Parliament | :31:09. | :31:13. | |
verves that right as the Prime Minister has sort of indicated that | :31:14. | :31:15. | |
we should be able to have a say on the final deal. Now, this is our | :31:16. | :31:22. | |
opportunity, this is our final opportunity, our final opportunity | :31:23. | :31:28. | |
to legislate on the face of the Bill precisely what circumstances those | :31:29. | :31:32. | |
would be and I have to say, no, I won't give way because I know there | :31:33. | :31:36. | |
is a lot of honourable members wanting to get in. What was | :31:37. | :31:39. | |
deplating in the minister's so-called concession which actually | :31:40. | :31:43. | |
now feels quite hollow was the fact that he then went on to say that if | :31:44. | :31:49. | |
Parliament did decide to reject or to vote against a draft deal he | :31:50. | :31:54. | |
wouldn't go back into negotiations. The Government would feel that this | :31:55. | :31:59. | |
was, "A sign of weakness" Of somehow or another. Personally, I think | :32:00. | :32:02. | |
that's entirely wrong. If Parliament says with respect to the Government, | :32:03. | :32:07. | |
this isn't quite good enough, please go back and seek further points of | :32:08. | :32:15. | |
clarification and further points. That should be a source of strength. | :32:16. | :32:20. | |
I believe it strengthens the arm of Government for them to be able to | :32:21. | :32:24. | |
say, "We'd like to do this, but Parliament are keen for a better | :32:25. | :32:27. | |
deal." It is useful to have that for the Prime Minister. So new clause | :32:28. | :32:32. | |
110, I believe, is a helpful amendment for the Government and for | :32:33. | :32:35. | |
the Prime Minister and what was disappointing was that the minister | :32:36. | :32:39. | |
didn't just say this in response to, you know, pressure from honourable | :32:40. | :32:43. | |
members. He had it in his script, in his piece of paper, from which he | :32:44. | :32:48. | |
was reading his remarks. He had pre-prepared the circumstances where | :32:49. | :32:51. | |
he was going to say that he was not prepared to go back into | :32:52. | :32:55. | |
negotiations if Parliament declined to give support to those new | :32:56. | :33:00. | |
arrangements. So we can see that the concession is not quite all that it | :33:01. | :33:01. | |
is meant to be. One of the things troubling me is | :33:02. | :33:10. | |
the principle of equivalents. As I understand it, the European | :33:11. | :33:13. | |
Parliament has the opportunity to vote on the deal before presented to | :33:14. | :33:17. | |
the European Council and it in effect has the right of veto. My | :33:18. | :33:21. | |
interpretation is that the deal is therefore sent back to the | :33:22. | :33:24. | |
negotiating team for further negotiation. Does he agree with me | :33:25. | :33:28. | |
that one of the strong points here, we have to ensure that those who | :33:29. | :33:32. | |
voted to leave the EU, have at least the same equivalents of what their | :33:33. | :33:38. | |
parliament can do with that of the European Parliament? She absolutely | :33:39. | :33:42. | |
makes an incredibly important point. And one that is in defence of the | :33:43. | :33:47. | |
sovereignty of our Parliament. It is about putting Britain first and | :33:48. | :33:51. | |
making sure we do defend and safeguard the rights of our | :33:52. | :33:55. | |
constituents and make sure that the European Parliament doesn't have an | :33:56. | :33:59. | |
advantage that we would not. And if the European Parliament has the | :34:00. | :34:03. | |
opportunity to reject the new relationship, the new arrangements, | :34:04. | :34:07. | |
then so should we. It's a very simple point. With respect, even if | :34:08. | :34:13. | |
the Minister were to personally come here and make that verbal | :34:14. | :34:17. | |
concession. He's a very able minister, but ministers can be here | :34:18. | :34:21. | |
today and gone tomorrow. Ministers come and go. Having such clarity on | :34:22. | :34:28. | |
the face of the bill enshrined in the legislation is really important | :34:29. | :34:31. | |
for honourable members. This is a question that transcends party | :34:32. | :34:35. | |
political issues. I think he should hear the voice of members from all | :34:36. | :34:40. | |
sides on this particular issue. We recognise we are going to be leaving | :34:41. | :34:43. | |
the European Union but we want the best possible deal for Britain. | :34:44. | :34:48. | |
Parliament is sovereign here. Yes, we have ministers who lead on the | :34:49. | :34:52. | |
negotiations, but he can't cut Parliament out altogether. It should | :34:53. | :34:57. | |
be a source of strength for them. A very final intervention. The thing I | :34:58. | :35:01. | |
really don't understand, and I have been thinking about this since the | :35:02. | :35:04. | |
point was made by the Right Honourable member for Ponty cracked | :35:05. | :35:08. | |
and Castleford. When he says can we have a vote in the situation of not | :35:09. | :35:12. | |
having a deal, the Liberal Democrat leader has been clear in this case | :35:13. | :35:16. | |
that he would either say yes to the deal, sorry, you if you said no to | :35:17. | :35:20. | |
the deal you would remain in the European Union. When he says there | :35:21. | :35:23. | |
would be a vote on a no deal situation, what are the two choices? | :35:24. | :35:28. | |
Would one of them be remaining in the European Union? My understanding | :35:29. | :35:34. | |
is that we remain in the European Union until such time as the Article | :35:35. | :35:38. | |
50 two-year period expires, after which time there is the famous cliff | :35:39. | :35:44. | |
edge. I'm hoping now we had a partial acceptance from the | :35:45. | :35:46. | |
government that the vote needs to take place in Parliament | :35:47. | :35:49. | |
sufficiently early on the draft arrangements, that Parliament would | :35:50. | :35:52. | |
then have a sick fish and period of time to say to ministers, perhaps we | :35:53. | :36:02. | |
like 90% of the deal done but we would like to go back to get a | :36:03. | :36:06. | |
slightly better deal. -- have a significant period. To take | :36:07. | :36:09. | |
Parliament out of that process altogether would be a great shame. I | :36:10. | :36:13. | |
would like to move on because honourable members want to get into | :36:14. | :36:19. | |
this discussion. The question, the wording in New Clause 110 is very | :36:20. | :36:31. | |
deliberate. We need to take the opportunity the Supreme Court has | :36:32. | :36:34. | |
given us and also listen to the entreaties of the Prime Minister | :36:35. | :36:37. | |
herself in her own white paper where I think the 12th of 12 points was to | :36:38. | :36:43. | |
say that we would not aspire to a cliff edge, that we would try to get | :36:44. | :36:49. | |
a deal, and this new clause 110 simply seeks to facilitate in many | :36:50. | :36:53. | |
ways the role Parliament could have in achieving the very thing the | :36:54. | :36:56. | |
Prime Minister has said she wants. I'm afraid to say to the Minister, | :36:57. | :37:00. | |
Hobson 's choice, take it or leave it. Source style votes are not | :37:01. | :37:07. | |
acceptable and not good enough for Parliament. We have to do have a | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
continued say in this and I would urge the house across the parties to | :37:12. | :37:16. | |
consider the role that new clause 110 could play in making it a | :37:17. | :37:23. | |
meaningful vote. Dominic Grieve. It's a pleasure to participate in | :37:24. | :37:26. | |
this debate. I agree with one comment made by the Honourable | :37:27. | :37:30. | |
member for Nottingham East in moving his amendment to 110, the problem | :37:31. | :37:34. | |
that the Devils this debate is that we are in a completely grey and | :37:35. | :37:40. | |
murky environment. When it comes to ascertaining how this process will | :37:41. | :37:44. | |
or should unfold. Someone who campaigned for the Remain campaign, | :37:45. | :37:51. | |
this worried me at the time. But I have to accept the electorate has | :37:52. | :37:56. | |
spoken. For me, the key issue is, how can I help the government never | :37:57. | :38:00. | |
get some of the reefs that seem to be present so we can achieve a | :38:01. | :38:04. | |
satisfactory outcome and try to give effect to the expressed will of the | :38:05. | :38:09. | |
electorate. The problem we have is that we cannot predict what the | :38:10. | :38:13. | |
situation is going to be in two years' time. We have no idea what | :38:14. | :38:17. | |
the political landscape is going to be here in terms of the economic | :38:18. | :38:21. | |
condition, whether in fact we are doing very well in the run-up to | :38:22. | :38:25. | |
Brexit or very badly. We cannot predict what the landscape will be | :38:26. | :38:30. | |
on the European continent and the state of the current union itself | :38:31. | :38:34. | |
and how it would impact on the negotiations. Nor could we predict | :38:35. | :38:39. | |
the wider security situation that may exist for our continent. That's | :38:40. | :38:45. | |
why, it has always seemed to me, that the idea that this house in | :38:46. | :38:50. | |
some way forgoes its responsibility to safeguard the electorate's | :38:51. | :38:55. | |
interest because a referendum has taken place, is simply not a view to | :38:56. | :39:01. | |
which I am prepared to subscribe. And in those circumstances, we have | :39:02. | :39:05. | |
to do have regard to what the situation might be. We have to do | :39:06. | :39:11. | |
have regard to the difficulties the government undoubtedly faces also in | :39:12. | :39:15. | |
its unpredictability, but also to rule nothing out. And to pick up the | :39:16. | :39:19. | |
point that has been made, I repeat it, because it's my position and I | :39:20. | :39:23. | |
will hold to it to the end. The public opinion on this matter might | :39:24. | :39:27. | |
change radically. And this house would be entitled to take that into | :39:28. | :39:32. | |
account. Equally, I accept that at the moment there is no such | :39:33. | :39:35. | |
evidence, and it is our duty to get on with the business of trying to | :39:36. | :39:42. | |
operate with Brexit. How do we introduce safeguards into this | :39:43. | :39:46. | |
process? There is an ultimate safeguard, this house has the power | :39:47. | :39:52. | |
to stop the government in its tracks. But that tends to be a | :39:53. | :39:57. | |
rather chaotic process and leads usually two governments falling from | :39:58. | :40:01. | |
office. It's an option that one can never entirely rule out in 1's | :40:02. | :40:05. | |
career in politics, but it's not one I would wish to visit my colleagues | :40:06. | :40:09. | |
on the front bench. But I have to say it's an important matter and one | :40:10. | :40:13. | |
of the risks they undoubtedly run in this process is that could happen to | :40:14. | :40:17. | |
them. We can't exclude it. But actually, it's very much better that | :40:18. | :40:21. | |
we should have some process by which Parliament can provide input and | :40:22. | :40:27. | |
influence the matter in a way that facilitates debate and enables us | :40:28. | :40:31. | |
collectively to come to outcomes which at least we can accept and | :40:32. | :40:36. | |
which may be in the national interest as we do it. I give away. | :40:37. | :40:41. | |
On a point of clarification, will my right honourable friend indicate | :40:42. | :40:45. | |
whether he perceives New Clause 110 as potentially being a vehicle which | :40:46. | :40:51. | |
if invoked could block Brexit and keep us within the European Union? | :40:52. | :40:55. | |
Because at the moment, it's not clear to me. I will come clause 110, | :40:56. | :41:01. | |
the amendment, in just a moment. It's certainly very well-meaning, | :41:02. | :41:04. | |
but I happen to think there are problems with it and I will explain | :41:05. | :41:08. | |
what they are in a moment. One of the points that has been made, or | :41:09. | :41:14. | |
should be made, is that it is usual for government to bring important | :41:15. | :41:18. | |
treaties to this house for approval before they sign it. It's quite | :41:19. | :41:23. | |
common is a phenomenon. It's not unusual. Not normally ratified it | :41:24. | :41:28. | |
signed. There is a long history of doing this on important treaties. In | :41:29. | :41:36. | |
an ideal world, the obvious course of action, sequentially, is the | :41:37. | :41:41. | |
white paper, and I'm delighted we succeeded in securing it because it | :41:42. | :41:45. | |
sets out a plan. The government getting on with the treaty | :41:46. | :41:48. | |
negotiations. And in our ideal world, I would like to see the | :41:49. | :41:52. | |
government come back before anything is concluded to ask this house for | :41:53. | :41:57. | |
its approval. And to indicate what it has succeeded in achieving. The | :41:58. | :42:00. | |
house would then have to make judgments at that time in relation | :42:01. | :42:08. | |
to the situation overall. I'm grateful to the Honourable member | :42:09. | :42:11. | |
for giving way as he takes us through the sequence of this. The | :42:12. | :42:14. | |
minister indicated that the beginning of the debate that there | :42:15. | :42:18. | |
was a concession that would make this more meaningful. I don't expect | :42:19. | :42:22. | |
him to comment, but it appears number ten on our briefing that this | :42:23. | :42:27. | |
is exactly the same as what the Prime Minister offered in her | :42:28. | :42:29. | |
Lancaster house speech, and therefore nothing has changed. I | :42:30. | :42:34. | |
have to say, I don't think I agree with that. I don't know what number | :42:35. | :42:40. | |
ten may or may not be doing. I had some role in trying to secure the | :42:41. | :42:44. | |
concession that was read out by the Minister. It is by no means a | :42:45. | :42:49. | |
perfect concession as far as I am concerned, but I will come on in a | :42:50. | :42:52. | |
moment to explain some of the difficulties I think that house has. | :42:53. | :42:57. | |
I give way to the Honourable Lady. The daily Mirror is reporting that | :42:58. | :43:02. | |
number ten has said that all the concession does is give clarity | :43:03. | :43:05. | |
around the timing of the vote and nothing else. The timing, it is | :43:06. | :43:12. | |
absolutely right that there had been indications from the government on a | :43:13. | :43:15. | |
number of occasions previously that they would allow this house to have | :43:16. | :43:20. | |
a say. Indeed, I have to say, looking at the matter logically, the | :43:21. | :43:24. | |
idea we would be deprived of having a say, that is lighting a blue touch | :43:25. | :43:30. | |
paper and retiring. If a government wishes to bring its self down, then | :43:31. | :43:34. | |
denying Parliament a say on some really important issue is just not | :43:35. | :43:41. | |
feasible. I will give way in just a moment. I had some role in trying to | :43:42. | :43:48. | |
look and see how the government could provide some assurance on the | :43:49. | :43:52. | |
process. Not perfect, and the Minister has read out what he has. I | :43:53. | :43:57. | |
have to say to the Honourable Lady, I think it's a significant step | :43:58. | :44:01. | |
forward, as was said by the Honourable and learn it gentlemen, | :44:02. | :44:06. | |
the member for Holborn and St Pancras, a significant step forward | :44:07. | :44:10. | |
on what had been said previously. It has provided to my mind helpful | :44:11. | :44:16. | |
clarification. Number ten is briefing that there is no real | :44:17. | :44:20. | |
change. The concession is not a concession. That is number ten it's | :44:21. | :44:25. | |
self. I can read what's on the paper. I take the view that it is a | :44:26. | :44:31. | |
significant step forward. I will say no more about it at this time. I | :44:32. | :44:38. | |
will give way. The house will have its say, the question is the | :44:39. | :44:42. | |
circumstances under which it has that say, and what is the default | :44:43. | :44:47. | |
position if it doesn't agree? Can we adjudicate between the daily Mirror, | :44:48. | :44:51. | |
number ten, the minister in the front bench and the interpretation | :44:52. | :44:54. | |
of the right honourable gentleman by having something on paper in the | :44:55. | :44:59. | |
bill so we can all then have an interpretation crystallised around a | :45:00. | :45:07. | |
central truth. The right honourable gentleman, with characteristic | :45:08. | :45:09. | |
sagacity goes to the heart and snub of the problem. Is it readily | :45:10. | :45:16. | |
probable to put on the face of this bill, the intention is set out by | :45:17. | :45:21. | |
the minister when he read it out at the dispatch box? There are, I'm | :45:22. | :45:25. | |
afraid, it seems to me, some really good reasons, in fairness to the | :45:26. | :45:30. | |
Minister and government, why it presents difficulties. The most | :45:31. | :45:34. | |
obvious difficulty is the finite nature of the negotiating period | :45:35. | :45:38. | |
under Article 50 will stop one of the things I was interested in is | :45:39. | :45:42. | |
whether we could secure from the government an undertaking that we | :45:43. | :45:46. | |
would have a vote at the end of the process before, in fact, the signing | :45:47. | :45:51. | |
of the deal with the commission. Contrary to what is in amendment | :45:52. | :45:59. | |
110, the Council of ministers and the commission are not two separate | :46:00. | :46:03. | |
processes. The commission will sign the initial agreement when the | :46:04. | :46:07. | |
Council of ministers gives them authority to do it. Then it goes to | :46:08. | :46:12. | |
the European Parliament for a ratification or approval process, | :46:13. | :46:16. | |
call you what it will. These are not two separate things. The problem we | :46:17. | :46:20. | |
run is that if this negotiation follows a pattern, which we have | :46:21. | :46:25. | |
often had in the course of EU negotiations in running into the | :46:26. | :46:28. | |
11th hour, 59th minute and 59th second and we are about to drop off | :46:29. | :46:33. | |
the edge, I confess that I don't particularly wish to fetter the | :46:34. | :46:36. | |
government's discretion in saying that at that precise moment they | :46:37. | :46:41. | |
have to say, we are sorry, we have to give a decision until 48 hours | :46:42. | :46:45. | |
after we have dropped off because we have to get approval from both | :46:46. | :46:49. | |
houses of parliament. That is a real problem. It's a real problem | :46:50. | :46:55. | |
inherent in the ghastly labyrinth, from my point of view, into which we | :46:56. | :47:01. | |
have been plunged. And we have to try to work our way through with | :47:02. | :47:13. | |
common sense. Was his understanding that what the minister said was that | :47:14. | :47:17. | |
the deal would be presented to Parliament after it had been agreed | :47:18. | :47:20. | |
by the commission and the Council, but before it had been agreed by | :47:21. | :47:27. | |
Parliament. If so, that seems like a really late stage in the process. | :47:28. | :47:31. | |
And does he think there's a problem if the EU Parliament can send it | :47:32. | :47:37. | |
back to negotiations, but the UK Parliament can't. There are bound to | :47:38. | :47:42. | |
be difficulties in this because the whole process of negotiation, as she | :47:43. | :47:45. | |
is aware from Article 50, is rather one-sided. This is an inherent | :47:46. | :47:53. | |
difficulty. Let's suppose for a moment that these negotiations are | :47:54. | :47:57. | |
concluded in 18 months. I would hope in those circumstances the Minister | :47:58. | :48:00. | |
would say, thank you, but we will not do the first agreement, we want | :48:01. | :48:05. | |
to go back to both houses of parliament before we agree with the | :48:06. | :48:08. | |
commission because we have time to do so. But if it is the 11th hour, I | :48:09. | :48:14. | |
accept the government has a problem. And that problem is not taken into | :48:15. | :48:18. | |
account in New Clause 110. The preference is for Parliament to | :48:19. | :48:28. | |
be asked its opinion before any agreement has been signed with the | :48:29. | :48:32. | |
council on the, the commission on the authority of the council. Does | :48:33. | :48:37. | |
he accept this 11th hour problem, can easily be got round in the | :48:38. | :48:42. | |
torturous process of European negotiations stopping the clock is | :48:43. | :48:48. | |
hardly unknown and if all the member states were agreed that the British | :48:49. | :48:52. | |
Government had to be given time to get the approval of Parliament they | :48:53. | :48:57. | |
would allow two or three weeks to' lapse. Now would he also agree that | :48:58. | :49:03. | |
what we need is something on paper to clarify these highly important | :49:04. | :49:12. | |
poin? So would he agree with me in inviting the minister to table an | :49:13. | :49:16. | |
amendment in the House of Lords giving precise effect to whatever | :49:17. | :49:20. | |
the concession is meant to mean. If we pass new clause 99 or new clause | :49:21. | :49:27. | |
110 today, it can be replaced with that Government amendment. If they | :49:28. | :49:31. | |
come up with a better clarification, but what we can't do is leave this | :49:32. | :49:36. | |
debate continuing for the next two years on what the minister did or | :49:37. | :49:40. | |
did not mean when he made his statement to the House today. | :49:41. | :49:48. | |
The Right Honourable gentleman had a very long career. So long in fact | :49:49. | :49:54. | |
that I think he is capable of recognising the difference between | :49:55. | :50:01. | |
an intervention and a speech. Dominic Grieve... It would be | :50:02. | :50:08. | |
helpful if the Government were in a position to amplify on the brief | :50:09. | :50:13. | |
statement, but also acknowledge and my honourable friend knows this that | :50:14. | :50:17. | |
just as he expressed it, doing this by means of an amendment is, I | :50:18. | :50:22. | |
think, going to be difficult. I know Government drafts men have extreme | :50:23. | :50:28. | |
inagain uity and this maybe an issue which might be taken up, but I think | :50:29. | :50:32. | |
there are some difficulties because there is a whole series of | :50:33. | :50:35. | |
conditionalities in it and I don't wish at the moment to fetter the | :50:36. | :50:39. | |
Government in it's ability to carry out this negotiation. It would seem | :50:40. | :50:46. | |
a greateror if we do this, because we will undermine the ultimate | :50:47. | :50:51. | |
outcome to our own detriment. This has been something which worried me | :50:52. | :50:54. | |
throughout. So for those reasons, it don't want to take up more of the | :50:55. | :51:00. | |
House's time, for those reasons, my inclination, although I have had | :51:01. | :51:03. | |
great difficulty over this today and indeed in the days that led up to it | :51:04. | :51:09. | |
is so accept the assurance that's been given by honourable friend the | :51:10. | :51:13. | |
minister to be a constructive step forward, but I think he will have to | :51:14. | :51:17. | |
face up to the fact that this issue isn't going to go away. Even when we | :51:18. | :51:23. | |
have enacted the legislation and triggered Article 50 this will be a | :51:24. | :51:26. | |
recurrent theme throughout the whole of the negotiating process and it | :51:27. | :51:30. | |
will come back much, much harder as we get closer to the outcome and it | :51:31. | :51:34. | |
becomes clearer from all the leaks that will come from Brussels what | :51:35. | :51:38. | |
sort of deal or non deal they're going to have. So the Government had | :51:39. | :51:41. | |
better have a strategy because if the strategy is to avoid this House, | :51:42. | :51:46. | |
isle afraid I have to say to my honourable friend the Government is | :51:47. | :51:49. | |
going to fail miserably and I don't want that to happen. I want to try | :51:50. | :51:56. | |
and guide this process as best I can as a previous law officer towards a | :51:57. | :52:02. | |
satisfactory conclusion. I'm grateful to my Right Honourable | :52:03. | :52:05. | |
friend who played a considerable part in this. What the remarks that | :52:06. | :52:11. | |
the minister do is put an onus on the Government to make sure that a | :52:12. | :52:15. | |
reporting process of the negotiation is also meaningful because you can't | :52:16. | :52:21. | |
have a vote at the end of this after 18 months of radio silence so the | :52:22. | :52:25. | |
negotiating process can be sensible and can be relevant and can give the | :52:26. | :52:30. | |
House a real feel of what's to happen, if that's not there, the | :52:31. | :52:33. | |
vote at the end would mean very little. I agree entirely with my | :52:34. | :52:38. | |
honourable friend and I hope the Government will listen because this | :52:39. | :52:42. | |
issue is not going to go away and it will keep con coming back whilst | :52:43. | :52:49. | |
this issue dominates our politics until we have satisfactorily | :52:50. | :52:50. | |
resolved it. I just want to say as he thanked the | :52:51. | :53:05. | |
minister, the House ought to thank him. He set out the responsible | :53:06. | :53:11. | |
version about how to deal with this issue. | :53:12. | :53:16. | |
I'm grateful. I listened to his speech and some of the things I | :53:17. | :53:19. | |
might have said he had already said and he approached it from a similar | :53:20. | :53:23. | |
angle. I will just say this in conclusion at the risk of repeating | :53:24. | :53:30. | |
myself. Yes, I give way. His speech seems to be predicated on the idea | :53:31. | :53:37. | |
that the Government can go to and from to Europe and negotiate | :53:38. | :53:47. | |
something that Parliament might be happy with. Isn't this I don't know | :53:48. | :54:02. | |
and I actually think that none of us know. You can make some broad | :54:03. | :54:07. | |
assumptions and there appears to be goodwill to reach a sensible | :54:08. | :54:10. | |
agreement. You can see how that could be easily derailed by | :54:11. | :54:13. | |
political pressures and considerations within other EU | :54:14. | :54:16. | |
states and you can also see and I have to say that the United Kingdom | :54:17. | :54:19. | |
is at a disadvantage of these negotiations for reasons that are | :54:20. | :54:23. | |
plainly obvious. But seeing as we have embarked on this course, what | :54:24. | :54:28. | |
we have got to do collectively is try to apply common sense. I often | :54:29. | :54:33. | |
don't hear common sense on this issue and frequently I don't seem to | :54:34. | :54:38. | |
hear it from some members on my own benches who seem fixated on | :54:39. | :54:43. | |
ideological considerations that will reduce this country to beggary if we | :54:44. | :54:50. | |
continue with them, but I do consider we have to be rational in | :54:51. | :54:53. | |
trying to respond to the clearly stated wishes of the electorate. | :54:54. | :54:59. | |
Until such time we they show they might do as they did between 197 and | :55:00. | :55:03. | |
a last year that they changed their mind on the subject and even then it | :55:04. | :55:08. | |
might be a different future and not a return to the past. I will do my | :55:09. | :55:13. | |
best to support the Government. I welcome the minister's comments and | :55:14. | :55:16. | |
in the circumstances therefore, I think that they are looking at the | :55:17. | :55:19. | |
amachinedments the best solution we have this evening and as I say, that | :55:20. | :55:23. | |
doesn't mean to say that the Government is not going to have to | :55:24. | :55:27. | |
continue thinking about how it involves this House and otherwise | :55:28. | :55:30. | |
this House is simply going to involve itself. It is a pleasure to | :55:31. | :55:41. | |
follow the excellent speech from the member. A chrkically shrewd speech. | :55:42. | :55:48. | |
I agree wholeheartedly with one of the things he said towards the | :55:49. | :55:51. | |
beginning of his speech. We cannot allow the fact that there has been a | :55:52. | :55:56. | |
referendum to absolve this House of Its duty to scrutinise the | :55:57. | :56:00. | |
Government's progress through these negotiation and to act in the | :56:01. | :56:05. | |
national interest. I wholeheartedly agree with him about that and it is | :56:06. | :56:08. | |
that view which is conditioning the entire which in which I'm | :56:09. | :56:12. | |
approaching this debate. I disagreed with him however about the other | :56:13. | :56:17. | |
substantive thing he said was in respect of the concession made by | :56:18. | :56:22. | |
the member for clued, the Brexit minister. I agree that it is a | :56:23. | :56:27. | |
substantive concession that the Government has made here today. I'm | :56:28. | :56:32. | |
less Angwin I confess than some of my honourable and Right Honourable | :56:33. | :56:35. | |
friends about that. It doesn't feel that we have moved much beyond where | :56:36. | :56:39. | |
we are in the Lancaster House speech. Inasmuch as what is being | :56:40. | :56:43. | |
offered to the House is a debate right at the end of the process, at | :56:44. | :56:48. | |
a point we don't know exactly, but seemingly right at the dog days of | :56:49. | :56:53. | |
the process and a choice at that point between the deal that is on | :56:54. | :56:58. | |
offer which in my view is likely to be a bad deal because it is | :56:59. | :57:03. | |
predicated itself on our leaving the single market, and leaving the | :57:04. | :57:07. | |
customs union and the hard hard Brexit we feared and no deal and if | :57:08. | :57:11. | |
there is no deal then as the minister has confirmed here today, | :57:12. | :57:15. | |
what the country will face is exiting the European Union on WTO | :57:16. | :57:19. | |
terms. Now what does that mean for the country? Well, according to the | :57:20. | :57:25. | |
Director-General of the World Trade Organisation, it would mean a | :57:26. | :57:30. | |
reduction of around ?9 billion worth of trade per annum for the United | :57:31. | :57:34. | |
Kingdom. That's the view of the WTO. What does it mean according to the | :57:35. | :57:38. | |
Treasury? Well, before the referendum the Treasury said that | :57:39. | :57:43. | |
they thought it would mean an annual reduction in the receipts for this | :57:44. | :57:49. | |
country of ?45 billion per year. That's the reduction in GDP that | :57:50. | :57:54. | |
they saw. It is an eye watering sum. It would be equivalent to putting | :57:55. | :57:58. | |
ten pence on the basic rate of income tax in this country and | :57:59. | :58:02. | |
that's why above all else, we have to consider incredibly carefully | :58:03. | :58:07. | |
where we're going because if we end up at that point, it will be | :58:08. | :58:11. | |
disaster for Britain the I said I wanted to speak in favour of | :58:12. | :58:17. | |
amendment 43 by the honourable member for west moorland and | :58:18. | :58:21. | |
Lonsdale. I would have liked to have been able to speak in respect of my | :58:22. | :58:26. | |
amendment, new clause 52 or new clause 131 by the Liberal Democrats | :58:27. | :58:29. | |
which would have gone further and insisted on there being a second | :58:30. | :58:35. | |
referendum. Apparently we can't have those amendments because they would | :58:36. | :58:39. | |
mean a money commitment that there isn't in respect of this Bill, but | :58:40. | :58:44. | |
it seem to me to be ironic when the potential cost of falling out of the | :58:45. | :58:49. | |
European Union is ?45 billion, not to spend ?100 million on making sure | :58:50. | :58:54. | |
we don't do that is a pretty good deal. On the particular point, there | :58:55. | :59:01. | |
is amendment 44 to be voted on on Wednesday which does have a | :59:02. | :59:04. | |
provision for a referendum evaluation that doesn't therefore | :59:05. | :59:09. | |
need to be costed and therefore, it is in order and people who want a | :59:10. | :59:13. | |
second referendum on the film say can vote for that amendment. I'm | :59:14. | :59:19. | |
pleased with that. I hope we will vote on that tomorrow. The reason I | :59:20. | :59:23. | |
am insistent that we need to consider once more a second | :59:24. | :59:27. | |
referendum, a con fir matetry ratify katetry referendum, whatever you | :59:28. | :59:30. | |
want to call it, I believe that Brexit is going to be a disaster for | :59:31. | :59:35. | |
our country. One that is going to cost us and future generations in | :59:36. | :59:41. | |
lost trade, in lost revenues, and in lost opportunities. I believe that | :59:42. | :59:45. | |
it is a disaster for us to be dividing the country as we have done | :59:46. | :59:52. | |
on this issue. On our values and on the crucial things we hold in | :59:53. | :59:55. | |
concert and I won't give way because the honourable member has spoken a | :59:56. | :59:59. | |
lot in this debate. I also think it is destructive for us to have | :00:00. | :00:07. | |
engaged in Brexit and unleashed a catalytic force of destructive | :00:08. | :00:11. | |
politics, not just in this country, but across the west. And it is to my | :00:12. | :00:17. | |
eternal regret that we launch down this route with this Parliament in | :00:18. | :00:23. | |
my view not being sufficiently vigilant on diligent as to the risks | :00:24. | :00:27. | |
that we face in this referendum or to the nature of the referendum that | :00:28. | :00:31. | |
we were offering to the country because I believe that it was a | :00:32. | :00:37. | |
profoundly flawed referendum. Flawed in many regards and one which could | :00:38. | :00:41. | |
I'm sure many people would feel right across this House, could have | :00:42. | :00:45. | |
been dramatically improved with greater scrutiny, and with greater | :00:46. | :00:49. | |
care. Why did we not offer that scrutiny? Because I do not think | :00:50. | :00:52. | |
that many members in this House on either side of the debate seriously | :00:53. | :00:56. | |
thought that the referendum was going to be lost. There was a | :00:57. | :01:01. | |
widespread view that this was a referendum being agreed upon for | :01:02. | :01:05. | |
ideological reasons to solve the culture wars that have raged in the | :01:06. | :01:11. | |
Tory Party for 30 odd years and it wasn't really considered carefully | :01:12. | :01:15. | |
enough. But we have an opportunity in this House now to make aid | :01:16. | :01:20. | |
mendments for the mistake that we made -- amends for the mistake that | :01:21. | :01:27. | |
we made, not the people, they voted on the question we offered them, | :01:28. | :01:30. | |
they voted with the information that we provided, they voted with the 50% | :01:31. | :01:35. | |
plus one margin that we put in statute. We have an opportunity to | :01:36. | :01:40. | |
rectify some of those mistakes and I feel that we should. I feel we | :01:41. | :01:44. | |
should follow the view that the Brexit Secretary had when he was on | :01:45. | :01:48. | |
the back benches in this House and it is the honourable member for west | :01:49. | :01:53. | |
moorland said have a final con fir matetry referendum. We had a mandate | :01:54. | :01:57. | |
referendum which said we should leave the European Union, but we do | :01:58. | :02:02. | |
not know what the terms of that leaving will be and it is legitimate | :02:03. | :02:06. | |
for us to consider that. It wouldn't be denying democracy to do that. It | :02:07. | :02:10. | |
would in my view be doubling down on it. The problem with simply pushing | :02:11. | :02:16. | |
for a vote in this place on the terms of that deal is that I feel we | :02:17. | :02:24. | |
run the risk of leaving the people doubly dissatisfied because it is | :02:25. | :02:27. | |
perfectly possible that this House could reject the prospect of us | :02:28. | :02:33. | |
falling out of the European Union on WTO terms because of the costs that | :02:34. | :02:37. | |
will become apparent when we see the extra cost for our production of | :02:38. | :02:42. | |
cars, for chemicals, for financial services, for all of the other | :02:43. | :02:46. | |
things that would see their tariff price rise for export out of this | :02:47. | :02:50. | |
country. It is perfectly possible that as the honourable member said, | :02:51. | :02:55. | |
we start to see a change in the views of the country in respect of | :02:56. | :03:00. | |
Brexit when those things happen. I will give way in a moment. Why do | :03:01. | :03:05. | |
I ask for that? Because I hope the country does change its mind. I'm | :03:06. | :03:10. | |
not shy about saying that. I feel Brexit is a mistake. I think it will | :03:11. | :03:13. | |
damage the future of our children. It is not in our national interest | :03:14. | :03:18. | |
and although the people have voted for it, I think we have a duty to | :03:19. | :03:22. | |
scrutinise the Government's management of this process to give | :03:23. | :03:27. | |
clarity to the people as to what it's really going to mean to them, | :03:28. | :03:30. | |
not the projections and not the promises and not the ?350 million | :03:31. | :03:36. | |
lies that were scrawled on a bus, nor some of the so-called threats | :03:37. | :03:40. | |
from project fear, but the reality of what Brexit is going to mean in | :03:41. | :03:45. | |
pounds, shillings and pence for my children, for all of our children | :03:46. | :03:49. | |
and at that point we will be doing our duty if we not only scrutinise | :03:50. | :03:53. | |
and vote in this place, but use that vote to give the people the final | :03:54. | :03:56. | |
say on the final terms of the deal. Can I say from the outset, it is | :03:57. | :04:13. | |
really important for all of us just step back from the way we have done | :04:14. | :04:20. | |
politics for too long and to the detriment of British politics? The | :04:21. | :04:23. | |
idea there are concessions to be made, whether there are briefings | :04:24. | :04:31. | |
from Number 10 that say no concessions can be made, whether we | :04:32. | :04:35. | |
say they have been given and the abyss and that, and isn't it | :04:36. | :04:43. | |
wonderful, and something is triumphant over another? Whether you | :04:44. | :04:48. | |
have seen of the Brexiteer 's or remain as, it is not only tedious | :04:49. | :04:54. | |
and inaccurate, it does not do us or our constituents any favours. I for | :04:55. | :05:02. | |
1am sick and tired of it. It was back in September or October for a | :05:03. | :05:06. | |
number of people on these benches said the what now happened, as we | :05:07. | :05:14. | |
leave the EU, we have accepted the referendum result. Transcend normal | :05:15. | :05:19. | |
party political divide because it is so important, not for my generation | :05:20. | :05:23. | |
but for my children and grandchildren that are to come. As | :05:24. | :05:29. | |
others have said, I will give credit, these are the most important | :05:30. | :05:34. | |
negotiations we have entered for decades and it is critical we get it | :05:35. | :05:38. | |
right because of the consequences for generations to come. So can we | :05:39. | :05:52. | |
in effect stop the sort of... It is not acceptable any more. Let us try | :05:53. | :05:57. | |
to come together, to heal the divide, because we need to say this, | :05:58. | :06:07. | |
he was not just in my constituency. I look to Nottingham in Ashfield, | :06:08. | :06:13. | |
because the results of the borough are bigger than my constituency and | :06:14. | :06:20. | |
excludes eastward, and I will not go into the demography of them, but in | :06:21. | :06:26. | |
my constituency, the vote for Leave was about the national average, 51%, | :06:27. | :06:34. | |
maybe up to 52%. Some of my voters, as indeed across this country, voted | :06:35. | :06:39. | |
to leave the European Union because they wanted to and they were adamant | :06:40. | :06:48. | |
they wanted this place to have true sovereignty, true Parliamentary | :06:49. | :06:53. | |
sovereignty. And yet the awful irony of it is, since this vote, there are | :06:54. | :07:00. | |
many people who feel that Parliament has been completely excluded. The | :07:01. | :07:06. | |
government had to be brought in. This bill had to come because of | :07:07. | :07:15. | |
some brave citizens that went to court to say, Parliamentary | :07:16. | :07:19. | |
sovereignty must mean that, it must be sovereign and it must exceed the | :07:20. | :07:23. | |
powers of the government. And then it has failed to say if this place | :07:24. | :07:31. | |
has been excluded. And so it has been that we are leaving the single | :07:32. | :07:37. | |
market, we have abandoned free movement, long held beliefs on all | :07:38. | :07:45. | |
sides that people are against, in some instances, everything we have | :07:46. | :07:49. | |
ever believed in the decades, and those we have in effect, last week | :07:50. | :07:55. | |
when we voted to put into action the result of the referendum, we did not | :07:56. | :08:00. | |
vote according to a conscience all our long-held beliefs. I did not | :08:01. | :08:05. | |
vote with my conscience. If I am truthful about it, I am actually not | :08:06. | :08:09. | |
sure I voted in the best interests of my constituents. That upsets me | :08:10. | :08:17. | |
because when I came here, I have not come here for a career, I came here | :08:18. | :08:21. | |
because I wanted to represent my constituents and did a very best for | :08:22. | :08:25. | |
them, and I genuinely do not know if I did not last week, but I was true | :08:26. | :08:31. | |
to the promise I made to my constituents. I promise them that if | :08:32. | :08:35. | |
they voted Leave, they would get Leave, and that is what drove me | :08:36. | :08:40. | |
with a heavy heart through the lobbies and against my conscience | :08:41. | :08:43. | |
but I do believe I did the right thing and I look myself in the | :08:44. | :08:46. | |
mirror every morning, believing I have been true to the promise made | :08:47. | :08:53. | |
to my constituents. But if I will not now be true to my belief in | :08:54. | :08:57. | |
Parliamentary sovereignty, I do not want to vote against my government, | :08:58. | :09:02. | |
I have never been to slaughter my government, even though at times... | :09:03. | :09:07. | |
I have always been true and loyal to my government. In this instance, I | :09:08. | :09:14. | |
think that Newport one 110 and bodies admirable objectives. And | :09:15. | :09:20. | |
goodness me, anyone would think this is revolutionary. Whatever happens, | :09:21. | :09:26. | |
be a deal, and I support my government and Prime Minister in all | :09:27. | :09:30. | |
their efforts to get that deal, and I thank the Minister for the | :09:31. | :09:37. | |
concession he has given, and if people do not like the word | :09:38. | :09:42. | |
concession, I will abandon that, for what the Minister has said has been | :09:43. | :09:47. | |
the right thing to say. The excellent speech from my right | :09:48. | :09:52. | |
honourable learn a friend, it is progress and the right thing to do. | :09:53. | :09:58. | |
But what concerns me is what happens if, despite its best efforts, the | :09:59. | :10:02. | |
government fails to no-fault of its own and we have no deal. And how | :10:03. | :10:08. | |
revolutionary is it to say, in the event of no deal and in a writing | :10:09. | :10:15. | |
meaningful time, as we go to that new relationship, please could we | :10:16. | :10:19. | |
have a say, not on by Harper Parliament, on behalf of all our | :10:20. | :10:23. | |
constituents? That is why I come to this place. She has got to the nub | :10:24. | :10:32. | |
of the issue. What my constituents fear is that they have seen | :10:33. | :10:35. | |
throughout this process Parliament being sidelined and been presented | :10:36. | :10:38. | |
with this deal or no Deal option with the horror of ending up in | :10:39. | :10:45. | |
limbo, giving the difficulties of negotiating terms. That will put our | :10:46. | :10:49. | |
country in a bigger mess than we are an already. That's what they fear | :10:50. | :10:53. | |
that is why they want Parliament to have a say. I agree with much of the | :10:54. | :10:56. | |
content of what the right honourable gentleman says but I am also | :10:57. | :11:01. | |
reminded of what the member for Beaconsfield said, who knows where | :11:02. | :11:08. | |
we may be in 2-mac reduced time? Nobody seems to have thought of in | :11:09. | :11:13. | |
these terms. We may not have our Prime Minister. It may be another | :11:14. | :11:20. | |
Prime Minister. We might not have the same Secretary of State. Even my | :11:21. | :11:24. | |
right honourable friend, the minister. That is a circumstance | :11:25. | :11:28. | |
that could change. Another circumstance that could change as | :11:29. | :11:33. | |
the economy, the mood in Europe and it might actually be... Those | :11:34. | :11:39. | |
hardline Brexiteers, there may be circumstances that they want to | :11:40. | :11:43. | |
protect themselves from and they may want this debate and it may also be | :11:44. | :11:49. | |
the case that actually WTO tariffs and those other things that we fear | :11:50. | :11:56. | |
actually might be in our best interest. That is the point of this. | :11:57. | :12:01. | |
We do not know where the we should be in two years' time, it is right | :12:02. | :12:06. | |
we keep our options open and it is right we debate on it. She is making | :12:07. | :12:14. | |
her points with the usual eloquence. Does she agree with me that one of | :12:15. | :12:18. | |
the other contexts that has clearly changed since the 23rd of June is | :12:19. | :12:24. | |
the geopolitics of the world? We have a new leader in the United | :12:25. | :12:28. | |
States, we have some very serious concerns that have been raised about | :12:29. | :12:33. | |
Putin in Russia, all of that changes the context. We do not know in two | :12:34. | :12:38. | |
years' time where we might be. I absolutely agree with the right | :12:39. | :12:42. | |
honourable gentleman. That is exactly the point that many members | :12:43. | :12:47. | |
across this House are now making. In conclusion, could it gently say to | :12:48. | :12:55. | |
the government, of course give way. The honourable lady has given a very | :12:56. | :13:01. | |
honest speech and I must commend her for her honesty and decency. We have | :13:02. | :13:10. | |
just had the pre-excellent, calm, rational speeches, explaining the | :13:11. | :13:13. | |
things that are tearing this country apart. Is it not time now for us all | :13:14. | :13:22. | |
to understand that not only are we talking to our own constituents, but | :13:23. | :13:26. | |
this House has been listened to across the world? The people who | :13:27. | :13:34. | |
will be deciding on Brexit are also listening, and the more | :13:35. | :13:38. | |
triumphalist, the more aggressive, the more rebellious are actually the | :13:39. | :13:44. | |
worst enemies to get us to where we need to be. I completely agree and | :13:45. | :13:50. | |
can I say, it is part of this bringing together, this forming and | :13:51. | :13:55. | |
building of the consensus, not just in this place, but the country at | :13:56. | :14:01. | |
large, families, friends, communities remain divided and we | :14:02. | :14:05. | |
must come together. People have put their trust as I have in my Prime | :14:06. | :14:12. | |
Minister and government. I have said to them, as somebody who was always | :14:13. | :14:15. | |
believed in our continuing membership of the European Union, we | :14:16. | :14:21. | |
lost that debate, I now trust the Prime Minister and government when | :14:22. | :14:24. | |
it comes to the abandoning of the single market, freedom of movement | :14:25. | :14:32. | |
and even leaving the customs union, but I will continue to fight for all | :14:33. | :14:36. | |
of those things because I believe in them but I trust them to get the | :14:37. | :14:42. | |
best deal for our country and all I ask is, rather than have to vote for | :14:43. | :14:46. | |
an amendment when this bill, which is a good vehicle to deliver the | :14:47. | :14:53. | |
result, and should not be amended, but all we are asking is that this | :14:54. | :14:59. | |
place, in the event of no deal, actually has a voice and a vote. Mr | :15:00. | :15:07. | |
Howarth, if the government cannot see the profound logic and sense of | :15:08. | :15:12. | |
that, it will put people like me with no alternative in order to make | :15:13. | :15:17. | |
my voice clear and heard, on behalf of all my constituents and to | :15:18. | :15:23. | |
support the right honourable gentleman in this amendment, it is | :15:24. | :15:27. | |
reasonable and fair but it encompasses in what it seeks to | :15:28. | :15:33. | |
achieve the right thing, and I will give way... In the case of there | :15:34. | :15:39. | |
being a deal, it is very clear that ministers made a commitment that the | :15:40. | :15:42. | |
House will vote on it. In the case of there not being a deal, I do not | :15:43. | :15:48. | |
know whether the honourable lady can answer the question any better than | :15:49. | :15:53. | |
the honourable gentleman, but my reading of new clause 110 is it only | :15:54. | :15:57. | |
deals with cases where there is a new treaty or relationship being | :15:58. | :16:00. | |
proposed, it does not deal with the case of there not being a deal. I am | :16:01. | :16:05. | |
very grateful for the intervention. I am sure you could explain it if it | :16:06. | :16:12. | |
needs any further clarity. The relationship has been exactly that. | :16:13. | :16:17. | |
If we do not have a deal, we then have a new deal on new relationship | :16:18. | :16:22. | |
with the European Union. I congratulate him on putting the word | :16:23. | :16:27. | |
relationship into that clause because it perfectly encompasses no | :16:28. | :16:32. | |
deal, it encompasses all eventualities. It is not rocket | :16:33. | :16:36. | |
science, it is not revolutionary, it is the right thing to do and I make | :16:37. | :16:41. | |
it clear... I will give way once more. I want to take the lady back | :16:42. | :16:49. | |
to the remarks about a bad deal or no Deal. How does she see the WTO? | :16:50. | :16:57. | |
How does she see, if the UK does not get a deal, dishes see that as a | :16:58. | :17:00. | |
sign of failure by the UK Government? It is a language I want | :17:01. | :17:09. | |
to abandon, failure and success. I will not play that game. I want us | :17:10. | :17:14. | |
to come together, I want is now to get the best deal and in the | :17:15. | :17:18. | |
eventuality that we do not get a deal to make sure that this place | :17:19. | :17:24. | |
absolutely gets that vote. On that basis, I will listen to the debate | :17:25. | :17:30. | |
but I have to say, I will vote in favour of this amendment and make it | :17:31. | :17:37. | |
clear, not for any design, but to stand up for what is right for all | :17:38. | :17:45. | |
my constituents. Can I commend the honourable member on her speech, | :17:46. | :17:50. | |
much of which I agree with because, like her, I voted this week to | :17:51. | :17:56. | |
trigger Article 50 as part of the second reading because I think we | :17:57. | :18:01. | |
should respect the referendum result and I campaigned for us to remain | :18:02. | :18:07. | |
but like her, I think we have a cross Parliament a responsibility to | :18:08. | :18:10. | |
get the best possible Brexit deal, and that means all of us should be | :18:11. | :18:14. | |
involved in that because we know there is so much yet to be decided | :18:15. | :18:18. | |
about what kind of Brexit do we get, what kind of terms we have as part | :18:19. | :18:24. | |
of leaving the EU. That is why I stand to support new clauses one, 99 | :18:25. | :18:33. | |
and 110 because everyone today has said that they agreed that the | :18:34. | :18:37. | |
Parliamentary vote should be meaningful but in fact what the | :18:38. | :18:41. | |
minister said does not provide that assurance at all. | :18:42. | :18:45. | |
First of all the government is not prepared to put that on the face of | :18:46. | :18:53. | |
the bill. If the government changes, if things change, what reassurance | :18:54. | :18:56. | |
do we have if this boat is not on the face of the bill that it will | :18:57. | :19:00. | |
happen at the right time, that it will be respected in the right way. | :19:01. | :19:06. | |
Secondly, if there is no deal, then there is no match report and that | :19:07. | :19:09. | |
matters because what it means is that it is possible for the | :19:10. | :19:14. | |
executive with power concentrated in its hands to decide to reject a deal | :19:15. | :19:20. | |
from the EU that maybe parliament might have accepted. It gives the | :19:21. | :19:25. | |
executive the power to decide. Actually it's going to go down the | :19:26. | :19:30. | |
WTO route without going for any of the many alternatives that there | :19:31. | :19:34. | |
might have been with no say for parliament. There is no opportunity | :19:35. | :19:39. | |
for Parliament to say there was a better deal on offer and actually | :19:40. | :19:41. | |
the government should be working with the EU to get that better deal | :19:42. | :19:46. | |
that might be in the interests of all our constituents. I do think we | :19:47. | :19:51. | |
should give the executive the concentration of power in their | :19:52. | :19:54. | |
hands to simply be able to choose the WTO route with no possible | :19:55. | :19:59. | |
debate or discussion or vote. There should be devoted on an alternative. | :20:00. | :20:05. | |
I think to be fair to the honourable lady, she has at least gone some way | :20:06. | :20:09. | |
to answering her question. What I think she said is that if the | :20:10. | :20:12. | |
government judges the best available terms on offer are not good in the | :20:13. | :20:19. | |
government's definition a bad deal, what she is saying is she would let | :20:20. | :20:23. | |
the government to put that in front of Parliament and ask parliament to | :20:24. | :20:27. | |
decide whether that is indeed a bad deal. I think that's what she said, | :20:28. | :20:32. | |
could you confirm that? That would be one way to do to make sure there | :20:33. | :20:36. | |
was indeed a substantive vote rather than the government simply heading | :20:37. | :20:41. | |
directly for the WTO alternative without giving Parliament the | :20:42. | :20:45. | |
alternative option to do so. I think the second challenge with the | :20:46. | :20:49. | |
government's approach, if there is a deal, actually the timing of the | :20:50. | :20:53. | |
vote will still make it very difficult for Parliament because the | :20:54. | :20:57. | |
vote will come after it has been agreed with the 27 countries, after | :20:58. | :21:00. | |
it's been agreed with the commission but before it goes to the European | :21:01. | :21:04. | |
Parliament. And again Parliament will only get the choice between the | :21:05. | :21:10. | |
executive's deal and the WTO terms, even if again we know that there was | :21:11. | :21:15. | |
a better or fairer deal on offer. Now I hope there will be agreement | :21:16. | :21:18. | |
across this has, I hope that the government will be able to come up | :21:19. | :21:21. | |
with the best possible Brexit deal and in fact it will have strong | :21:22. | :21:27. | |
support and endorsement. But if it doesn't, eventually things unravel | :21:28. | :21:31. | |
along the way, what is the opportunity for Parliament to have | :21:32. | :21:36. | |
its say and do try and bring things back together? Again, the timing of | :21:37. | :21:40. | |
this vote, leaving a dry to the very end of the process makes it very | :21:41. | :21:46. | |
hard to do. With the honourable lady agree with me that the opportunity | :21:47. | :21:51. | |
would be for the government to be to request an extension of the article | :21:52. | :21:54. | |
50 process if we've not been able to conclude up possible deal and the | :21:55. | :21:59. | |
request for that extension would be greatly enhanced and strengthened if | :22:00. | :22:02. | |
it had the mandate of Parliament behind it, so this would be a | :22:03. | :22:06. | |
partnership of the legislature and the executive working together to | :22:07. | :22:11. | |
strengthen the national interest, vis-a-vis the European partners. | :22:12. | :22:15. | |
That would certainly be one option. If the EU Parliament votes down the | :22:16. | :22:19. | |
deal, that is indeed what would happen, the EU parliament would get | :22:20. | :22:23. | |
the opportunity to save the negotiations should be extended but | :22:24. | :22:25. | |
currently the UK parliament would not get that opportunity was that I | :22:26. | :22:30. | |
don't think the purpose of this should be to extend the | :22:31. | :22:32. | |
negotiations, we should be trying to implement the decision that has been | :22:33. | :22:38. | |
taken as part of the referendum but we do need the safeguards in place | :22:39. | :22:41. | |
to prevent the government running hell for leather or an option which | :22:42. | :22:45. | |
is bad for Britain if it turns out that Parliament judges there is a | :22:46. | :22:50. | |
better offer on the table that would give us a better Brexit deal. The | :22:51. | :22:56. | |
honourable lady is very passionate on this subject. My concern is that | :22:57. | :23:01. | |
once the Article 50 process has been begun, if at the end of this process | :23:02. | :23:06. | |
parliaments rejects it, nothing happens, then we leave and my | :23:07. | :23:11. | |
concern is that an undesirable result and that is why binding the | :23:12. | :23:14. | |
hands of the government with these amendment is not in the interest of | :23:15. | :23:19. | |
this country. But I don't think these amendments would bind the | :23:20. | :23:22. | |
hands of the government, I do agree with him that there is a concern, | :23:23. | :23:26. | |
that we could end up sort of toppling off the edge of the | :23:27. | :23:29. | |
negotiations without having a deal in place and that means I there's an | :23:30. | :23:33. | |
incentive on all of us in Parliament to want there to be a deal in place, | :23:34. | :23:37. | |
both in terms of the Brexit deal but also in terms of what the future | :23:38. | :23:41. | |
trade arrangements should be on what transitional arrangements should be | :23:42. | :23:44. | |
in order to do that. That will be the incentive of all of us in | :23:45. | :23:48. | |
Parliament but my concern is that at the moment but with the government | :23:49. | :23:52. | |
has set out its arrangements, there isn't an incentive on the executive | :23:53. | :23:57. | |
to try and get a deal that the whole of Parliament can support because | :23:58. | :24:02. | |
the executive can simply go down the WTO route and decide to reject | :24:03. | :24:06. | |
alternatives without any say for Parliament and actually we don't | :24:07. | :24:09. | |
have the right incentives to get possible deal. With the Right | :24:10. | :24:14. | |
honourable lady agree that actually everybody in this house on all sides | :24:15. | :24:19. | |
and the government would like tariff free trade. We're entirely agreed | :24:20. | :24:23. | |
about that, the only issue is what can be individually and together do | :24:24. | :24:27. | |
to make it more likely the other 27 states agree it because they will | :24:28. | :24:31. | |
make that decision. I actually do agree with the honourable member, we | :24:32. | :24:37. | |
do want tariff free trade and he and I would probably have a difference | :24:38. | :24:41. | |
of agreement about the customs union. I think there's huge | :24:42. | :24:44. | |
advantages of staying in, does it affect the decision we might make | :24:45. | :24:47. | |
about three movement or other aspects of the single market, could | :24:48. | :24:52. | |
have advantages and he would be outside the customs union but that | :24:53. | :24:55. | |
is one of the issues that in the end becomes part of the crunch questions | :24:56. | :24:59. | |
for the deal and then maybe alternative options that the | :25:00. | :25:02. | |
government could sign up to on things like the customs union that | :25:03. | :25:06. | |
the government and the executive on its own would be rejecting rather | :25:07. | :25:10. | |
than having the opportunity for Parliament to have its say if there | :25:11. | :25:14. | |
was a better deal on offer. Some of this also comes under the timing | :25:15. | :25:17. | |
because I do except there's an article 50 timescale of two years | :25:18. | :25:23. | |
and it will be for the EU to decide what happens at the end of that if | :25:24. | :25:28. | |
there is no deal in place. But that also comes down to the timing of | :25:29. | :25:32. | |
this vote and at the moment because of what the minister said earlier, | :25:33. | :25:36. | |
this borders on the very end of the process and could very well end up | :25:37. | :25:41. | |
being at the end of the two years. The strength of new clause 110 is | :25:42. | :25:45. | |
that it requires the vote to be before this as gone to the | :25:46. | :25:50. | |
commission and to the Council as well as before it goes to | :25:51. | :25:53. | |
Parliament. The advantage of that is that we have a parliamentary debate | :25:54. | :25:56. | |
on the board at an early on stage in the process so that if it were to | :25:57. | :26:01. | |
reach the point where there was no agreement, there would still be the | :26:02. | :26:04. | |
opportunity for further negotiations and debates before we get to the end | :26:05. | :26:10. | |
of the Article 50 process. I hesitate to say this but sometimes I | :26:11. | :26:16. | |
think this house fails to realise its own powers. If indeed it's the | :26:17. | :26:20. | |
case in the course of the two years of the negotiation and becomes clear | :26:21. | :26:25. | |
the government is rejecting and negotiating opportunity that this | :26:26. | :26:28. | |
house thinks it's better than the one it's pursuing, there's nothing | :26:29. | :26:31. | |
to prevent this house from asserting its authority order to make the | :26:32. | :26:36. | |
government change direction. It's a question of whether we have the will | :26:37. | :26:40. | |
to do it but the problem the point that she is raising is that it does | :26:41. | :26:43. | |
come back to this issue. If you write up against the wire you might | :26:44. | :26:47. | |
be tipping the government into losing an agreement with nothing to | :26:48. | :26:52. | |
replace it. Where that to be the case, that would be the decision, | :26:53. | :26:56. | |
the responsibility of Parliament to behave with the common sense that | :26:57. | :27:00. | |
the honourable member has advocated earlier and I would trust Parliament | :27:01. | :27:03. | |
to behave with common sense in the circumstances, not to push Britain | :27:04. | :27:07. | |
into an unnecessary cliff edge because I don't think that is what | :27:08. | :27:11. | |
Parliament wants to do. I think Parliament has already shown it | :27:12. | :27:15. | |
wants to respect the decision that was made in the referendum and that | :27:16. | :27:19. | |
has been important. But I also think Parliament wants to get the best | :27:20. | :27:22. | |
deal for Britain and Parliament would be pragmatic about what those | :27:23. | :27:26. | |
options are at that time but the problem with OTS suggested is that | :27:27. | :27:33. | |
there might be an alternative way for Parliament to exercise its | :27:34. | :27:36. | |
sovereignty. In practice, what are those ways? You can have a backbench | :27:37. | :27:39. | |
motion that the government ignores, you could have an opposition day | :27:40. | :27:44. | |
motion that the government ignores, you could have a no-confidence | :27:45. | :27:46. | |
motion but I personally do not think that would be the appropriate | :27:47. | :27:51. | |
response to something very odd to instead be looking at what the | :27:52. | :27:55. | |
alternative would be in order to simply get a better deal out of the | :27:56. | :28:00. | |
negotiations. If he was to come up with an alternative way for | :28:01. | :28:03. | |
Parliament to exorcise its sovereignty that I haven't thought | :28:04. | :28:07. | |
of, maybe there is an alternative to this vote today. It seems to me, if | :28:08. | :28:11. | |
we want to be sure that we have something in the legislation to make | :28:12. | :28:15. | |
sure there is records to Parliament over these important issues that | :28:16. | :28:19. | |
will affect us for so many years to come down the right thing to do is | :28:20. | :28:22. | |
to get something onto the face of the bill. I'm going to make some | :28:23. | :28:25. | |
progress because I know other people want to get in. There are many ways | :28:26. | :28:29. | |
that the government could do this, the government to come forward with | :28:30. | :28:31. | |
a manuscript amendment that simply puts into practice the things that | :28:32. | :28:37. | |
it has said today, that would be immensely helpful, that might | :28:38. | :28:40. | |
provide reassurance that many need. There is a new class 99 which could | :28:41. | :28:45. | |
be done through an act of Parliament. -- clause 90 nine. There | :28:46. | :28:49. | |
is a strong case for these decisions to be taken through acts of | :28:50. | :28:54. | |
Parliament. We could do so in other similar weighty matters. On new | :28:55. | :28:58. | |
clause 110, which to be honest much of what it does is simply to put on | :28:59. | :29:02. | |
the face of the bill the point is that the Minister has already made | :29:03. | :29:06. | |
and that he has said he will do but provides the reassurance on the face | :29:07. | :29:09. | |
of the bill with the added benefit that there is the clarity that would | :29:10. | :29:14. | |
also be a vote if there was no deal and if we were going down the WTO | :29:15. | :29:18. | |
route and also that the timing of the vote would be early on in the | :29:19. | :29:23. | |
process to get Parliament the opportunity to have a say before we | :29:24. | :29:27. | |
get to the final crunch end of the negotiations. The honest truth is, | :29:28. | :29:32. | |
new clause 110 really isn't that radical, it's simply putting into | :29:33. | :29:36. | |
practice and embedding in the legislation the things that some | :29:37. | :29:38. | |
honourable members opposite have said that they would like to | :29:39. | :29:42. | |
achieve, so pointedly simply put it on the face of the bill to embed | :29:43. | :29:46. | |
that I do have that reassuring is in place. In the end, there's a reason | :29:47. | :29:51. | |
why all this is important, we all talked about parliamentary | :29:52. | :29:53. | |
sovereignty on both sides of the referendum debate, we talked about | :29:54. | :29:56. | |
the importance parliamentary sovereignty. I think that comes with | :29:57. | :30:03. | |
it, Parliamentary responsibility. We shown that responsibility by | :30:04. | :30:05. | |
deciding to respect the results of the referendum already as part of | :30:06. | :30:10. | |
the second reading vote. With that Parliamentary sovereignty and that | :30:11. | :30:15. | |
Parliamentary responsibility is also the responsibility to recognise that | :30:16. | :30:18. | |
we've got to get the best possible Brexit deal for our whole country | :30:19. | :30:23. | |
and not just to walk away from that process and the deal and the debates | :30:24. | :30:28. | |
on that deal. I have to say as well, if we end up simply saying we will | :30:29. | :30:32. | |
walk away and we will have the concentration of power simply in the | :30:33. | :30:37. | |
hands of the executive, I've never supported concentrations of power in | :30:38. | :30:41. | |
this way. All of us, everyone of us should be part of making sure we get | :30:42. | :30:43. | |
the Brexit deal. A pleasure to follow on from the | :30:44. | :30:53. | |
Right Honourable Lady and indeed I Right Honourable and learned friend. | :30:54. | :30:56. | |
I agree on the principle Parliament should vote on the final deal, I | :30:57. | :30:59. | |
argued that during the referendum and I haven't changed my mind now. | :31:00. | :31:04. | |
On top of that, as people talk about Parliament being stripped of its | :31:05. | :31:08. | |
rights, it's worth pointing out that any domestic implementing | :31:09. | :31:10. | |
legislation as a result of any deal is reached at the international | :31:11. | :31:14. | |
level would of course require Parliamentary approval and the usual | :31:15. | :31:17. | |
way. The legal effect of Brexit at home would be dealt with through an | :31:18. | :31:23. | |
act of legislation in advance of the ratification of the international | :31:24. | :31:26. | |
treaties. In relation to the international element, I think it's | :31:27. | :31:31. | |
useful to distinguish two key components of the diplomacy, the | :31:32. | :31:34. | |
terms of exit and the terms of any new relationship agreement on trade | :31:35. | :31:38. | |
security on the other areas of cooperation that its common | :31:39. | :31:41. | |
agreement, we all agree we want to preserve that. With that in mind, I | :31:42. | :31:47. | |
want to just welcome again the White Paper and the Lancaster house speech | :31:48. | :31:50. | |
which as we talk about all the process and procedures set out a | :31:51. | :31:53. | |
positive vision for Britain of post-Brexit. As a self-governing | :31:54. | :32:02. | |
democracy, a strong European neighbour but also a global leader | :32:03. | :32:07. | |
when it comes to free trade. I confess as a former Foreign Office | :32:08. | :32:11. | |
lawyer who spent six years advising on both EU law and particularly | :32:12. | :32:16. | |
treaty interpretation, I find article 50 palpably clear on the | :32:17. | :32:19. | |
surface, on the face of it. If this applies the EU treaties two years | :32:20. | :32:26. | |
after article 50 is triggered. The language is mandatory as a matter of | :32:27. | :32:30. | |
treaty law. If Parliament refuses to approve the terms of any exit | :32:31. | :32:33. | |
agreement, the UK drops out without one. Before there is general | :32:34. | :32:39. | |
hysteria across the House and on this side as well, there's a general | :32:40. | :32:43. | |
principle of customary international law it's true of common law that | :32:44. | :32:48. | |
where there's a general rule you can have exceptions but the exceptions | :32:49. | :32:52. | |
must be interpreted narrowly and there are exceptions to this. There | :32:53. | :32:56. | |
is an exception if the EU unanimously agrees to extend the | :32:57. | :32:59. | |
period under article 50 paragraph three. If you look at the clear | :33:00. | :33:05. | |
language used, I think it's only conceivable to imagine that | :33:06. | :33:08. | |
happening if at all in very exceptional circumstances for a | :33:09. | :33:11. | |
limited period and in relation to the exit terms. | :33:12. | :33:22. | |
It is extremely doubtful the paragraph you merit three could be | :33:23. | :33:29. | |
used to delay departure on those grounds, which means many of those | :33:30. | :33:35. | |
amendments could be unlawful as well as unwise. He makes a very careful | :33:36. | :33:43. | |
and interesting analysis but, at the end of the day, if there is no deal, | :33:44. | :33:51. | |
we were forced to leave on WTO terms, it would be a scandal if this | :33:52. | :33:56. | |
House did not have a chance to have a say in it and a betrayal. We hope | :33:57. | :34:02. | |
perhaps in the Lord's people might look more carefully. The government | :34:03. | :34:07. | |
is on borrowed time. I pay tribute to the chair of the Select Committee | :34:08. | :34:13. | |
and I agree there should be a vote. I have not heard anyone explain the | :34:14. | :34:18. | |
alternative negotiation strategy to the one that has been advanced by | :34:19. | :34:24. | |
the government other than staying in limbo within the EU, which would | :34:25. | :34:28. | |
create more uncertainty for business, greater frustration for | :34:29. | :34:33. | |
the public and frankly devastate, paralyse our negotiating hand. There | :34:34. | :34:40. | |
is a second exception and it is not true to say that triggering Article | :34:41. | :34:45. | |
50 is irreversible. It can be reversed as I explained earlier, you | :34:46. | :34:51. | |
have the time of the specific exception envisaged in Article 50, | :34:52. | :34:58. | |
paragraph 5. You leave and apply to rejoin. That is, the clear language | :34:59. | :35:03. | |
on the face of Article 50 course is binding as a matter of UK law and of | :35:04. | :35:08. | |
course it was a previous Labour government with Lib Dem support that | :35:09. | :35:14. | |
signed us up not just at the Lisbon Treaty but explicitly to the fact is | :35:15. | :35:18. | |
we now face, that is why I suffered a little bit with some of the | :35:19. | :35:21. | |
railing against some of the difficult legal confines the | :35:22. | :35:24. | |
government finds itself on not just as a matter of its own policy but as | :35:25. | :35:31. | |
a matter of law. The choice on the final deal is clear. The British | :35:32. | :35:36. | |
Parliament can view to the ex-agreement and all the terms of | :35:37. | :35:40. | |
the new relationship agreement but in that case, Britain would leave | :35:41. | :35:45. | |
the EU without agreeing terms. With respect to the new relationship | :35:46. | :35:49. | |
agreement, the UK Government would of course be free for further | :35:50. | :35:52. | |
negotiations but that could not delay. Brexit from happening. These | :35:53. | :36:00. | |
facts will focus our minds quite rightly and quite understandably and | :36:01. | :36:03. | |
with a sense of trepidation. It will also focus minds on the other side | :36:04. | :36:10. | |
of the channel amongst our European friends. On the assumption that it | :36:11. | :36:15. | |
would take at least 18 months to read all the terms of any new | :36:16. | :36:18. | |
relationship agreement, the idea to Parliament voting down any deal | :36:19. | :36:24. | |
would set the UK back for further round of meaningful negotiations | :36:25. | :36:28. | |
before Britain leaves is a odds with the procedure in the Lisbon Treaty | :36:29. | :36:31. | |
and frankly I find it neither feasible nor credible. He mentioned | :36:32. | :36:42. | |
earlier Article 50 subsection paragraph three, which provides for | :36:43. | :36:49. | |
transitional arrangements, for a country to negotiate the | :36:50. | :36:52. | |
arrangements to continue indifferently until a subsequent | :36:53. | :36:56. | |
state is provided that the end of the negotiating process for the | :36:57. | :37:00. | |
implementation. Does he not agree that that should create a window for | :37:01. | :37:06. | |
the exactly the circumstances he is so concerned about? If you read the | :37:07. | :37:10. | |
Article 50 paragraph three it explicitly refers to the withdrawal | :37:11. | :37:16. | |
component of the diplomacy but he is also right to say there is scope for | :37:17. | :37:19. | |
transitional arrangements to deal with some of the so-called cliff | :37:20. | :37:24. | |
edge concerns the honourable members are rightly concerned about. Of | :37:25. | :37:30. | |
course, the ostensible aim of Article 50 in fairness to the | :37:31. | :37:34. | |
previous government was to facilitate certainty, the focus | :37:35. | :37:39. | |
minds of the negotiating parties and avoid withdrawal, leaving a | :37:40. | :37:45. | |
lingering Shadow over the EU but also the departing nation. Many if | :37:46. | :37:51. | |
the amendments we are considering today are counter-productive because | :37:52. | :37:57. | |
it would weaken our flexibility and negotiating position and critically | :37:58. | :38:02. | |
making the risk of no deal more likely. Honourable members | :38:03. | :38:05. | |
supporting these amendments need to face up to the fact that they are | :38:06. | :38:11. | |
courting the very scenario that the say we so dearly want to seek to | :38:12. | :38:18. | |
avoid. Equally, I would say for my part, I could not count on voting | :38:19. | :38:24. | |
attempts to an act negotiating terms and binding legislation because that | :38:25. | :38:28. | |
would set the government up to face a blizzard of legal challenges on | :38:29. | :38:33. | |
the final deal which I would find deeply responsible because it would | :38:34. | :38:36. | |
seem to me the amount of poison tactics. Would he not agree that the | :38:37. | :38:44. | |
Prime Minister's approach so far in pandering not so much to the tens of | :38:45. | :39:00. | |
thousands of immigrants risks the scenario we have just discussed? The | :39:01. | :39:04. | |
idea is to be done and she needs to admit it. I would gently say to the | :39:05. | :39:10. | |
honourable member that, between open-door immigration and close to | :39:11. | :39:14. | |
immigration, it seems to me quite wide scope for sensible reciprocal | :39:15. | :39:19. | |
arrangements which allow us to retain control over the volume of | :39:20. | :39:22. | |
immigration, allow us to retain control over things like residency | :39:23. | :39:26. | |
in welfare and make sure people are self-sufficient and make sure we | :39:27. | :39:30. | |
have these security checks and deportation powers we need. I am not | :39:31. | :39:37. | |
sure we disagree on this. Between the approach of cutting off all | :39:38. | :39:41. | |
immigration and having open-door immigration, there is actually | :39:42. | :39:43. | |
enormous scope and sensible diplomacy. I will turn briefly to | :39:44. | :39:52. | |
the specific group of amendments. The government's assurances or would | :39:53. | :39:55. | |
be enough to satisfy those who might be tempted by the new clause 1. The | :39:56. | :40:03. | |
government has promised Parliament to have a vote in the final deal I | :40:04. | :40:07. | |
would also like to pay tribute to the Shadow Minister. The other | :40:08. | :40:14. | |
cluster of amendments which have attracted attention relate to new | :40:15. | :40:21. | |
clause 19, 54 and 137, and they would require Parliamentary vote | :40:22. | :40:24. | |
against the deal to send the UK Government back to renegotiate with | :40:25. | :40:29. | |
the EU, and I can I totally understand someone who has | :40:30. | :40:34. | |
negotiated treaties ride that is attractive. The truth is that if | :40:35. | :40:37. | |
Parliament is not agree with the exit terms, it is theoretically | :40:38. | :40:42. | |
possible that the UK Government could revert to meaningful | :40:43. | :40:45. | |
negotiations with the EU if the draft agreement is concluded within | :40:46. | :40:54. | |
a year. In practice of course it is utterly inconceivable, total | :40:55. | :40:57. | |
fantasy. Why would the EU give us better terms of the divorce just | :40:58. | :41:02. | |
because Parliament did not like them? We would not even get the | :41:03. | :41:06. | |
extension or better terms and would leave without such an agreement. If | :41:07. | :41:10. | |
on the other hand Parliament does not approve the agreement on the new | :41:11. | :41:15. | |
relationship, there is no express provision for extension of | :41:16. | :41:17. | |
negotiations and note clear basis for withdrawal to be delayed so we | :41:18. | :41:24. | |
would exit within two years and as my honourable friend was pointing | :41:25. | :41:30. | |
out, the question of implementation being phased would then become far | :41:31. | :41:36. | |
more salient. Besides these legal considerations, any delay to the | :41:37. | :41:40. | |
timetable would inject an additional dose of uncertainty into the entire | :41:41. | :41:45. | |
process, bad for business, frustrating for the public and that | :41:46. | :41:49. | |
would harm our negotiating position rather than reinforce it. New clause | :41:50. | :41:55. | |
28, which deals with Parliamentary approval but for the European | :41:56. | :41:57. | |
Parliament has its say, has been dealt with the reassurances the | :41:58. | :42:03. | |
minister gave, and I welcome those. I'm not convinced by new clause 110 | :42:04. | :42:09. | |
or 182 about Parliamentary approval before the commission concludes the | :42:10. | :42:13. | |
agreement. We would not know the date when the commission would | :42:14. | :42:17. | |
approve a new deal and we would not know the terms until it had done so. | :42:18. | :42:22. | |
It reinforces in my mind is the concern about honourable members in | :42:23. | :42:27. | |
good faith trying to dictate what would be a fluid diplomatic process | :42:28. | :42:32. | |
to the entirely inappropriate vehicle of binding legislation. That | :42:33. | :42:38. | |
cannot hope to cater for the potential eventualities we need to | :42:39. | :42:43. | |
be ready to adapt to as a matter of multilateral diplomacy. Finally, on | :42:44. | :42:49. | |
the specific amendments, amendment 43 by the Liberal Democrats and the | :42:50. | :42:53. | |
honourable member for Westmorland, in a competitive field, this is | :42:54. | :42:56. | |
certainly the clear winner for the worst amendment that has been | :42:57. | :43:00. | |
tabled! It is probably illegal because there is no scope to reverse | :43:01. | :43:07. | |
its decision and that is clear from Article 50 paragraph 5 and is | :43:08. | :43:15. | |
clearly designed to reverse Brexit on the clear understanding we would | :43:16. | :43:20. | |
respect the result. It is beyond undemocratic and illegal, it is just | :43:21. | :43:25. | |
plain tricksy because it was open to any honourable member to table | :43:26. | :43:28. | |
amendments at that time to stipulate that there would be a second | :43:29. | :43:33. | |
referendum. Why not best-of-3? To give the British people the chance | :43:34. | :43:38. | |
to do the bulky cookie. There is a clear reason why no one tabled such | :43:39. | :43:42. | |
an amendment, the public would have shuddered at such a prospect. No one | :43:43. | :43:46. | |
proposed such an amendment and we did not hold the referendum on that | :43:47. | :43:51. | |
basis. I support a final vote on the deal. I welcome the government's | :43:52. | :43:56. | |
striving to reassure all honourable members on this but house should not | :43:57. | :44:01. | |
be under any illusion that such a vote would not frustrate the verdict | :44:02. | :44:05. | |
of the British people and most honourable members on all sides | :44:06. | :44:08. | |
recognise that. Many of the amendments we are deliberating in | :44:09. | :44:14. | |
this cluster of flawed but above all these clauses would attempt to tie | :44:15. | :44:18. | |
the government up in procedural knots at the crucial moment in the | :44:19. | :44:25. | |
two years of Brexit negotiation. The public expect all of us to be | :44:26. | :44:29. | |
focused on securing the very best deal for the whole country, whether | :44:30. | :44:34. | |
intentionally or inadvertently laying elephant traps that can only | :44:35. | :44:40. | |
make striving for that deal harder. For that reason, I hope the House or | :44:41. | :44:46. | |
vote on all of the amendments. There are four honourable members that one | :44:47. | :44:54. | |
still to get in, who have given the names to amendments. That means... | :44:55. | :45:01. | |
The government is unlikely to come back at six o'clock so if everyone | :45:02. | :45:05. | |
takes less than five minutes, I might be able to squeeze at least | :45:06. | :45:10. | |
four more speakers in. It is a gentle reminder that there is no | :45:11. | :45:17. | |
time limit. I will try and be brief. I have now been in the House | :45:18. | :45:25. | |
entering my 17th year and in those 17 years, you strike up | :45:26. | :45:30. | |
relationships across the House. I want to make a confession. I have a | :45:31. | :45:33. | |
relationship with the member for Chingford. The member for | :45:34. | :45:41. | |
Chingford... I am sorry he is not in his seat but he has the unusual | :45:42. | :45:50. | |
honour of also being a fan of Tottenham Hotspur server had been | :45:51. | :45:52. | |
occasions where we have been at White Hart Lane and we have been at | :45:53. | :45:57. | |
White Hart Lane together. They have also been occasions on which he has | :45:58. | :46:03. | |
mentioned a subject that has been a favourite of his, and that has been | :46:04. | :46:08. | |
the sovereignty of this Parliament. And the issue of the European Union. | :46:09. | :46:14. | |
Now, I have to say, there have been occasions where my eyes glazed over | :46:15. | :46:18. | |
because I have not seen the issue like he has seen it. But in the last | :46:19. | :46:24. | |
few months, as I have grown increasingly depressed about the | :46:25. | :46:27. | |
direction of travel we are now set upon, I have looked for the silver | :46:28. | :46:34. | |
lining. And the silver lining is of course in the 17 years I have been | :46:35. | :46:39. | |
an MP, we have been in the European Union and so effectively we have | :46:40. | :46:43. | |
decided to pull some of our sovereignty with Europe and I have | :46:44. | :46:48. | |
had less power. Well, the power is now coming back. I will be a | :46:49. | :46:54. | |
powerful Member of Parliament and as a result of all of his work and | :46:55. | :47:00. | |
others, we're now in a situation where in this important time, where | :47:01. | :47:07. | |
we need that sovereignty, and the very same people who are asking for | :47:08. | :47:13. | |
it, now stand up to argue that we should put that power somewhere | :47:14. | :47:19. | |
else. They argue, backbenchers many of them for many years, that we | :47:20. | :47:22. | |
should put the power with the Executive, that the Prime Minister | :47:23. | :47:27. | |
and her Cabinet should make the decisions, huge decisions about our | :47:28. | :47:33. | |
economy and direction of travel. They argue perversely that we should | :47:34. | :47:38. | |
have the power Solly with the 27 other countries of the European | :47:39. | :47:42. | |
Union, that they should determine our direction along with the | :47:43. | :47:47. | |
European Commission and Council and ultimately the European Parliament, | :47:48. | :47:52. | |
power everywhere else except here! And who will suffer as a consequence | :47:53. | :47:59. | |
of this Parliament not acting? Our constituents. And that is why this | :48:00. | :48:04. | |
is not the time to play party politics and that is why I was happy | :48:05. | :48:07. | |
to vote against my own party last week. | :48:08. | :48:15. | |
It is the time to stand up for our constituents and it seems to me that | :48:16. | :48:21. | |
we must scrutinise the executive with the very detailed negotiations | :48:22. | :48:25. | |
that we debate. We hear that we'll strike a deal with an two years. | :48:26. | :48:32. | |
When Greenland left the old EEC it took them three years and that was | :48:33. | :48:36. | |
Greenland fighting over fish. It's not going to take us two years, so | :48:37. | :48:43. | |
as has been said, yes, the terms of our withdrawal but our new trading | :48:44. | :48:48. | |
relationships must come back to this place and if we don't get an | :48:49. | :48:52. | |
agreement it must absolutely be a decision on which we must vote on | :48:53. | :48:57. | |
long before. Let me just say, if we were to exit without a proper deal, | :48:58. | :49:03. | |
this great country would be in the bizarre situation to have no trading | :49:04. | :49:09. | |
relations with the rest of the world, a situation we will not have | :49:10. | :49:13. | |
been in since sometime before King Henry VIII and the beginning of | :49:14. | :49:20. | |
Empire. Ridiculous. Madness. WTO rules. Insane. Of course power must | :49:21. | :49:25. | |
rest here and that's why I signed a number of causes and they are truly | :49:26. | :49:30. | |
stand with my honourable friend who has put down clause 110. We must | :49:31. | :49:36. | |
give this place power. Or we will regret it hugely. I find myself in a | :49:37. | :49:44. | |
rather strange place in writing this beach. It's very difficult to | :49:45. | :49:48. | |
countenance voting for an opposition motion for some day my position, | :49:49. | :49:53. | |
I've always respected pragmatism and politics behind most decisions but | :49:54. | :49:55. | |
I've always had a sneaking admiration for colleagues who fly to | :49:56. | :49:59. | |
the government whip with impunity, which is not what I told them when I | :50:00. | :50:03. | |
was in the Whip's office and I heard and so many cases that this... Our | :50:04. | :50:13. | |
current Secretary of State for Brexit was the most principled | :50:14. | :50:15. | |
politician in the last parliament rebelling dozens and dozens of | :50:16. | :50:20. | |
times. But to me this appears to be very much a point of principle and | :50:21. | :50:23. | |
there are three principles which have been exorcised by myself and | :50:24. | :50:28. | |
colleagues now. The first of the thorny issue of what does | :50:29. | :50:32. | |
Parliamentary sovereignty means. Far be it for me to take exception with | :50:33. | :50:35. | |
the very blown a gentleman, my honourable friend, but Article 50 | :50:36. | :50:44. | |
was effectively -- with the very learned gentleman. | :50:45. | :50:50. | |
The expectation that it would never be triggered, it would be | :50:51. | :50:55. | |
inconceivable that it would be triggered, so it seems to me that | :50:56. | :50:59. | |
for us to set up what we believe our sovereign Parliamentary process | :51:00. | :51:04. | |
should be, setting against that rather cruelly drafted aspect of the | :51:05. | :51:08. | |
treaty is not inconceivable and this is what so many campaigners told me | :51:09. | :51:13. | |
that they were actually campaigning for. To restore our sovereignty and | :51:14. | :51:17. | |
that sovereign tray has now been confirmed by the Supreme Court, so I | :51:18. | :51:23. | |
think it's absolutely right that we had confirmation today that | :51:24. | :51:26. | |
Parliament will have a vote on the terms of the deal on the timing of | :51:27. | :51:31. | |
that vote is crucial, it's not a done deal brought back to us, there | :51:32. | :51:35. | |
is an opportunity to influence and to shape and negotiate and do what | :51:36. | :51:39. | |
we have done so well over the last four days, is that we were not | :51:40. | :51:44. | |
intended to have the opportunity to actually get into the nitty-gritty | :51:45. | :51:47. | |
of what does it mean if we trigger this, what would a vote look like. I | :51:48. | :51:51. | |
for one feel far better informed than I did at the start of this | :51:52. | :51:55. | |
process and that is exactly what we're sent you to do. I agree with | :51:56. | :52:02. | |
her entirely about the role this Parliament has to scrutinise that | :52:03. | :52:06. | |
but it's vital and funny about the only way we can do that, in | :52:07. | :52:13. | |
practical terms how can we achieve that scrutiny, what can we actually | :52:14. | :52:15. | |
do to change it if the deal isn't good enough? We can probe and ask | :52:16. | :52:20. | |
questions and we can bring our collective knowledge and wisdom of | :52:21. | :52:23. | |
which there is an enormous amount on these benches and also our | :52:24. | :52:26. | |
understanding of what alternatives might be. If it is the case that | :52:27. | :52:30. | |
there is no alternative or no process, well at least we know that | :52:31. | :52:35. | |
but we have got to date, with a concession from the front bench and | :52:36. | :52:38. | |
option that was not on the table at the start of this process, an option | :52:39. | :52:43. | |
when you are negotiating and an uncertain environment is this | :52:44. | :52:46. | |
usually valuable thing to have. My second point of principle which are | :52:47. | :52:49. | |
referenced earlier is his point of equivalence. It just seems bizarre | :52:50. | :52:53. | |
to me that if you look at the negotiation for exit, the European | :52:54. | :52:58. | |
Parliament has a number of go, no-go decision points upon which it | :52:59. | :53:01. | |
effectively has a right of veto and we have been scared to give the same | :53:02. | :53:05. | |
to this Parliament. That does not sit well with me as somebody who | :53:06. | :53:09. | |
wants to stand up for the sovereign parliament, it's a very perverse | :53:10. | :53:12. | |
thing and I'm glad we're try to correct it. The third is the | :53:13. | :53:17. | |
question of representation. I'm still mystified there are those who | :53:18. | :53:22. | |
think they should be scared of Parliament. How many more votes do | :53:23. | :53:26. | |
we need to have to demonstrate the overwhelming support in this place | :53:27. | :53:30. | |
for executing the will of the British people. They gave us a | :53:31. | :53:33. | |
mandate, we're not going to replay the arguments, we're not going to go | :53:34. | :53:37. | |
over it, we have a mandate, we have to get on and we have two votes | :53:38. | :53:41. | |
suggesting that members and Right Honourable members across the House | :53:42. | :53:47. | |
except that view of the union. This to me, we should not be scared of | :53:48. | :53:51. | |
bringing these things to Parliament and ultimately isn't this what we | :53:52. | :53:55. | |
are here to do, to represent our constituents. We don't want a second | :53:56. | :54:00. | |
referendum, I can fully agree with my honourable friend to say it would | :54:01. | :54:04. | |
be absurd to go back. We are the next best thing, we have the | :54:05. | :54:08. | |
opportunity to bring what our constituents passing, many of them | :54:09. | :54:10. | |
still have lots of questions about what this process looks like to put | :54:11. | :54:15. | |
them to each other and to the front bench and to represent us that the | :54:16. | :54:18. | |
principle of rest pronunciation is absolutely vital that | :54:19. | :54:27. | |
representation. The tone of this debate, sometimes borders on the | :54:28. | :54:31. | |
hysterical. I feel sometimes I'm sitting along with colleagues who | :54:32. | :54:36. | |
are like jihadis in their support for a hard Brexit. No Brexit is hard | :54:37. | :54:41. | |
enough, be gone new evil Europeans, we never want you to darken our | :54:42. | :54:46. | |
doors again. I'm afraid I heard speeches last week exactly making | :54:47. | :54:50. | |
that point. The point of this is the more we get this out in the open the | :54:51. | :54:55. | |
more we are not led by some of the more hysterical tabloid newspapers | :54:56. | :54:59. | |
out there but actually have an open and frank conversation with each | :55:00. | :55:04. | |
other about what we want to do the better. On the issues of scrutiny, | :55:05. | :55:08. | |
representation and Parliamentary sovereignty, I am very interested in | :55:09. | :55:14. | |
the amendment that was brought forward by the opposition. I have | :55:15. | :55:18. | |
heard today, I'm pleased to say, some very substantial concessions on | :55:19. | :55:22. | |
the timing and the detail if you like, although there is a | :55:23. | :55:27. | |
criticality about the ending which still doesn't sit well with me | :55:28. | :55:31. | |
because whilst it might be the government and the Prime Minister's | :55:32. | :55:35. | |
intention not to bring forward a bad deal, we still have not allowed | :55:36. | :55:39. | |
ourselves to put that to the test. So before I decide which way to | :55:40. | :55:43. | |
vote, Ambaka when to listen very carefully to what the minister has | :55:44. | :55:46. | |
to say and I'm hoping to get his assurance that is not the | :55:47. | :55:54. | |
government's intention to put a no deal, that can be put within the | :55:55. | :55:58. | |
bounds of what should happen much is a Parliamentary decision on this | :55:59. | :55:59. | |
vital step for our country. There are two issues at the heart of | :56:00. | :56:13. | |
today's debate which is about the role of Parliament in judging the | :56:14. | :56:20. | |
final deal. The first issue is on the timing of any such vote and the | :56:21. | :56:27. | |
second issue is on how to make that vote meaningful. I want to move new | :56:28. | :56:32. | |
clause 137 standing in my name and the name of my honourable and Right | :56:33. | :56:36. | |
Honourable friends. A significant part of the argument for leaving the | :56:37. | :56:40. | |
European Union was to restore Parliamentary sovereignty for this | :56:41. | :56:44. | |
house to take the decisions about the country's future. Yet too often, | :56:45. | :56:50. | |
attempts to assert it have been constantly dismissed, undermining | :56:51. | :56:56. | |
the government is not undermining the country and the cry over and | :56:57. | :57:03. | |
over again has been blank cheque, blank cheque, blank check. We | :57:04. | :57:07. | |
shouldn't give a blank cheque, there is a legitimate role. The amendment | :57:08. | :57:11. | |
seeks to do two things, first of all to enshrine the Prime Minister's | :57:12. | :57:15. | |
promise of a parliamentary vote on the final deal in the legislation | :57:16. | :57:24. | |
and the second part is to assert what can happen if Parliament | :57:25. | :57:29. | |
declines to approve the final deal. Now the government has set out in | :57:30. | :57:32. | |
the White Paper and in other statements what its aims are. The | :57:33. | :57:38. | |
white paper defines the government's name as the freest possible trade in | :57:39. | :57:44. | |
goods and services between the UK and the EU. The Secretary of State | :57:45. | :57:48. | |
for Brexit said this would be and I quote, a copper has and the | :57:49. | :57:52. | |
comprehensive customs agreement will deliver the exact same benefits as | :57:53. | :57:59. | |
we have. That's the test the government has set itself and I wish | :58:00. | :58:05. | |
the government well in ensuring that we get the exact same benefits that | :58:06. | :58:11. | |
we have. This amendment does not seek to time the government's hands | :58:12. | :58:15. | |
in the negotiations, it doesn't seek to influence the content, what it | :58:16. | :58:20. | |
focuses on is what happens if Parliament declines to approve the | :58:21. | :58:25. | |
final deal because the choice that we do not want to be presented with | :58:26. | :58:29. | |
is, I'm afraid, the one that the minister set out at the beginning, | :58:30. | :58:34. | |
which is defining as success whatever the government negotiates | :58:35. | :58:40. | |
or falling back on to the WTO. Now I don't want to go through the WTO | :58:41. | :58:43. | |
rules in detail, let me just give one example. A 10% tariff on car | :58:44. | :58:53. | |
exports. Take the Nissan, proudly made in the north-east of England. | :58:54. | :58:59. | |
That tariff would mean a surcharge of over ?2000 on each car made in | :59:00. | :59:03. | |
the north-east compared to a competitor vehicle made within the | :59:04. | :59:08. | |
EU or even another Nissan model made in a planned within the European | :59:09. | :59:14. | |
Union, on food and drink the tariffs are 20% and on some agricultural | :59:15. | :59:17. | |
products they are even higher and that's before you even get to the | :59:18. | :59:22. | |
weakness of enforcement mechanisms within the WTO, where businesses | :59:23. | :59:28. | |
cannot even take cases and only governments can take enforcement | :59:29. | :59:32. | |
cases. And the thing about this is that the government itself says it | :59:33. | :59:37. | |
doesn't want this option it set out 12 points in its White Paper on the | :59:38. | :59:43. | |
12th of which says that the government wants a smooth mutually | :59:44. | :59:49. | |
beneficial exit. Paragraph 12 .2 says it's in no 1's interest for | :59:50. | :59:53. | |
there to be a cliff edge for business or a threat to stability. | :59:54. | :59:57. | |
Instead we want to have reached an agreement about our future | :59:58. | :00:02. | |
partnership by the time the two year article 50 process has been | :00:03. | :00:08. | |
concluded. What this amendment does is it empowers Parliament to avoid | :00:09. | :00:14. | |
the very outcome that the government itself says its wants to avoid in | :00:15. | :00:20. | |
the White Paper. And for that reason it's not as do many members have | :00:21. | :00:24. | |
asserted some attempt to undermine the government. We should be using | :00:25. | :00:29. | |
the power of Parliament to influence these negotiations and let me just | :00:30. | :00:32. | |
deal with this five minutes to midnight point that was made by The | :00:33. | :00:35. | |
Right Honourable member for Beaconsfield. It is hardly unknown | :00:36. | :00:43. | |
for the European Union to schedule another round of talks, it happens | :00:44. | :00:48. | |
very frequently and in these circumstances we would be entirely | :00:49. | :00:52. | |
within our rights to strengthen our government's hand by seeing go back | :00:53. | :00:56. | |
and renegotiate on this point that point. | :00:57. | :01:02. | |
I want to emphasise this, all sorts of things are possible. The | :01:03. | :01:09. | |
commission and the council might decide to extend the period of | :01:10. | :01:13. | |
negotiation but we have to look at what the legal implications are of | :01:14. | :01:18. | |
what we pass into law by amendments. If indeed the amendment is | :01:19. | :01:22. | |
prescriptive in a way that could allow the problem to which has been | :01:23. | :01:26. | |
identified which is dropping off because you've lost time and you can | :01:27. | :01:29. | |
come back to this house, we just can't ignore that. We have to find a | :01:30. | :01:34. | |
way round it or accept the accept the assurances the government give. | :01:35. | :01:39. | |
The amendment is very simple on this point, it asks that the government | :01:40. | :01:43. | |
in no circumstances will seek to negotiate an alternative agreement, | :01:44. | :01:47. | |
that's a perfectly reasonable point. The point of all of this, I don't | :01:48. | :01:52. | |
have much time so I will conclude. The point of all this is to avoid | :01:53. | :01:56. | |
the choice between being told we have to define our success on the | :01:57. | :02:03. | |
first account of it, whatever the government has managed to negotiate | :02:04. | :02:07. | |
or default to the WTO. To be honest, a concession on timing that doesn't | :02:08. | :02:13. | |
allow us to ask the government to go back and negotiate a better | :02:14. | :02:17. | |
agreement is simply holding a gun to Parliament's head a few months | :02:18. | :02:21. | |
earlier than we'd otherwise have been the case, so this amendment is | :02:22. | :02:27. | |
about taking all those claims made for decades about Parliamentary | :02:28. | :02:31. | |
sovereignty and making them real, rather than giving us a choice | :02:32. | :02:35. | |
between Deal or no Deal, take it or leave it, my way or the highway. | :02:36. | :02:39. | |
Frankly, Parliament and the country deserves better than that. | :02:40. | :02:49. | |
I'll confine this to a stew questions to the Minister. The | :02:50. | :02:56. | |
concession that he gave right at the start this significant, the question | :02:57. | :03:00. | |
is how significant. What did the Minister mean when he said that the | :03:01. | :03:04. | |
government would bring forward a motion on the final agreement? He | :03:05. | :03:08. | |
must mean the proposed agreement. I noticed that he then changed the | :03:09. | :03:12. | |
wording to the final draft agreement. Is he talking about the | :03:13. | :03:17. | |
draft agreement or a final agreement? At a point in which it's | :03:18. | :03:26. | |
The minister said he expects an intense this place will get a say | :03:27. | :03:36. | |
before the European Parliament. Thirdly, will he answered the | :03:37. | :03:39. | |
equivalence point made by my honourable friend, that we must be | :03:40. | :03:46. | |
able to have at least as much say as the European Parliament? And 40, for | :03:47. | :03:56. | |
he clarified that this WTO cliff edge issue needs to be subdued with | :03:57. | :04:00. | |
the issue of transitional arrangements? If the government puts | :04:01. | :04:05. | |
the need to negotiate transitional arrangements as its priority and | :04:06. | :04:09. | |
succeeds in getting at least a deal on that, that is the deal which can | :04:10. | :04:17. | |
then trigger Article 50, subsection 3, to enable a extended periods of | :04:18. | :04:24. | |
discussion. Would he accept that is a reasonable and sensible approach | :04:25. | :04:29. | |
to taking this debate forward and if he will, I might be considered... I | :04:30. | :04:37. | |
will listen very carefully to what the Minister will say. Thank you | :04:38. | :04:47. | |
very much indeed for giving me a second bite of the cherry. May I | :04:48. | :04:52. | |
deal in the first instance with the points made by my right honourable | :04:53. | :04:59. | |
friend, the chairman of the Treasury Select Committee? He asked direct | :05:00. | :05:02. | |
questions which have been raised during the course of the debate. I | :05:03. | :05:06. | |
thought I had answered them with some clarity previously but I am | :05:07. | :05:12. | |
very happy to clarify further. He asked what in fact this House would | :05:13. | :05:20. | |
be asked to prove, and it would be the final greed draft of the | :05:21. | :05:24. | |
agreement before it was submitted to the European Parliament. He | :05:25. | :05:35. | |
mentioned the points that we had indicated that we expected and | :05:36. | :05:39. | |
intended that this would happen before the European Parliament | :05:40. | :05:43. | |
debated it. The reason that formulation is used is of course it | :05:44. | :05:47. | |
is out of our hands as to what the commission does in connection with | :05:48. | :05:50. | |
the information it sends to the European Parliament. While we would | :05:51. | :05:55. | |
do our best to ensure this House voted first, we cannot control what | :05:56. | :06:02. | |
the commission would do. He raised the issue of equivalence. The | :06:03. | :06:08. | |
difference is that the European Parliament does have the role | :06:09. | :06:12. | |
prescribed for it in Article 50. This House does not. But certainly, | :06:13. | :06:19. | |
in practical terms, I would suggest a boat of this House would be a | :06:20. | :06:25. | |
matter of significance. He then raised the issue finally of | :06:26. | :06:30. | |
transitional arrangements which was raised by either honourable members, | :06:31. | :06:33. | |
and it is indeed, as the Prime Minister has already made clear, the | :06:34. | :06:38. | |
intention, if necessary, to looked a period of implementation for | :06:39. | :06:44. | |
whatever arrangement we arrive at with the European Union. This has | :06:45. | :06:52. | |
been an important debate and I was grateful... I will briefly... My | :06:53. | :07:00. | |
honourable friend has confirmed that the voters put the Parliament after | :07:01. | :07:05. | |
the deal has been done with the commission and the council. It is a | :07:06. | :07:09. | |
done deal, the European Parliament in this House either take it or | :07:10. | :07:16. | |
leave it. Will he confirm that is exactly what was offered in the | :07:17. | :07:22. | |
White Paper a few days ago? What we have sought to do today is to | :07:23. | :07:31. | |
provide clarity, and I hope that by my contribution earlier this | :07:32. | :07:35. | |
afternoon and now I am providing that clarity, and it is indeed the | :07:36. | :07:39. | |
case that which it would be the final draft agreement we contemplate | :07:40. | :07:42. | |
which would be put before this House. As I was saying, this has | :07:43. | :07:48. | |
been an important debate and the quality of the contributions has | :07:49. | :07:53. | |
been extremely high. We have to remember, as my right honourable | :07:54. | :07:59. | |
friend, the point that she made, this will be the most important | :08:00. | :08:05. | |
negotiation that this country has entered into for at least half a | :08:06. | :08:09. | |
century and it is therefore entirely right that this House should have an | :08:10. | :08:14. | |
important part in the process of the negotiation of the agreement we are | :08:15. | :08:21. | |
to arrive at. But is very far from what this government has in mind. We | :08:22. | :08:27. | |
have every intention that throughout the process of negotiation, this | :08:28. | :08:32. | |
House will be kept fully informed consistent with the extent to ensure | :08:33. | :08:36. | |
that confidentiality is maintained. I do not think that anyone would | :08:37. | :08:42. | |
regard that as an unreasonable way forward. Indeed, my right honourable | :08:43. | :08:48. | |
friend, the member for Beaconsfield, highlighted the need for reporting, | :08:49. | :08:52. | |
and that is something this government intends to do. I would | :08:53. | :08:56. | |
like to deal however with a number of other amendments I have not dealt | :08:57. | :09:00. | |
with previously which have attracted some attention this afternoon. New | :09:01. | :09:05. | |
clause 18 would specify that any new treaty with the EU should not be | :09:06. | :09:11. | |
ratified except with the express improvement of Parliament. However, | :09:12. | :09:14. | |
I can only repeat the commitment I have made several times this | :09:15. | :09:18. | |
afternoon at this dispatch box, there will be a vote on the final | :09:19. | :09:28. | |
deal. Will he accept that many of us welcome the progress made and the | :09:29. | :09:32. | |
insurance says he has given? There will be every opportunity for | :09:33. | :09:36. | |
debate, discussion, questions and votes as is proper in this House. | :09:37. | :09:42. | |
Indeed that is absolutely right, and I think that the suggestion that | :09:43. | :09:45. | |
this government would not keep this House informed when we have been | :09:46. | :09:49. | |
scrupulous in doing so so far is unworthy. New clause 110 is similar | :09:50. | :09:56. | |
to new clause 18 but also specifies that any new relationship would also | :09:57. | :10:01. | |
be subject to a resolution of Parliament, and this amendment I | :10:02. | :10:05. | |
believe is unnecessary, it asks again for a vote of each house on a | :10:06. | :10:10. | |
new treaty or new agreement reached with the EU, and there will be a | :10:11. | :10:15. | |
vote on the final draft treaty and any other agreement. In any event, | :10:16. | :10:20. | |
as my honourable friend pointed out, it calls for a vote before terms are | :10:21. | :10:26. | |
agreed, leaving it open to the commission to change its mind and | :10:27. | :10:30. | |
position without any apparent recourse for this place. New clause | :10:31. | :10:39. | |
137 requires the government to seek to negotiate a new agreement with | :10:40. | :10:43. | |
the EU Parliament rejects deal and again, I must reject this amendment. | :10:44. | :10:48. | |
While we are confident that we will achieve a deal that is acceptable to | :10:49. | :10:52. | |
Parliament, if Parliament were to reject that deal, it would be a sure | :10:53. | :10:58. | |
sign of weakness to return to the EU and to ask the other terms. We would | :10:59. | :11:03. | |
be likely to achieve only a worse deal and furthermore there is no | :11:04. | :11:07. | |
obligation on the EU to continue negotiating with us beyond the | :11:08. | :11:22. | |
two-year period. New clause 175 words require us to remain an member | :11:23. | :11:29. | |
of the EU. To do so would be to betray the referendum and this | :11:30. | :11:31. | |
government is not prepared to accept that. But I must make absolutely | :11:32. | :11:38. | |
clear, this government wants Parliament to be engaged throughout | :11:39. | :11:44. | |
this process and we will keep this Parliament... I will give way. Will | :11:45. | :11:50. | |
he confirm that it is the position of the government to diminish the | :11:51. | :11:53. | |
status of this House in comparison to that of the European Parliament | :11:54. | :11:57. | |
in having an oversight of this process? That is absolutely | :11:58. | :12:03. | |
ludicrous because the European Parliament's row comes at the end of | :12:04. | :12:07. | |
the process. It has oversight to the extent that it rubber-stamps it or | :12:08. | :12:16. | |
it does not. New clause is 18 and 19 would require any new treaty agreed | :12:17. | :12:21. | |
with the EU would be subject to the ratification of Parliament. We have | :12:22. | :12:25. | |
always said we will observe the Constitution and legal obligations | :12:26. | :12:28. | |
that apply to the final deal and that remains the case and as we have | :12:29. | :12:33. | |
already confirmed, the final agreement will be subject to a vote | :12:34. | :12:37. | |
of this House before it is concluded. Will the Minister also | :12:38. | :12:46. | |
confirm whether he will abide by the recommendation of the Select | :12:47. | :12:49. | |
Committee report that when the government brings forward this deal | :12:50. | :12:54. | |
to Parliament, it should have regard to the requirement for adequate time | :12:55. | :12:58. | |
to consider the statement before those proposed terms are put forward | :12:59. | :13:02. | |
for approval? We will consider all the recommendations of the Select | :13:03. | :13:06. | |
Committee and we walk report formally in June course. We do not | :13:07. | :13:13. | |
approach these negotiations expecting failure but anticipating | :13:14. | :13:18. | |
success. But let me remind members that in this bill we are seeking to | :13:19. | :13:24. | |
do one very simple straightforward thing, we are seeking to follow the | :13:25. | :13:28. | |
instructions we have received from the British people in the referendum | :13:29. | :13:32. | |
and remaining a member of the European Union is not an option. The | :13:33. | :13:37. | |
process for leaving the EU will set up by Article 50 and it is not | :13:38. | :13:42. | |
within our power to extend the negotiations. New clause 99 and | :13:43. | :13:48. | |
visages yet another act of Parliament approving the | :13:49. | :13:51. | |
arrangements for our withdrawal and future relationship with the EU and | :13:52. | :13:55. | |
would require yet another act of Parliament to withdrawal from the EU | :13:56. | :13:58. | |
in the absence of a negotiating deal. While we would be ready for | :13:59. | :14:05. | |
any outcome, and exit without a trade agreement is emphatically not | :14:06. | :14:10. | |
what we seek, but let me be clear, keeping open the prospect of staying | :14:11. | :14:14. | |
in the EU as envisaged by that clause would only encourage the EU | :14:15. | :14:17. | |
to give us the worst possible deal in the hope that we would change our | :14:18. | :14:24. | |
minds. Amendment 43 calls for a referendum on our membership of the | :14:25. | :14:28. | |
European Union after we have negotiated a final deal. That was | :14:29. | :14:35. | |
tabled by the Liberal Democrats. This has been an important debate. | :14:36. | :14:40. | |
We have listened very carefully to the amendments, considered them very | :14:41. | :14:44. | |
carefully, but for the reasons given, we reject them and invite | :14:45. | :14:53. | |
them to be withdrawn. I have listened carefully to this debate. | :14:54. | :15:01. | |
There are inevitable problems. They have been claims and counterclaims | :15:02. | :15:05. | |
about the nature of the concessions made. Whatever Number 10 may be | :15:06. | :15:09. | |
briefing or not briefing, until today, there was never a commitment | :15:10. | :15:16. | |
to a vote on both the Article 50 deal and the future agreement with | :15:17. | :15:23. | |
the EU. There was never a commitment to a vote before the agreement was | :15:24. | :15:27. | |
concluded on a final agreed draft and it is simply rewriting history | :15:28. | :15:30. | |
to suggest that that was the case and there was never a deal, a | :15:31. | :15:35. | |
commitment there would be about in this House before the European | :15:36. | :15:42. | |
Parliament vote. Those three things have never been said before and I | :15:43. | :15:46. | |
gone through all the records book for making that assertion. Anyone to | :15:47. | :15:52. | |
suggest that is a concession and significant is to be blind to those | :15:53. | :15:57. | |
developments. I recognised there are a number of unanswered questions, | :15:58. | :16:01. | |
most importantly as to the consequences and timing of the vote. | :16:02. | :16:06. | |
As the right honourable member said, to some extent, we just do not know. | :16:07. | :16:11. | |
From my work in Brussels it is clear the planned the is to have a deal | :16:12. | :16:17. | |
which is capable of being put to the European Parliament in October 2018 | :16:18. | :16:22. | |
and that should be the ambition because that deal is put to this | :16:23. | :16:28. | |
House in October 2018, it means there would be a number of | :16:29. | :16:31. | |
consequences for this House to consider. I accept there are | :16:32. | :16:35. | |
questions and it is important the others reflect on the concessions | :16:36. | :16:39. | |
that have been made and consider what amendment might capture them. I | :16:40. | :16:46. | |
do not push new clause 1. That may allow space for other amendments to | :16:47. | :16:56. | |
be put to a vote. Is it your pleasure that new clause numeric one | :16:57. | :17:05. | |
be withdrawn? We will now take new clause 110. It is on page seven of | :17:06. | :17:12. | |
the Amendment paper. The question is that new clause 110... Sorry. The | :17:13. | :17:23. | |
question is that new clause 110 B read a second time. As many as are | :17:24. | :17:26. | |
of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". Division. Clear the | :17:27. | :17:29. | |
lobby. As many of that opinion say IAM | :17:30. | :19:26. | |
Cycling. On the contrary no. Tellers for the ayes, Jeff Smith. Tellers | :19:27. | :19:31. | |
for the no. The ayes to the right. 293. The Noes | :19:32. | :25:36. | |
to the left 326. The ayes to the right, 283. The Noes | :25:37. | :31:43. | |
to the left, 326. The Noes have it. The Noes have it. Unlock. We now | :31:44. | :31:52. | |
come to new clause 180 which is on page ten of the amendment paper. | :31:53. | :31:57. | |
Alex Salmond to move formally. The question is that new clause 180 be | :31:58. | :32:01. | |
added to the bill. As many as are of that opinion say Aye. Of the | :32:02. | :32:09. | |
contrary, No. Division. Clear the lobby. | :32:10. | :34:08. | |
The question is that new clause 180 be added to the bill. As many as are | :34:09. | :34:14. | |
of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". Tellers for the ayes | :34:15. | :34:18. | |
and the noes. Thank you. The ayes to the right, 88. The noes | :34:19. | :45:50. | |
to the left, 336. The eyes to the right were 88, the noes to the left | :45:51. | :46:00. | |
were 336, so the noes have it. Unlock. We now continue clause 5, | :46:01. | :46:07. | |
with which it will be convenient to take the clauses and amendments are | :46:08. | :46:21. | |
seen on the order paper. I beg to move new clause 5 in my name and in | :46:22. | :46:25. | |
the name of my right honourable friends. I also intend to speak | :46:26. | :46:31. | |
briefly the amendment 11 and new clause 90 eight. The bill before us | :46:32. | :46:35. | |
is straightforward but as many Honourable members have said, it | :46:36. | :46:40. | |
will set in train a process that will have profound implications for | :46:41. | :46:44. | |
our country and each of our constituents. Despite the government | :46:45. | :46:50. | |
resisting new clause 3 yesterday and setting the pace against giving | :46:51. | :46:55. | |
Parliament an active role in scrutinising the negotiation | :46:56. | :46:57. | |
process, this House. Need to hold the government to account. The | :46:58. | :47:04. | |
discharge that duty effectively, it requires adequate information and | :47:05. | :47:09. | |
robust analysis. As things stand, we do not have it. When it comes to the | :47:10. | :47:14. | |
crucial issue of the impact the different future trading models with | :47:15. | :47:18. | |
half an our economy, the government's White Paper for five | :47:19. | :47:22. | |
short on what is required to ensure we will have informed discussions | :47:23. | :47:27. | |
and debate in this place. It offers little beyond assurances that the | :47:28. | :47:33. | |
government will prioritising goods and services. This House, but more | :47:34. | :47:38. | |
importantly businesses across the country, deserved to be made aware | :47:39. | :47:42. | |
of the government's evaluation of the likely impact of different | :47:43. | :47:45. | |
future trading relations. The government can provide them with | :47:46. | :47:50. | |
that without revealing their hand by publishing any impact assessments | :47:51. | :47:54. | |
undertaken and that is the purpose of new clause 5. In its intent, new | :47:55. | :48:00. | |
clause 5 is similar to amendment 11 which stands in the name of my | :48:01. | :48:04. | |
honourable friend, which concerns the impact of withdrawal on the | :48:05. | :48:09. | |
public finances. I hope he gets a chance to speak to his amendment | :48:10. | :48:14. | |
because the public will not quickly forget the ?350 million a week that | :48:15. | :48:18. | |
though the Leave promised to the NHS and I know he will continue to | :48:19. | :48:26. | |
Returning to new clause five, we know the analysis we wished to see | :48:27. | :48:31. | |
published exists. Ministers have made clear from the dispatch box and | :48:32. | :48:36. | |
in responses to specific Parliamentary questions that the | :48:37. | :48:38. | |
government is conducting a broad range of analysis and the | :48:39. | :48:43. | |
macroeconomic and central level to understand the impact of leaving the | :48:44. | :48:48. | |
EU on all aspects of the UK. If I recall rightly the Secretary of | :48:49. | :48:51. | |
State said last week the 58 sectors are being assessed. We're not | :48:52. | :48:55. | |
were not asking the government to carry out undertakings and is not | :48:56. | :49:03. | |
interpreted as a mechanism to delay or frustrate the triggering of | :49:04. | :49:06. | |
article 50. The ministers maintained that no impact assessments have been | :49:07. | :49:13. | |
finalised the new clause is for the Secretary of State to report to both | :49:14. | :49:19. | |
houses. Does he suspect that any modelling by the Treasury may concur | :49:20. | :49:22. | |
with the modelling of the ISS which says that EEA membership is far | :49:23. | :49:28. | |
preferable and terms of economic growth than an FTA. I find the | :49:29. | :49:35. | |
honourable gentleman, the honest answer is that we don't know but as | :49:36. | :49:39. | |
I'll come to in my remarks, other organisations are doing this. There | :49:40. | :49:44. | |
isn't a vacuum out there and the government I think could quite | :49:45. | :49:49. | |
easily publish its analysis to help informed debate. I hope when the | :49:50. | :49:52. | |
minister responds that he doesn't simply echo the arguments of those | :49:53. | :49:56. | |
who have argued and will argue that publishing any information we are | :49:57. | :50:01. | |
undermining the government's negotiating strategy. We have those | :50:02. | :50:05. | |
arguments prior to the government's speech and White Paper and will know | :50:06. | :50:09. | |
that she them in the months ahead but I said to honourable members who | :50:10. | :50:13. | |
take that view, for genuine reasons of concern possibly because they | :50:14. | :50:17. | |
want the legislation to shut up shop for 18 months that the detailed | :50:18. | :50:21. | |
analysis of the kind we are asking to be published is out there. Other | :50:22. | :50:25. | |
organisations are doing it, not just the government. I listened with | :50:26. | :50:32. | |
care. His amendment seeks to make the giving of notice of Article 50 | :50:33. | :50:37. | |
as I understand conditional upon an impact assessment being set before | :50:38. | :50:41. | |
the House of Commons. It seems to me that the giving of the article 50 | :50:42. | :50:46. | |
should be conditional upon a vote of the British people which took place | :50:47. | :50:49. | |
last year. This is simply an attempt to delay. I think of the on one is | :50:50. | :50:57. | |
being fair, I dealt with the question earlier on when I said it's | :50:58. | :51:01. | |
not an attempt to delay because we know that the government have | :51:02. | :51:05. | |
already carried out these impact assessments and the idea that we're | :51:06. | :51:08. | |
not bitter any impact assessments published during the course of the | :51:09. | :51:12. | |
negotiations is farcical, we could have them upfront and we could | :51:13. | :51:18. | |
debate. Reputable and well-regarded organisations... Does he not agree | :51:19. | :51:27. | |
with me that if we were to have official produced impact assessments | :51:28. | :51:29. | |
rather than the impact assessments done by people guessing, Treasury | :51:30. | :51:34. | |
impact assessments, we wouldn't be able to have a proper debate about | :51:35. | :51:39. | |
the right kind of Brexit that was best for our country in very | :51:40. | :51:44. | |
difficult and rapidly changing times. My right honourable friend | :51:45. | :51:50. | |
expresses the intent of the bill perfectly and I agree with her 100%. | :51:51. | :51:56. | |
Well-regarded and reputable organisation such as the National | :51:57. | :52:00. | |
Institute of economic and social research have published detailed | :52:01. | :52:05. | |
analysis of the costs and benefits of future trading relationships with | :52:06. | :52:09. | |
the EU at has other less reputable organisations. The quality of the | :52:10. | :52:13. | |
argument that the government and the Treasury can produce will match if | :52:14. | :52:16. | |
not surpassed that analysis and we believe honourable members should | :52:17. | :52:21. | |
have access to it. More importantly, businesses across the country need | :52:22. | :52:24. | |
to be able to see it so they can help adequately plan for their | :52:25. | :52:30. | |
futures. He's just asserted that the analysis that he wants to see would | :52:31. | :52:34. | |
be superior in quality to some of the others that may be available. | :52:35. | :52:40. | |
What does he based that assertion on given that the people he wants to | :52:41. | :52:46. | |
report on the situation are giving us the most extraordinary | :52:47. | :52:48. | |
information before the referendum they were telling us that we were | :52:49. | :52:54. | |
going to be attended by plagues of frogs and locusts and the sky was | :52:55. | :52:58. | |
going to fall in. What I would say to the honourable gentleman is that | :52:59. | :53:02. | |
if he is right, I would not like to be one of the ministers negotiating | :53:03. | :53:07. | |
the agreement with the EU because they will be relying on that | :53:08. | :53:10. | |
information when they decide then I negotiating priorities. We on these | :53:11. | :53:17. | |
benches look forward to healing the thoughts of the Minister on the | :53:18. | :53:23. | |
matter and I want to now turn to new clause 98 in the name of my | :53:24. | :53:26. | |
honourable friend. The purpose of new clause 98 is simple. To ensure | :53:27. | :53:32. | |
the impact of decisions on women and those with protected characteristics | :53:33. | :53:35. | |
are considered and debated at every stage of the negotiation process. It | :53:36. | :53:39. | |
may have escaped the attention of some honourable members but the word | :53:40. | :53:44. | |
equality does not appear once in the government White Paper. Indeed, the | :53:45. | :53:49. | |
White Paper contains no mention of race, disability, sexuality and | :53:50. | :53:53. | |
gender identity, which I find quite astonishing. How can we secure a | :53:54. | :53:58. | |
Brexit that works for everyone as honourable members from both sides | :53:59. | :54:01. | |
of the chip have repeated ad nauseam in these debates that these | :54:02. | :54:08. | |
communities are not given due consideration when weighing up the | :54:09. | :54:12. | |
different negotiating positions. The process and the final deal must have | :54:13. | :54:16. | |
regard for equalities and the protection and extension of rights | :54:17. | :54:19. | |
for those with protected characteristics. New clause 9860 | :54:20. | :54:23. | |
ensure that the qualities considerations are at the forefront | :54:24. | :54:27. | |
of government thinking and that the inform the final deal. Doing so | :54:28. | :54:29. | |
would help ensure we get the best deal for everyone wherever they are | :54:30. | :54:34. | |
but crucially whoever they are. It would ensure that any negative | :54:35. | :54:40. | |
impact on women must be transparently presented and | :54:41. | :54:43. | |
considered and if there's a risk of disproportionate impact that the | :54:44. | :54:45. | |
government takes steps to mitigate it. The new clause is in line | :54:46. | :54:50. | |
recommendations from the cross-party women and equalities committee which | :54:51. | :54:54. | |
is called for greater transparency on the impact of government | :54:55. | :54:57. | |
decisions on women and those with protected characteristics and help | :54:58. | :55:00. | |
improve scrutiny and accountability and look forward and hope the | :55:01. | :55:03. | |
Minister gives it due consideration when he responds. New clause five | :55:04. | :55:09. | |
impact assessments. The question is that new clause five | :55:10. | :55:14. | |
B read a second time. I intend to deliver has very much, | :55:15. | :55:28. | |
most of these ones are narrow and deal with this very specific point | :55:29. | :55:32. | |
that the honourable gentleman on the front raised early on. I have a very | :55:33. | :55:36. | |
simple concern as to why there is such a peculiar sense about the | :55:37. | :55:43. | |
vital importance of these particular tabled forecasts that really places | :55:44. | :55:49. | |
huge credit on the Treasury's ability to be able to forecast were | :55:50. | :55:53. | |
recording in every sector. As so many of these forecasts have in the | :55:54. | :55:59. | |
past been fundamentally wrong and I asked the library to look at the | :56:00. | :56:04. | |
Treasury forecast in May 2016 and to concern itself as whether or not how | :56:05. | :56:08. | |
accurate that turned out to be and I think it's worth actually just silly | :56:09. | :56:11. | |
to me exactly how accurate that really has turned out to be when | :56:12. | :56:14. | |
they had in front of them a huge array of figures and possibilities. | :56:15. | :56:21. | |
It's worth reading this one because it's quite important. In May 2016 | :56:22. | :56:25. | |
the Treasury published forecast for the immediate economic impact of | :56:26. | :56:28. | |
voting to leave the EU. Its forecast for a recession to occur in the | :56:29. | :56:33. | |
second half of 2016 quarterly GDP growth of -0.1% in both quarter | :56:34. | :56:39. | |
three and a quarter four. And its forecast essentially a second severe | :56:40. | :56:43. | |
shock scenario that was also shown with a deep recession occurring | :56:44. | :56:52. | |
under this scenario growth of 1% and -0.4% in quarter 420 16. In reality | :56:53. | :56:58. | |
the economy continue to grow in its pre-referendum pace with quarterly | :56:59. | :57:03. | |
growth of 0.6% and more and now it's been adjusted again by the governor | :57:04. | :57:07. | |
of the Bank of England to be just close to it 2% with the prospect of | :57:08. | :57:15. | |
further adjustments. Just on the point of quarterly growth | :57:16. | :57:18. | |
statistics, as understand it, I think that even the future | :57:19. | :57:21. | |
predictions even knowing what is happening right now is often very | :57:22. | :57:26. | |
difficult for predicting entities. In fact I believe it's about four | :57:27. | :57:31. | |
times out of 270 quarters they have the numbers correct. In fact, the | :57:32. | :57:38. | |
range of prediction had nearly and 90 billion margin for error from the | :57:39. | :57:44. | |
Office for Budget Responsibility over the previous seven years. That | :57:45. | :57:51. | |
?90 billion was plus or minus 15 on the plus side and 40 billion on the | :57:52. | :57:57. | |
minus side. -- 50 billion on the plus side. We have a sense that | :57:58. | :58:00. | |
somehow these forecasts give you any strong real indication of what could | :58:01. | :58:08. | |
happen in the economy. This particular new clause, and other | :58:09. | :58:10. | |
amendments relevant to it, actually do make this contingent on this and | :58:11. | :58:16. | |
other words the triggering of article 50 officially cannot be done | :58:17. | :58:21. | |
until these forecasts are laid. There's not a of consult on them or | :58:22. | :58:26. | |
made as a matter of information by the government of contingents, so | :58:27. | :58:30. | |
other words, this Article 50 letter cannot go until these are laid and | :58:31. | :58:37. | |
all they do is be inform the debate depending on what the forecasts are. | :58:38. | :58:41. | |
For example, I happen to be of the general opinion in talking to | :58:42. | :58:45. | |
economists that we've had seven years of growth and its normal | :58:46. | :58:48. | |
within the cycle that you would expect at some point after this long | :58:49. | :58:52. | |
period of growth to have a certain flattening, that would be the normal | :58:53. | :58:56. | |
prospect. But that e-commerce will tell you it's defined in more | :58:57. | :59:00. | |
prospects of whether or not we have a natural process of slightly lower | :59:01. | :59:03. | |
growth directly as a result of this longer period of growth, what | :59:04. | :59:07. | |
happens at the world economy, what's happening in the European Union is | :59:08. | :59:11. | |
almost impossible to forecast that and do it with any great accuracy. | :59:12. | :59:15. | |
My point that are merely making, it does seem to be strange that the new | :59:16. | :59:20. | |
clause five, it says here and I caught this, the Prime Minister may | :59:21. | :59:23. | |
not give notice under section one until either HM Treasury has | :59:24. | :59:30. | |
published any impact assessment and HM Treasury has laid a statement | :59:31. | :59:33. | |
before both houses of parliament. This is not, with respect to the | :59:34. | :59:36. | |
honourable gentleman this book for the opposition, this is not just a | :59:37. | :59:41. | |
helpful attempt to get information to the House. This is exactly what | :59:42. | :59:47. | |
he said it was not. This is quite clearly a back door attempt to try | :59:48. | :59:52. | |
and make it almost impossible and difficult for the government to | :59:53. | :59:54. | |
actually get on and trigger article 59 what what what my honourable | :59:55. | :00:00. | |
friend Dover said was was that the verdict of the British people and | :00:01. | :00:03. | |
the referendum was to trigger article 50, they weren't asked | :00:04. | :00:07. | |
Sharon Wood triple article 50 only after we have laid various reports | :00:08. | :00:10. | |
and notables who believe the economy is good, bad or indifferent, they | :00:11. | :00:14. | |
were rashly asked do you want to leave order you want to stay and | :00:15. | :00:18. | |
they've chosen to leave and we need to get on with it. The idea that | :00:19. | :00:21. | |
government will go on to a negotiation without any idea about | :00:22. | :00:25. | |
what may favour and what by a large what the margins will be is | :00:26. | :00:29. | |
ridiculous and the other point I'd make is that the House has to in a | :00:30. | :00:37. | |
sense recognise that it's come to be swamped with information of this | :00:38. | :00:41. | |
sort every single forecasting agency is going to be in the game of | :00:42. | :00:46. | |
telling us where we are and none will be the wiser. And I'm sure | :00:47. | :00:49. | |
depending on what their position is, everybody in the House will take the | :00:50. | :00:52. | |
worst are the best depending on what they want. If you got a margin of | :00:53. | :00:58. | |
error from the Office for Budget Responsibility of ?90 billion, you | :00:59. | :01:00. | |
can take with ever petition you want but it doesn't change anything. | :01:01. | :01:06. | |
Because we are leaving and the nature of the agreement that we get, | :01:07. | :01:11. | |
if we get an agreement with the European Union, is not to be based | :01:12. | :01:14. | |
on a budget forecasts, his country based on what ultimately goes | :01:15. | :01:18. | |
negotiating from the European Union thinkers in their general best | :01:19. | :01:21. | |
interests and we from the UK managed to persuade them is in our mutual | :01:22. | :01:27. | |
best interest. That is what a negotiation is about and anybody | :01:28. | :01:30. | |
who's been engaged in the negotiation business will know that | :01:31. | :01:34. | |
you start with what you base bottom line is on worst for you and you try | :01:35. | :01:38. | |
to improve upon that and they do the same. This is not going to be, I | :01:39. | :01:42. | |
tell you what my forecast comes to women to be better, what is your | :01:43. | :01:48. | |
sick? We're going to be better off, so which forecast regurgitate? The | :01:49. | :01:53. | |
Battle of forecasts is a decrease and pointless exercise. I'm grateful | :01:54. | :01:57. | |
to the Right honourable gentleman forgiving way. Of course, as he | :01:58. | :02:04. | |
characterised it, it isn't going to be a battle of forecasts. What the | :02:05. | :02:09. | |
forecasts are based on is the same thing as the assessment that people | :02:10. | :02:14. | |
make when they're judging what will or will not be in their interest. | :02:15. | :02:19. | |
They've got a mental model and sometimes those mental models can be | :02:20. | :02:23. | |
put into mathematical form and sometimes that is useful and surely | :02:24. | :02:28. | |
that is precisely what the City of London is doing when it says to the | :02:29. | :02:33. | |
French and the Germans and the Italians, you need us more than we | :02:34. | :02:39. | |
need you. Yes, but the point is here that we'll be none the wiser and | :02:40. | :02:45. | |
this is my point, if the House links that forecasts are somehow going to | :02:46. | :02:50. | |
really inform the view of it, I would after 25 years be astonished. | :02:51. | :02:55. | |
Debates in this house are freely really informed, they are mostly | :02:56. | :02:59. | |
based on the judgment of individuals, particularly from some | :03:00. | :03:05. | |
of my... My right honourable friend is making a very impressive case. | :03:06. | :03:18. | |
I'm tempted to quote from carry on up the Khyber. | :03:19. | :03:39. | |
Is it not the case given the candour of one of the most distinguished | :03:40. | :03:44. | |
economists in this country that those who call for impact | :03:45. | :03:49. | |
assessments in the way they did attributing. I'm tempted my | :03:50. | :03:55. | |
predecessor when he said when there's screaming, shouting and | :03:56. | :03:58. | |
laughing, carry on you must be on the right track. The point I would | :03:59. | :04:03. | |
make is also the head of the OBE I was seeing in the end of it, almost | :04:04. | :04:05. | |
all forecasts are wrong. This is not really about being | :04:06. | :04:30. | |
informed? Is not information its delay. That's what it is all about, | :04:31. | :04:33. | |
and attend to were not satisfied with that, that doesn't quite confer | :04:34. | :04:37. | |
with what be passed in this clause, therefore you are not able to | :04:38. | :04:40. | |
trigger article 50. The honest truth is the government is to go always | :04:41. | :04:45. | |
with their best will and endeavour and try and arrange to get the best | :04:46. | :04:49. | |
kind of deal they can. As we look around us and we listen to what | :04:50. | :04:54. | |
various politicians in Europe, we keep forgetting their position in | :04:55. | :04:57. | |
this is really what will and upsetting what kind of arrangement | :04:58. | :05:04. | |
we get. Finance Minister of Germany 24 hours ago has changed his | :05:05. | :05:08. | |
position and has now said that there is no way on earth that they should | :05:09. | :05:11. | |
have any concept of trying to punish the United Kingdom, quite con the | :05:12. | :05:18. | |
contrary. He said we need the City of London to succeed and thrive | :05:19. | :05:21. | |
because without it we will be poor and went on to say therefore we | :05:22. | :05:27. | |
absolutely will have to come to an arrangement with the United Kingdom | :05:28. | :05:32. | |
because it is in all of our interests and that is the best | :05:33. | :05:35. | |
forecast you can get because it's about what people believe is in | :05:36. | :05:42. | |
their mutual best interest. Further to that point. Has he seen comments | :05:43. | :05:49. | |
from the German equivalent of the CBI. | :05:50. | :06:01. | |
Thomas Ince the Prime Minister made her excellent speech in which she | :06:02. | :06:09. | |
set out the 12 points that were subsequently fleshed out into a | :06:10. | :06:12. | |
White Paper she made it clear what the British Government was not going | :06:13. | :06:16. | |
to be asking for any special pleading about the single market | :06:17. | :06:17. | |
that the rashly began to say. I engage with a company that turns | :06:18. | :06:37. | |
over 400 million euros a year. They are in the pre-packaged potato | :06:38. | :06:42. | |
industry and 39% of their product they sell all over the world but 39% | :06:43. | :06:47. | |
is sold to the United Kingdom. They do very well. | :06:48. | :07:04. | |
These things are already nothing to do with forecasts, all to do with | :07:05. | :07:12. | |
people caring about their futures and jobs. These amendments come | :07:13. | :07:21. | |
before any such rational intervention by reasonable business | :07:22. | :07:26. | |
people across Europe. They are designed, they are based on the | :07:27. | :07:29. | |
presumption that the members opposite genuinely believe in their | :07:30. | :07:36. | |
doomsday forecasts. They're just waiting for them to occur and that's | :07:37. | :07:40. | |
the whole point of delaying the process in the hope that when it | :07:41. | :07:45. | |
does happen and the sky does fall, the British people will change their | :07:46. | :07:53. | |
minds. I am the most mild-mannered and tolerant of men. | :07:54. | :08:02. | |
The interventions are becoming slightly overlong. Interventions | :08:03. | :08:10. | |
should be interventions not speeches. Thank you for that | :08:11. | :08:19. | |
explanatory intervention. I'm still prepared to take any further | :08:20. | :08:21. | |
interventions should they wish to foster keep them short. We just | :08:22. | :08:27. | |
talked a month ago about the City of London, the power of the City of | :08:28. | :08:32. | |
London. 30 relies as well that other major capitals, Paris and Frankfurt | :08:33. | :08:37. | |
and they don't have the infrastructure. Frankfurt has won | :08:38. | :08:41. | |
for a Mike Mitchell and Paris has restricted labour laws. It plays | :08:42. | :08:49. | |
usually to the government's hands. In Frankfurt in was interesting that | :08:50. | :08:54. | |
when he was interviewed by the BBC to their horror when they said you | :08:55. | :08:58. | |
already tried to get people to come to take up their jobs. | :08:59. | :09:16. | |
We absolutely need the City of London to thrive and prosper because | :09:17. | :09:23. | |
it's the way we keep our capital cheap. We can't replace it, it will | :09:24. | :09:27. | |
go somewhere outside of Europe. He said London is the only global city | :09:28. | :09:32. | |
in Europe and the point he was making was that we always move and | :09:33. | :09:36. | |
trade jobs are on but the point is the expertise and the ability to | :09:37. | :09:40. | |
make those capital deals lies in London and they want to make sure | :09:41. | :09:46. | |
that the kingdom government, the European Union commission and the | :09:47. | :09:50. | |
Council reach an agreement that is beneficial to both sides with access | :09:51. | :09:55. | |
to the marketplace. I make no bones about it, I'm an optimist and | :09:56. | :09:58. | |
nothing in the way of this amendment which is good to help in any way | :09:59. | :10:01. | |
whatsoever for the government or even more importantly these | :10:02. | :10:05. | |
amendments for the House to reach any kind of magic to conclusion such | :10:06. | :10:09. | |
as to let the government then trigger article 50. This I content | :10:10. | :10:17. | |
in conclusion, somebody wants to intervene but in conclusion I | :10:18. | :10:28. | |
content. When it comes to forecasts there was another real-life example | :10:29. | :10:32. | |
which I don't think is mentioned which is the referendum in Scotland | :10:33. | :10:36. | |
for independence was predicated on the oil price remaining high. | :10:37. | :10:40. | |
Shortly afterwards the oil price dropped dramatically which would | :10:41. | :10:44. | |
have left Scotland in dire straits and they voted for independence. I | :10:45. | :10:54. | |
agree, as the head of the old BR said about forecasts, he was clear. | :10:55. | :10:57. | |
He said in the end most forecasts are wrong. On that basis it isn't | :10:58. | :11:03. | |
really good to help the House in any way to suddenly have a Treasury | :11:04. | :11:07. | |
forecast any other than it will for all the multitude of other forecasts | :11:08. | :11:11. | |
that are likely to set about seeing where the economy will go. I don't | :11:12. | :11:14. | |
blame them for being on because there are far too many movable part | :11:15. | :11:17. | |
in economies as complex as the United Kingdom's. | :11:18. | :11:33. | |
This is about making sure the government's hands are tied, that | :11:34. | :11:40. | |
the slow the process down in the vague hope that some how, people's | :11:41. | :11:54. | |
opinions will change. The honest truth is... He has been very | :11:55. | :12:00. | |
generous in accepting these interventions. As I understand from | :12:01. | :12:07. | |
polling and my experience on the doorstep, most people just want us | :12:08. | :12:13. | |
to get on with the job. Brexit is actually more popular than it was at | :12:14. | :12:21. | |
the time of the referendum. I just simply want to say that is exactly | :12:22. | :12:25. | |
the point. The purpose of all of this, if you were trying to mend the | :12:26. | :12:30. | |
bill on this basis and tied a government's hands, or that will | :12:31. | :12:35. | |
happen is that, in the end, the British people will get frustrated | :12:36. | :12:39. | |
and angry about that... I will indeed give way. What if, actually, | :12:40. | :12:49. | |
everyone in the House, whether they are Brexiteers all remain as, want | :12:50. | :12:54. | |
the best deal for the country? And in order to make good decisions | :12:55. | :12:58. | |
about that, they want to see the analysis about what is going on | :12:59. | :13:03. | |
about the implications of making particular decision so we can have a | :13:04. | :13:06. | |
good debate? Surely, that is what this is about, not delay? I say to | :13:07. | :13:12. | |
the honourable lady, if that were the purpose, explicit purpose of | :13:13. | :13:18. | |
this amendment or new clause, I would agree with her, but the | :13:19. | :13:24. | |
difference is that it restricts the government from invoking Article 50 | :13:25. | :13:29. | |
until this matter is laid in front of the House. I simply say to her, | :13:30. | :13:34. | |
that line alone makes it very clear that this is not the full intention. | :13:35. | :13:41. | |
If however all that was said was we would invoke Article 50 and it would | :13:42. | :13:44. | |
be good that the government puts forward the various predictions | :13:45. | :13:48. | |
forecast, I would probably have said the government would not have a | :13:49. | :13:51. | |
problem with that, but this is not what this says. If the honourable | :13:52. | :13:58. | |
lady beads, she will realise this is about delay and prevarication. I end | :13:59. | :14:09. | |
by simply saying... Would he like to make a forecast and say that maybe, | :14:10. | :14:17. | |
at the end of this process, the vast majority of the people in Scotland | :14:18. | :14:24. | |
will want Brexit? I will honestly say, as I have just condemned every | :14:25. | :14:29. | |
forecast, I will not make up forecast. But I will say that once | :14:30. | :14:33. | |
they get back on the domestic policy in Scotland, the Scottish | :14:34. | :14:38. | |
Nationalists will be seen for what they are. But let's get back to the | :14:39. | :14:49. | |
real forecast. In conclusion, I simply say therefore this new clause | :14:50. | :14:54. | |
and attending amendments that make it very clear that this House would | :14:55. | :14:59. | |
put another set of shackles around the government's hands, stopping | :15:00. | :15:02. | |
them from getting on with what the British people voted for last year, | :15:03. | :15:07. | |
must be rejected because the government at the end of the day | :15:08. | :15:10. | |
must seek the best deal they can in line with what is good for the EU | :15:11. | :15:20. | |
and good for the United Kingdom. I am pleased to follow the right | :15:21. | :15:24. | |
honourable member for Chingford. I have to say, before I come on to the | :15:25. | :15:31. | |
amendment I am moving, on a subject I noticed was absent from his | :15:32. | :15:35. | |
contribution just now, I am bemused at what can only be described as a | :15:36. | :15:43. | |
15 minute diatribe against forecasters, economists, the | :15:44. | :15:47. | |
experts, that is why I was not surprised to see the member for | :15:48. | :15:51. | |
Surrey Heath join him in that diatribe, because we have spent the | :15:52. | :15:56. | |
last five or six years on this side of the House listening to these two | :15:57. | :16:02. | |
former Cabinet ministers telling us how important economic forecasts | :16:03. | :16:08. | |
are, how important it is to listen to independent forecasters, which is | :16:09. | :16:10. | |
why they were telling us how important it was the set up the | :16:11. | :16:14. | |
offers the budget responsibility that he has just spent the last 15 | :16:15. | :16:19. | |
minutes slapping off. But anyway, I will make progress and come to the | :16:20. | :16:27. | |
honourable gentleman in a bit. I am bound to say at the start that I | :16:28. | :16:38. | |
wish we were not here. I campaigned as the two Honourable members know, | :16:39. | :16:43. | |
very strongly for us to stay in the European Union. I played a role in | :16:44. | :16:50. | |
the Britain stronger in Europe campaign nationally. But we lost. I | :16:51. | :16:57. | |
accept that and as a Democrat, I accept the result, which is why I | :16:58. | :17:02. | |
supported the second reading of this bill. But I respect people who took | :17:03. | :17:06. | |
a different view on how you interpret the referendum result. | :17:07. | :17:11. | |
However, whilst we have different views as to whether the trigger | :17:12. | :17:18. | |
Article 50 or not, we can all agree that, whilst various promises were | :17:19. | :17:20. | |
made by both sides in that referendum campaign, the key pledge | :17:21. | :17:28. | |
of the winning side was that, if we leave the European Union, ?350 | :17:29. | :17:34. | |
million extra per week would go to the NHS, which is why I am seeking | :17:35. | :17:39. | |
to move amendment 11. Dominic Cummings, who worked with the... Who | :17:40. | :17:48. | |
ran the vote Leave campaign, said on his blog last month that the ?315 | :17:49. | :17:54. | |
million argument was necessary to win. Would we have one without the | :17:55. | :18:04. | |
?350 million NHS? All our research suggests no. You can go and read on | :18:05. | :18:11. | |
his blog. So its importance cannot be underestimated or detached from | :18:12. | :18:16. | |
the triggering of Article 50. It is inextricably linked to why millions | :18:17. | :18:23. | |
of people voted to leave. It is inextricably linked to our | :18:24. | :18:26. | |
withdrawal from the European Union and the efforts of this Bill. I am | :18:27. | :18:33. | |
very grateful to my right honourable friend the giving way. He is | :18:34. | :18:37. | |
absolutely right. I have had public meetings and I was in one village | :18:38. | :18:43. | |
where they said it is fantastic that we are leaving the European Union | :18:44. | :18:48. | |
because we will get ?350 million a week for the NHS and the government | :18:49. | :18:52. | |
will be able to reopen the A hospital. That is right. And there | :18:53. | :18:59. | |
are lots of examples that throughout the country. It is not surprising. | :19:00. | :19:04. | |
Prominent members of this government, the foreign environment | :19:05. | :19:13. | |
secretaries, all members of the current Cabinet, went around the | :19:14. | :19:18. | |
country in that big red bus that said, we send the EU ?350 million a | :19:19. | :19:25. | |
week, let's fund our NHS instead. None of them... None of them | :19:26. | :19:30. | |
discerned this pledge during the campaign. All they stood by, a big | :19:31. | :19:41. | |
sign saying, let's give the NHS the ?350 million the EU gets every week. | :19:42. | :19:46. | |
Does he agree with me that this kind of cynical campaigning gives | :19:47. | :19:50. | |
politics and politicians are really bad name? And that people who have | :19:51. | :19:58. | |
seen the pledge on that big red bus now expect this government to | :19:59. | :20:04. | |
deliver that pledge? That is absolutely right and of course... | :20:05. | :20:12. | |
They seek to hide behind the wording and claim it was conditional. But | :20:13. | :20:16. | |
they knew exactly what they were doing when they stood in front of | :20:17. | :20:21. | |
that big red bus and those signs. The clear message they intended to | :20:22. | :20:27. | |
convey was that if we leave the European Union, ?350 million a week | :20:28. | :20:34. | |
will go to the NHS. This story about town hall meetings, I have a huge | :20:35. | :20:38. | |
amount of time for the honourable gentleman, but I say to him, I have | :20:39. | :20:41. | |
a number of people come up to me in meeting saying, we would love to | :20:42. | :20:46. | |
vote to leave the EU but the Chancellor has told us if we do, we | :20:47. | :20:51. | |
will use 400 ?400 and there will be an emergency budget. It does not | :20:52. | :20:58. | |
help this country with this House to rehash the campaign of seven months | :20:59. | :21:02. | |
ago. I am glad the honourable member raised this point. I also have a lot | :21:03. | :21:07. | |
of respect for him. I'm not tried to re-litigate the referendum campaign | :21:08. | :21:12. | |
now, I am trying to make sure the policies these people made are | :21:13. | :21:19. | |
delivered! We know the NHS needs the extra cash so it was not | :21:20. | :21:22. | |
unreasonable for people to believe them. As members of the health | :21:23. | :21:27. | |
Select Committee, people on all sides of the House sit on, they | :21:28. | :21:33. | |
pointed out recently the deficit in NHS foundation trusts in 2015 and 16 | :21:34. | :21:40. | |
was ?3.45 billion alone. We know that claimed increases in NHS | :21:41. | :21:44. | |
funding by ministers are being funded by reductions in other areas | :21:45. | :21:53. | |
of health spending. We know the reductions in spending on social | :21:54. | :21:56. | |
care are having a serious impact translating into increased pay any | :21:57. | :22:03. | |
attendances, emergency admissions, delays, the people leaving | :22:04. | :22:08. | |
hospitals. The NHS needs that extra cash so it was not unreasonable for | :22:09. | :22:11. | |
people who voted to leave the European to think this would be | :22:12. | :22:16. | |
deliverable. I am very grateful to the honourable gentleman to giving | :22:17. | :22:20. | |
way. He is complaining about the slogan on the side of the bus and is | :22:21. | :22:25. | |
implying that his amendment gives money to the NHS but it doesn't. It | :22:26. | :22:30. | |
merely suggests there is a report on the effect of the withdrawal from | :22:31. | :22:36. | |
the EU on national finance. So he seems to be falling into exactly the | :22:37. | :22:40. | |
same trap as he is accusing others of. Notes and beans come to mind. I | :22:41. | :22:50. | |
do not know about him, but all I will say to the honourable gentleman | :22:51. | :22:56. | |
is that this amendment has been drafted so it is an offensive to | :22:57. | :23:01. | |
people like him. And given it is such a reasonable amendment, I | :23:02. | :23:09. | |
suggest he simply votes for it! Is he aware of change Britain's latest | :23:10. | :23:16. | |
press release where the ?350 million a week has gone on to ?450 million a | :23:17. | :23:23. | |
week by the exhortations to scrap such owner is regulations such as | :23:24. | :23:30. | |
the motor vehicles regulations, the greenhouse gas emissions | :23:31. | :23:32. | |
regulations, the welfare of animals regulations and the welfare of | :23:33. | :23:37. | |
farmed animals regulations in this country? That is very interesting | :23:38. | :23:41. | |
and I note that the member for Surrey Heath are still in his place | :23:42. | :23:46. | |
because I saw in the Sun newspaper in November that the honourable | :23:47. | :23:51. | |
member for Surrey Heath was demanding that Theresa May spend ?32 | :23:52. | :23:56. | |
billion Brexit dividend on the NHS. I hope he will be supporting our | :23:57. | :24:02. | |
amendment today as well. I thank my honourable friend the giving way and | :24:03. | :24:05. | |
he is making some very important points. It is interesting to hear | :24:06. | :24:09. | |
the other sides scoffing and laughing at this issue but the thing | :24:10. | :24:12. | |
I point out is that this was not just one many pledges, it was the | :24:13. | :24:20. | |
pledge, the key pledge... There are a collection of photographs in front | :24:21. | :24:24. | |
of me. It was the number one commitment of this country when they | :24:25. | :24:28. | |
voted to leave the European Union. Does this chamber not have a | :24:29. | :24:31. | |
responsibility to honour the pledge in which people were voting to leave | :24:32. | :24:36. | |
the EU? I completely agree with my honourable friend and it is for | :24:37. | :24:40. | |
these reasons that I have tabled amendment 11. It is a very | :24:41. | :24:47. | |
reasonable amendment. It requires the Prime Minister to set out how | :24:48. | :24:52. | |
the UK's withdrawal from the EU will impact on the national finances, in | :24:53. | :24:58. | |
particular on health spending. She needs to set out how she is going to | :24:59. | :25:04. | |
make good on that boat Leave pledge to spend ?350 million extra per week | :25:05. | :25:14. | |
on the NHS. I have been very pleased to support his amendment. Does he | :25:15. | :25:17. | |
agree with me that this would be a vital part of keeping the public's | :25:18. | :25:22. | |
confidence in the process as well as we go forward over the next two | :25:23. | :25:28. | |
years, not least if I reflect on a conversation I had my constituency | :25:29. | :25:33. | |
on Sunday that this issue still remains top most people's minds as | :25:34. | :25:36. | |
to the reason why they voted to leave? Absolutely. This issue will | :25:37. | :25:43. | |
not go away. It will be a major part of the general election campaign, | :25:44. | :25:48. | |
whenever the next one comes. And I do hope that we will not only have | :25:49. | :25:51. | |
the opportunity to debate this but the opportunity to vote on this as | :25:52. | :26:00. | |
well. This is the amendment that has been signed by more members than any | :26:01. | :26:05. | |
other amendment. It is supported across parties and is the support of | :26:06. | :26:15. | |
the opposition front bench. In the end, in our democracy, it is in this | :26:16. | :26:20. | |
House that members of this House are held to account for the promises and | :26:21. | :26:26. | |
things they say to the people. What better way to test the resolve of | :26:27. | :26:30. | |
people like the honourable member for Chingford, the Surrey Heath, | :26:31. | :26:34. | |
what better way to test the resolve than for there to be a vote on this | :26:35. | :26:37. | |
side the the book and see whether the meant what they said? Another | :26:38. | :26:47. | |
commitment was they want to make Parliament sovereign again. If you | :26:48. | :26:49. | |
listen to the government benches today, they say, that would be | :26:50. | :26:57. | |
delaying tactics, they cannot have it both ways. He is absolutely | :26:58. | :27:04. | |
right. These people will never be forgiven if they betrayed the trust | :27:05. | :27:09. | |
of the people by breaking the promised to do with the can to | :27:10. | :27:14. | |
ensure that the ?350 million extra per week for the NHS is delivered. | :27:15. | :27:19. | |
They all know this only too well. Mr Cummings, who as I said worked for | :27:20. | :27:24. | |
the right honourable member for Surrey Heath, disclose this in the | :27:25. | :27:28. | |
blog I mentioned, but the Foreign Secretary and a member of the member | :27:29. | :27:32. | |
for Surrey Heath plan to impart deliver on this pledge is part of | :27:33. | :27:36. | |
the Foreign Secretary's leadership campaign. So when Mr Cummings said | :27:37. | :27:41. | |
he told the Foreign Secretary, you should start off by being an usual, | :27:42. | :27:47. | |
a politician who actually delivers what they promise, he says the reply | :27:48. | :27:52. | |
was from the Foreign Secretary, absolutely, we must do this, no | :27:53. | :28:00. | |
question. Apparently, the member for Surrey Heath strongly agreed and of | :28:01. | :28:04. | |
course Mr Cummins goes on to say, if they had not blown up, this would | :28:05. | :28:08. | |
have all happened. There are a number of reasons no doubt why the | :28:09. | :28:11. | |
Minister... Will say to us he cannot Firstly, there are those who claim | :28:12. | :28:27. | |
this wasn't a pledge at all. The transport Secretary has said the | :28:28. | :28:32. | |
specific proposal by the Vote Leave campaign was to spend ?100 million a | :28:33. | :28:38. | |
week of the ?350 million on the NHS. And he hoped, and I quote, the | :28:39. | :28:44. | |
aspiration will be met. I say to the transport secretary who is not here, | :28:45. | :28:50. | |
the poster they stood by and did not say this was an aspiration or use | :28:51. | :28:55. | |
the ?100 million figure, it was a pledge. Pure and simple. The poster | :28:56. | :29:02. | |
did not say, let's aspire to spend ?100 million extra. It gave the | :29:03. | :29:07. | |
clear impression... I will give way shortly. The clear impression the | :29:08. | :29:13. | |
money would be spent and it is true the office for National Statistics | :29:14. | :29:18. | |
said the ?350 million figure was misleading but the Vote Leave | :29:19. | :29:22. | |
campaign which the right honourable member chaired, they kept on using | :29:23. | :29:27. | |
that figure regardless and now they will be held to account. I give way. | :29:28. | :29:34. | |
I thank him for giving way eventually. I believe he should | :29:35. | :29:39. | |
listen to the words of my right honourable friend the Chingford who | :29:40. | :29:47. | |
talked about forecasting, the 350 million will be an issue at the next | :29:48. | :29:51. | |
election but does he agree the Conservative party was not Vote | :29:52. | :29:57. | |
Leave for the slogan, not the Conservative party and as he gives | :29:58. | :30:00. | |
as they toured a force of the Brexit campaign, witty comment on Project | :30:01. | :30:08. | |
via? I think he was involved with Vote Leave, maybe he wasn't but I | :30:09. | :30:12. | |
will not take any lectures about peddling fear and/or the rest of it | :30:13. | :30:15. | |
in any campaign from anyone associated Vote Leave and I will | :30:16. | :30:20. | |
come onto the point he makes about the Conservative party shortly. I | :30:21. | :30:26. | |
agree with the points he is making. Having made a complaint to the UK | :30:27. | :30:32. | |
statistics authority, the response I received was it was a potentially | :30:33. | :30:37. | |
misleading claim and they kept using it. Surely they kept using it | :30:38. | :30:42. | |
because they knew they needed to to win the referendum and having done | :30:43. | :30:46. | |
that, we need to hold them to account. Absolutely right. I | :30:47. | :30:51. | |
completely agree. I will come to that point that the gentleman was | :30:52. | :30:57. | |
making about the Conservative party because there are people who talk | :30:58. | :31:01. | |
about and some people from the Labour Party, there are people who | :31:02. | :31:07. | |
say these were pledges primarily made by people who may have been | :31:08. | :31:14. | |
members of the Conservative government but they did not speak | :31:15. | :31:17. | |
with the authority of that government. Well, the five members | :31:18. | :31:21. | |
of the Cabinet who took leading roles and led the campaign who I | :31:22. | :31:25. | |
mentioned, three of them were members of the government at the | :31:26. | :31:30. | |
time, and the Foreign Secretary attended the political Cabinet. Part | :31:31. | :31:35. | |
of the reason these key campaigners will put out to do media and | :31:36. | :31:39. | |
campaign for Vote Leave was because they carried the authority of being | :31:40. | :31:43. | |
government ministers. You can't attach one from the other. The other | :31:44. | :31:48. | |
argument connected to this is that this was a commitment given by one | :31:49. | :31:55. | |
side in a referendum campaign, not a government, so we should leave the | :31:56. | :31:58. | |
matter alone and get on with things and should shut up. I am sorry, I do | :31:59. | :32:04. | |
not think this will wash. Whether they were ministers or not, all of | :32:05. | :32:09. | |
the Vote Leave key campaigners were members of this house and as I said, | :32:10. | :32:15. | |
if democracy is to be anything, it is that you answer if you are a | :32:16. | :32:20. | |
member of this house, you answer in this house and are held to account | :32:21. | :32:23. | |
for the promises you make to the people and after all, and my friend | :32:24. | :32:30. | |
has made a point, it was in the name of parliamentary sovereignty that | :32:31. | :32:34. | |
they campaigned and if Parliament is sovereign, it is here they should be | :32:35. | :32:38. | |
held to account. Either they made this pledge, in the expectation of | :32:39. | :32:47. | |
delivering on it, in which case they must now show us the money and vote | :32:48. | :32:53. | |
for this amendment or they made this pledge in the knowledge it would | :32:54. | :32:57. | |
never be met in which case they will be never forgiven for their betrayal | :32:58. | :33:03. | |
of those who in good faith relied on this promise. I will give way. I am | :33:04. | :33:11. | |
wholly in favour of spending 350 colour whatever the figure but I | :33:12. | :33:15. | |
want to ask him specifically, it is his amendment, the amendment does | :33:16. | :33:21. | |
not say that, it is publisher reports that, I want to know what is | :33:22. | :33:28. | |
his position and his party with regards to the spending on the NHS | :33:29. | :33:32. | |
that would only come as and when we leave the European Union and get | :33:33. | :33:36. | |
back the money that we give at the moment which is up to 350, whichever | :33:37. | :33:41. | |
way you take the figure, what is his position, does he want to spend it | :33:42. | :33:46. | |
on the health service or not? I think I detected a hint of support | :33:47. | :33:53. | |
for the amendment from the remarks the right honourable gentleman has | :33:54. | :33:57. | |
made. He seems to except and melting is the word I hear, he seems to be | :33:58. | :34:03. | |
accepting the premise that the amendment so I am looking forward to | :34:04. | :34:08. | |
him joining us in the division lobbies and what I would say to the | :34:09. | :34:12. | |
honourable gentleman about the national Health Service which my | :34:13. | :34:16. | |
party established and created in the face of opposition from his party, | :34:17. | :34:22. | |
is that we have a far better record of providing the funding and | :34:23. | :34:27. | |
providing support to the NHS, we need no lectures or demands from his | :34:28. | :34:30. | |
party who are in government currently throwing it into chaos. I | :34:31. | :34:38. | |
finish by saying this, his prime minister goes around saying Brexit | :34:39. | :34:42. | |
means Brexit, if Brexit means anything, it means that he and all | :34:43. | :34:47. | |
his colleagues who campaigned to Vote Leave, these people need to | :34:48. | :34:51. | |
deliver on their promises to put ?350 million extra per week in the | :34:52. | :34:55. | |
NHS and I look forward to seeing him in a division lobbies. Order, order! | :34:56. | :35:04. | |
We are about to be faced with a situation of last night, we have a | :35:05. | :35:08. | |
large number of amendments, a large number of members who wish to speak, | :35:09. | :35:14. | |
I understand entirely members have been generous taking interventions | :35:15. | :35:18. | |
and it uses up time but I urge colleagues to shorten their speech | :35:19. | :35:23. | |
is it possible to enable the maximum number of members to take part in | :35:24. | :35:26. | |
what is an important debate. I could go. It is a pleasure to serve and | :35:27. | :35:34. | |
your chairmanship and to follow the member for Streatham who made a | :35:35. | :35:39. | |
characteristically authoritative and penetrating speech. I congratulate | :35:40. | :35:44. | |
him on his leadership of the Labour in campaign in London, it is the | :35:45. | :35:48. | |
case even though the UK voted to leave, some of the strongest | :35:49. | :35:52. | |
resistance was in London and that is in no small part to his | :35:53. | :35:57. | |
organisational ability. May I also say that I entirely agree with | :35:58. | :36:06. | |
him... He said the whole of the UK, it is a union so not all of the | :36:07. | :36:10. | |
United Kingdom and I hope he acknowledges not all of the UK | :36:11. | :36:15. | |
because constituent parts were told that we were equal partners in the | :36:16. | :36:23. | |
UK so not all... I accept the point he makes but it is striking the | :36:24. | :36:26. | |
northernmost part of his own constituency voted to leave and also | :36:27. | :36:37. | |
striking BBC striking that so many people in Scotland without any... I | :36:38. | :36:44. | |
will not. Anyway... We have heard at length last night from the SNP about | :36:45. | :36:50. | |
how Scotland voted and I would say a million people in Scotland voted to | :36:51. | :36:55. | |
leave overall and simile people voted to leave and as was pointed | :36:56. | :37:02. | |
out people want the vote to be expedited and the reason I am | :37:03. | :37:05. | |
speaking tonight is that I am opposed to every new clause and | :37:06. | :37:10. | |
amendments because they seek to frustrate the democratic will of the | :37:11. | :37:14. | |
people. The member for Streatham is right, people do want us to take | :37:15. | :37:17. | |
back control of the money which is spent on our behalf by the European | :37:18. | :37:27. | |
Union. But if we accept his amendment, and every single other | :37:28. | :37:30. | |
amendment and new clause, we will seek only to delay and to | :37:31. | :37:37. | |
procrastinate and put off the day when we leave the European Union and | :37:38. | :37:42. | |
can spend the additional money on the NHS or on any other priority. | :37:43. | :37:47. | |
So, if any member of this house wants to see taxpayers money | :37:48. | :37:52. | |
currently controlled by the European Union spent on the NHS or on | :37:53. | :37:59. | |
reducing VAT on fuel or spent four example on improving infrastructure | :38:00. | :38:04. | |
in the Western Isles, they have a duty to vote down the new clauses | :38:05. | :38:07. | |
which will frustrate the sovereign will of the people being honoured | :38:08. | :38:12. | |
and I will give way to gentleman on the frontbencher was first. He is | :38:13. | :38:20. | |
kind. He bears some responsibility of course for the mess we are in. | :38:21. | :38:28. | |
One area that he was clear run previously was Scotland should have | :38:29. | :38:31. | |
more control over immigration, will you join us in campaigning for that? | :38:32. | :38:38. | |
It is striking when he talks about the mess in which we are in, the Wii | :38:39. | :38:45. | |
refers to the SNP because they are in a significant mass, support for | :38:46. | :38:50. | |
independence has fallen, support for a second referendum is falling and | :38:51. | :38:55. | |
therefore psychological displacement theory explains why they want to | :38:56. | :38:58. | |
talk about anything else other than their own political failure. The | :38:59. | :39:03. | |
reason why... I will make progress and then give way. The reason I | :39:04. | :39:09. | |
oppose all the amendments is as was pointed out every single one of them | :39:10. | :39:13. | |
is implemented would delay and frustrate the legislation because we | :39:14. | :39:19. | |
have a huge list of impact assessments that require to be | :39:20. | :39:22. | |
published and other work to be undertaken before we can trigger | :39:23. | :39:28. | |
article 50. I know the gentleman from the front bench said it was not | :39:29. | :39:32. | |
the mission of the Labour Party to delay but he is in the position of | :39:33. | :39:38. | |
what you organisations took a clean skin. An innocent who has been put | :39:39. | :39:45. | |
in the way of gunfire by other wilier figures like the Chief Whip | :39:46. | :39:51. | |
and his position and I am sure the honourable gentleman is sincere in | :39:52. | :39:55. | |
his belief that these amendments and clauses would not delay legislation | :39:56. | :39:59. | |
or complicate or frustrate the British people but he is wrong. He | :40:00. | :40:08. | |
is in a position of the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus, the | :40:09. | :40:16. | |
delay. Everything he is doing, every single one of these new clauses and | :40:17. | :40:20. | |
amendments seeks to delay. Let me draw attention briefly for example | :40:21. | :40:27. | |
to new clause 48 in the name of the honourable lady for North West | :40:28. | :40:33. | |
Durham and look in particular at subsection one, S. We're required to | :40:34. | :40:41. | |
have an impact assessment of leaving the agency. It may have escaped the | :40:42. | :40:47. | |
notice of the honourable lady but Britain is an island. He makes a | :40:48. | :40:59. | |
very good point! The idea that we should spend an inordinate amount of | :41:00. | :41:03. | |
time and money trying to determine whether or not this country will | :41:04. | :41:07. | |
suffer or benefit by being free from the bureaucracy of that agency seems | :41:08. | :41:11. | |
to be a massive misdirection of effort. And more than that, and I | :41:12. | :41:18. | |
will give way, more than that, if we were to publish impact assessments | :41:19. | :41:22. | |
on every single one of these areas, we would also be falling prey to a | :41:23. | :41:27. | |
particular fallacy that politicians and officials for prey to which is | :41:28. | :41:31. | |
imagining the diligent work of the civil servants can predict the | :41:32. | :41:36. | |
future, a future where there are simile branching histories and | :41:37. | :41:40. | |
contingent events and so many unknowns. If we produce an impact | :41:41. | :41:43. | |
assessment on leaving the European Union how do we no how leaving that | :41:44. | :41:50. | |
agency might be impacted by some of the proposals... Being brought | :41:51. | :41:56. | |
forward by my right honourable friend the transport Secretary for | :41:57. | :42:00. | |
the unification and cohesion of the transport network? We cannot know | :42:01. | :42:03. | |
unless we have the fact in play but we do not yet know, because he is | :42:04. | :42:10. | |
consulting, what the policy will be. What will be doing is commissioning | :42:11. | :42:14. | |
the policy equivalent of a pig in a poke. And with that, I way. I'm | :42:15. | :42:22. | |
quite surprised to hear him say he does not know because I thought | :42:23. | :42:25. | |
everything was known after the vote and he will tell us the Berkman | :42:26. | :42:30. | |
leaving a single market but given he knows what it means, does it mean | :42:31. | :42:35. | |
the WTO or a deal from Europe because he says he knows, which will | :42:36. | :42:41. | |
it be? You know. My argument throughout this is in seeking to | :42:42. | :42:45. | |
find the certainty that he wants from the publication... I am a | :42:46. | :42:50. | |
humble seeker after truth to recognise in a world where there are | :42:51. | :42:55. | |
contending versions of it, for the SNP to the green version, the | :42:56. | :42:58. | |
independent Unionist version the Labour Party version, there is, for | :42:59. | :43:05. | |
all of us, responsibility to use reason in the face of so many | :43:06. | :43:08. | |
attractive and is contending versions of the truth. I will, in a | :43:09. | :43:15. | |
spirit of inclusion, sing to give way... | :43:16. | :43:28. | |
I am deeply offended by being accused long delay of trying to | :43:29. | :43:36. | |
frustrate the will of the people of the United Kingdom. I am a unionist | :43:37. | :43:42. | |
and I would like to address the very serious issue, and that is Sinn Fein | :43:43. | :43:47. | |
and the Republican party will use a hard Brexit to trigger a border poll | :43:48. | :43:51. | |
in Northern Ireland, and we may see the United Kingdom by the rhetoric | :43:52. | :43:56. | |
of the right honourable gentleman and others in this chamber. I wonder | :43:57. | :44:02. | |
whether he could address that serious point? I do not know if it | :44:03. | :44:08. | |
is relevant to the new clauses we are discussing but one thing I would | :44:09. | :44:13. | |
say is that in the future and elsewhere, I will do everything I | :44:14. | :44:17. | |
can to work with her in order to ensure we honour the whole of the | :44:18. | :44:20. | |
United Kingdom and at the same time work on the progress she has helped | :44:21. | :44:29. | |
secure. What we do know is that the people on the 23rd of June did not | :44:30. | :44:33. | |
vote to deliberately reduce environmental protection but we do | :44:34. | :44:39. | |
know that Brexit will reduce environmental protection because we | :44:40. | :44:43. | |
will not be part of the environmental agency. Is it not | :44:44. | :44:49. | |
rather reckless to be contemptuous to make sure we have in place | :44:50. | :44:53. | |
adequate safeguards for our environment before we trigger | :44:54. | :44:57. | |
Article 50? I may not agree with the honourable lady on everything but it | :44:58. | :45:01. | |
agreed effective environmental protection is a very important | :45:02. | :45:06. | |
thing. I would say two things in particular in response to her | :45:07. | :45:11. | |
intervention. It is entirely open to us to maintain the current standards | :45:12. | :45:14. | |
of environmental protection but it is also open to us to enhance them. | :45:15. | :45:21. | |
We can if we wish have higher standards of environmental | :45:22. | :45:22. | |
protection, four example for moving livestock. Her party has campaigned | :45:23. | :45:32. | |
against Common agricultural policy and against which her honourable | :45:33. | :45:35. | |
friend on the Other Place has campaigned so brilliantly. We can | :45:36. | :45:39. | |
replace the common agricultural policy with an approach to | :45:40. | :45:44. | |
subsidising land use which is more environmentally sensitive and also | :45:45. | :45:47. | |
more productive. I'm happy to give way. To be fair to the honourable | :45:48. | :45:52. | |
gentleman, the next person kind enough to it is to intervene was the | :45:53. | :45:59. | |
honourable member. Just before we proceed, it is customary and | :46:00. | :46:03. | |
courtesy to allow the right honourable gentleman to respond | :46:04. | :46:06. | |
before trying to make another intervention. I thank the honourable | :46:07. | :46:19. | |
member for giving way. He describes himself as the humble seeker of | :46:20. | :46:26. | |
truth and it does strike me as interesting that he campaigned so | :46:27. | :46:30. | |
hard for the ?350 million a week for that to be an argument for voting | :46:31. | :46:33. | |
Leave why you would therefore not support amendment 11 that the Prime | :46:34. | :46:40. | |
Minister must prepare and publish a report on the effect of the United | :46:41. | :46:45. | |
Kingdom's withdrawal from the EU on her national finances including the | :46:46. | :46:50. | |
impact. Surely as a humble seeker of truth, you might want to know the | :46:51. | :46:55. | |
answer to that? It is very important point but the point I sought to make | :46:56. | :47:00. | |
earlier and her intervention gives me a chance to underlying the | :47:01. | :47:04. | |
clarify, if we want more money spent on the NHS or anything else and we | :47:05. | :47:10. | |
want to take back control of the money the EU controls, we should | :47:11. | :47:14. | |
seek to expedite the will of the British people and leave the EU as | :47:15. | :47:17. | |
quickly as possible because then we will have that money back and we can | :47:18. | :47:21. | |
invest in the NHS more quickly. The honourable lady sought to intervene | :47:22. | :47:24. | |
earlier but I suspect the point made was very much hers and that was an | :47:25. | :47:28. | |
example of sisterly collaboration in example of sisterly collaboration | :47:29. | :47:36. | |
and in the spirit of fraternal humility, I hand over to the member | :47:37. | :47:41. | |
for hope. There are many members of the public who are also humble | :47:42. | :47:45. | |
seekers of truth. If we do not get these clauses through, we do not | :47:46. | :47:48. | |
have impact assessments, how do members of the public judge how | :47:49. | :47:54. | |
Brexit is going? How will the judge what the impact on the health, | :47:55. | :47:58. | |
education, transport, environment and the community will be if they | :47:59. | :48:02. | |
have no information at all? This gets me back to part my argument, | :48:03. | :48:10. | |
which is if one believes that the only authoritative evidence, the | :48:11. | :48:14. | |
only view that matters on any issue is that which is produced by the | :48:15. | :48:18. | |
government, then you are turning your back on 400 years of | :48:19. | :48:22. | |
enlightened thinking. Is it not the case that there is a single view | :48:23. | :48:27. | |
which is right in every respect? The whole point as was made clear | :48:28. | :48:31. | |
earlier is that there is a clarification of use of the impact | :48:32. | :48:35. | |
of leaving the EU in a number of different areas. And further beyond | :48:36. | :48:42. | |
that, if we seek to have the government's policy advice in every | :48:43. | :48:47. | |
area which is the inference behind the question published, that makes | :48:48. | :48:51. | |
the business of government impossible. He may remember reading | :48:52. | :48:57. | |
the words of the former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, in his | :48:58. | :48:59. | |
autobiography in which he talked about the Freedom of Information Act | :49:00. | :49:03. | |
and the way in which he thought it was the biggest mistake, I think | :49:04. | :49:10. | |
there were bigger! I think that is one view which commands consensus | :49:11. | :49:14. | |
around the House. But he handed weapon to his enemies, requiring | :49:15. | :49:21. | |
confidential advice to be prepared by civil servants and accepted by | :49:22. | :49:25. | |
ministers and it makes the business of government impossible. I would | :49:26. | :49:29. | |
also say, however good the advice that any minister receives, and when | :49:30. | :49:34. | |
I was a minister I received excellent advice, my mistakes were | :49:35. | :49:41. | |
all my own, nevertheless, civil service advice is only one source of | :49:42. | :49:46. | |
wisdom. Every minister worth their salt will want to consult widely, | :49:47. | :49:52. | |
any minister that sought only to steer by civil service advice would | :49:53. | :49:56. | |
quite rightly be held by this House to be a timid mouse, constrained by | :49:57. | :50:02. | |
the brief, incapable of ranging more widely, incapable of making a | :50:03. | :50:09. | |
judgment in the national interest. I thank the honourable member. On the | :50:10. | :50:14. | |
issue of finance, does he agree with his own Secretary of State for | :50:15. | :50:19. | |
Brexit, who is prepared to consider to have access to the single market? | :50:20. | :50:23. | |
To be fair to both the honourable gentleman and my right on boyfriend, | :50:24. | :50:27. | |
I think that as a mischaracterisation of what he said. | :50:28. | :50:36. | |
-- right honourable friend. I make no criticism of the honourable | :50:37. | :50:39. | |
gentleman but my interpretation was different. I think two fair-minded | :50:40. | :50:48. | |
figures, the fact that we can on the played words reached to different | :50:49. | :50:52. | |
conclusions, rather proves my point, which as we can ask for evidence but | :50:53. | :50:57. | |
we cannot have a single definitive view and then tried to make the | :50:58. | :51:00. | |
argument is these new clauses do we cannot proceed until we have is | :51:01. | :51:07. | |
single definitive view. Can I just say to my right honourable friend, | :51:08. | :51:11. | |
the most important word in this debate is accountability? Actually, | :51:12. | :51:18. | |
we are not accountable to the House but our constituents, and it would | :51:19. | :51:22. | |
be our constituents in the next General election and the one after | :51:23. | :51:25. | |
that who would hold us to account in success or failure of Brexit. He | :51:26. | :51:31. | |
makes a key point. It goes to the heart my argument which is, if by | :51:32. | :51:36. | |
the time of the next election, we have not left the European Union, | :51:37. | :51:40. | |
the British people feel that having been asked a decisive question and | :51:41. | :51:45. | |
given a clear answer, we have dishonoured the mandate they gave | :51:46. | :51:49. | |
us, we are not respecting the result. That leads directly to my | :51:50. | :51:54. | |
concern about the amount of work required to, and not just the amount | :51:55. | :51:58. | |
of work required, but also the tools which this work is to others outside | :51:59. | :52:02. | |
this House who may wish further to frustrate the will of the people. I | :52:03. | :52:10. | |
think what most of us campaigning, people just wanted us to get on with | :52:11. | :52:14. | |
it. There was no way on that ballot paper did it say it should be tied | :52:15. | :52:19. | |
down in knots for ever and a day. That is what they are seeking to do | :52:20. | :52:23. | |
on the opposite side of the House in effect. My honourable friend is | :52:24. | :52:27. | |
absolutely right and look at one of the new clauses standing in the name | :52:28. | :52:32. | |
of the honourable lady, the Prime Minister must undertake before even | :52:33. | :52:36. | |
exercising the power, before triggering Article 50, she will | :52:37. | :52:39. | |
publish an impact assessment. How can we know... I take the lead from | :52:40. | :52:49. | |
distinguished trade negotiators that actually leaving the customs union | :52:50. | :52:55. | |
as they have argued, Freudian slip, will lead not just the GDP growth in | :52:56. | :53:01. | |
the United Kingdom across world. But it is entirely open to others to | :53:02. | :53:06. | |
take a different view and entirely open to Her Majesty's government to | :53:07. | :53:10. | |
choose to follow policies which once we had left the customs union either | :53:11. | :53:16. | |
maximise or minimise our GDP. Once again by insisting on a narrow focus | :53:17. | :53:20. | |
on what they believe is one truth and holding up advancing this | :53:21. | :53:26. | |
legislation as a result of it the promoters of this new cause seek | :53:27. | :53:34. | |
once again to frustrate democracy. I thank my right honourable friend for | :53:35. | :53:39. | |
giving way. I welcome his conversion to experts and listening to experts. | :53:40. | :53:44. | |
I certainly welcome that. Does he agree with me but it would be no | :53:45. | :53:48. | |
good for our British business or constituents if we do for the next | :53:49. | :53:52. | |
two years is rehashed a result of the referendum or the debate? I am | :53:53. | :54:00. | |
sure we will disagree on times to come but it will not help in terms | :54:01. | :54:03. | |
of the outcome in terms of Brexit. I entirely agree. Of course we have | :54:04. | :54:09. | |
that referendum and of course there were people who will feel so on the | :54:10. | :54:15. | |
side of Remain, who will feel that somehow the result was not just a | :54:16. | :54:21. | |
betrayal of the hoax but also one by means they do not endorse. It | :54:22. | :54:27. | |
absolutely understand that there is a responsibility on those of us who | :54:28. | :54:30. | |
argued for Leave to listen carefully, to seek to include in the | :54:31. | :54:36. | |
type of new relationship the very best ambitions and aspirations that | :54:37. | :54:42. | |
they put forward as reasons for staying. I think that can be done | :54:43. | :54:46. | |
and I think this House has a critical role in it, but it can only | :54:47. | :54:49. | |
be done once we have triggered Article 50. The right honourable | :54:50. | :54:58. | |
member for Streatham spoke powerfully I thought about breaches | :54:59. | :55:03. | |
of promise but is there no single bigger breach of promise them | :55:04. | :55:08. | |
blocking Brexit by supporting these wretched amendments? There is one | :55:09. | :55:16. | |
particular element to it as well. One of the important principles of | :55:17. | :55:20. | |
our Constitution which I whole heartedly believe in is the | :55:21. | :55:25. | |
principle of judicial review. It is absolutely right that executive | :55:26. | :55:27. | |
action should be subject to judicial review. It is the only way, apart | :55:28. | :55:32. | |
from the exercise of power in this House, that we can be certain that | :55:33. | :55:36. | |
the Executive is following the rule of law and I'm one of those people | :55:37. | :55:41. | |
will that I voted for us to leave the European Union that was pleased | :55:42. | :55:45. | |
that the Supreme Court heard this government to account so that we | :55:46. | :55:48. | |
have this legislation now. But having said all of that, I support | :55:49. | :55:54. | |
the legislation and judicial review, if we accept any of these new | :55:55. | :55:58. | |
clauses or amendments, we will subject the operation of article 52 | :55:59. | :56:03. | |
judicial review, and that would mean that if any single one of these | :56:04. | :56:07. | |
impact assessments were not prepared in the right way at the right time, | :56:08. | :56:11. | |
with appropriate care, then it could be the case that the hope process | :56:12. | :56:18. | |
would be upended. And on this occasion, what different people have | :56:19. | :56:24. | |
different views on experts, I made a number of mistakes as I said during | :56:25. | :56:28. | |
my career, too much for us now to run over, given the fact the debate | :56:29. | :56:33. | |
has to close at 9pm. But one of the things I do remember is that | :56:34. | :56:43. | |
judicial review on the basis of a relatively small infraction of | :56:44. | :56:50. | |
equality impact assessment nevertheless resulted in the | :56:51. | :56:55. | |
paralysis of this government's school Capitol building programme. | :56:56. | :57:04. | |
If we want to create a feast for lawyers and litigators, accept these | :57:05. | :57:07. | |
new clauses, bring in these new amendments, and in so doing, see the | :57:08. | :57:15. | |
tills changing as he hangs bring up and down the country as we have once | :57:16. | :57:18. | |
again frustrated the will of the people. He makes a very powerful | :57:19. | :57:25. | |
argument. Does the honourable gentleman remembered that during the | :57:26. | :57:29. | |
campaign, there was an assessment of the economy given by the former | :57:30. | :57:34. | |
Chancellor of the Exchequer? And to see remember whether it was accepted | :57:35. | :57:37. | |
by the opposition party or whether the Leader of the opposition said he | :57:38. | :57:42. | |
did not accept the assessment and would not implement it? Again, my | :57:43. | :57:51. | |
honourable friend, who took the forbearance of comments by lawyers, | :57:52. | :57:54. | |
is absolutely on the bottom. Are we to accept the first time ever | :57:55. | :58:03. | |
an official government document will be taken by my friends on the SNP | :58:04. | :58:10. | |
benches or the Labour party benches as holy writ? Will they say thank | :58:11. | :58:15. | |
heavens, oh, this document bears the name of David Davis, it must be | :58:16. | :58:20. | |
right. That is the only way I can form a judgment on whether or not we | :58:21. | :58:24. | |
are leaving the European Union and it will be a success. Can I expect | :58:25. | :58:34. | |
the member for Scotland and other parts, can expect him to say, the | :58:35. | :58:40. | |
impact assessment from David Davis said axe and it is satisfied, I will | :58:41. | :58:45. | |
accept the Secretary of State is right because everything he has done | :58:46. | :58:48. | |
is in accordance with what he said he would do previously. I'm grateful | :58:49. | :58:54. | |
to him but he talks about the fact members of government have made | :58:55. | :58:58. | |
mistakes in the past, this is about the house holding the government to | :58:59. | :59:02. | |
account. We have to recognise the reality of what has happened and he | :59:03. | :59:06. | |
talks about the estimates that are out there but the reality is the | :59:07. | :59:10. | |
currency has fallen substantially against the dollar, we know the | :59:11. | :59:16. | |
impact on inflation and the impact assessments have to be informed by | :59:17. | :59:20. | |
the impact. There is no plan to affect trade with Europe. Of course | :59:21. | :59:24. | |
we need impact assessments to do the job properly. Order! May I again say | :59:25. | :59:36. | |
there are large numbers, he has been extremely generous in giving way but | :59:37. | :59:43. | |
I trust he is nearing the end. I am grateful to the honourable gentleman | :59:44. | :59:50. | |
who compares the roles of crofter and investment banker with skill. | :59:51. | :59:57. | |
The pound has fallen. One reason many people in our shared country of | :59:58. | :00:04. | |
birth rejected the SNP referendum promise in 2014 is at least we know | :00:05. | :00:08. | |
what currency we have in this country, if Scotland were | :00:09. | :00:13. | |
independent, Scotland would not have the pound, it could not have the | :00:14. | :00:18. | |
Euro so we do not know what it would be left with, the Groat, a hole in | :00:19. | :00:22. | |
the air! There was no answer to the question. This is critical. He | :00:23. | :00:32. | |
argues the only way we can effectively scrutinise backbenchers | :00:33. | :00:37. | |
and opposition spokesman and the government is through impact | :00:38. | :00:41. | |
assessments. This is a grotesque misunderstanding of the | :00:42. | :00:44. | |
opportunities available to us in this house. But a Freedom of | :00:45. | :00:47. | |
information requests, Parliamentary questions, written or oral, the | :00:48. | :00:54. | |
diligent use of all of the tools available to us to scrutinise the | :00:55. | :01:00. | |
executive, the idea we are mute and blind until an impact assessment has | :01:01. | :01:02. | |
been published, that there is no relevant tool available to us and no | :01:03. | :01:07. | |
relevant source of information which we can quarry other than an impact | :01:08. | :01:14. | |
assessment is actually amiss underestimation to use a phrase from | :01:15. | :01:19. | |
George W Bush is of what each of us as members of this house are capable | :01:20. | :01:25. | |
of. This brings me to my final point. And I will pause happily and | :01:26. | :01:33. | |
give way. He is expounding the principle of this house entirely | :01:34. | :01:37. | |
which is the principle of democracy and rule of law, not for the rule of | :01:38. | :01:44. | |
lawyers. I could not agree more and this is an opportunity for me to | :01:45. | :01:51. | |
commence him for the work he has done to draw attention to the way | :01:52. | :01:56. | |
some lawyers have used some legislation to enrich themselves at | :01:57. | :02:00. | |
the expense of those who were the Queens uniform and defend our | :02:01. | :02:05. | |
liberties every day and can I say that his work in this field is | :02:06. | :02:08. | |
commendable and as an example of what a backbencher can do because he | :02:09. | :02:12. | |
did that work without any impact assessments having been published or | :02:13. | :02:16. | |
waiting for the MoD to act, he did so because he believed it holding | :02:17. | :02:21. | |
the executive to account. And the one thing all of us want to hold the | :02:22. | :02:26. | |
executive to account for is triggering Article 50. So, if you | :02:27. | :02:33. | |
want to have perennial judicial review, if you want the scorn of the | :02:34. | :02:38. | |
public by putting pettifogging delay ahead of mandate... Yes! It is one | :02:39. | :02:51. | |
of my favourite policy ballot synonyms for prevarication, | :02:52. | :02:59. | |
procrastination or delay. If you actually want to get on with | :03:00. | :03:02. | |
scrutinising what the government does, join us on the committee, put | :03:03. | :03:10. | |
down written and Parliamentary questions, why not conduct a proper | :03:11. | :03:19. | |
study of what not just this government but other governments, | :03:20. | :03:23. | |
not as this government but civil society, not just this government | :03:24. | :03:28. | |
but a variety of industries and enterprises across the country are | :03:29. | :03:35. | |
saying. The idea that we should seek as these amendments and new clause | :03:36. | :03:38. | |
is sick to do, to delay the will of the British people, I'm afraid | :03:39. | :03:45. | |
rather than restoring confidence in this house, we would lower public | :03:46. | :03:49. | |
confidence and for that reason because it would mean a glorious | :03:50. | :03:58. | |
liberation was curdled, curdled by Parliamentary delaying tactics of a | :03:59. | :04:02. | |
discredited kind, it is for that reason I hope the entire house will | :04:03. | :04:07. | |
vote against these new clauses and all these amendments to uphold the | :04:08. | :04:11. | |
sovereign will of the British people as freely expressed in June last | :04:12. | :04:13. | |
year. | :04:14. | :04:20. |