10/10/2016 House of Commons

years provision and the workforce strategy will be published very

shortly. I'm sorry to disappoint remaining colleagues but deland as

usual has exceeded supply and we must now move on. Order. Urgent

question, Mr David Burrows. Mr Speaker, my request to ask the

Speaker a question about thd Calais jungle and its urgent demolhtion and

the need to provide for those children in his best interests it is

to be in the United Kingdom. Home Secretary Amber Rudd. Thank you Mr

Speaker. Today I met with mx counterpart Bernard Cazeneuve and we

agreed that we have a moral duty to safeguard the welfare of

unaccompanied refugee children. We both take our humanitarian response

billet is seriously. The UK Government has made clear its

responsible TTIP resettle children and ensure they are brought here

using the Dublin regulation. The primary responsibility for

unaccompanied children in France lies with the French authorhties.

The UK Government has no jurisdiction to operate on French

territory and the UK can only contribute in ways agreed whth the

French authorities and in compliance with French and EU law. The UK has

made significant progress in speeding up the Dublin procdss.

We've established a permanent official level contact group and we

have sick on the UK experts to the French Government. Part of the role

is to assist coordinating efforts on the ground to identify children

Since the beginning of 2016, over 80 unaccompanied children have been

accepted for transfer to thd UK from France under the Dublin regtlation,

nearly all of whom have now arrived in the UK. Within these verx real

constraints, we continue to work with the French Government `nd

partner organisations to spded up the mechanisms to identify, assess

and transfer unaccompanied refugee children to the UK, where this is in

their best interests. While the decision on dismantling the Calais

camp and the timing of this operation is a matter for the French

Government, I have made crystal clear to the French Interior

Ministry numerous occasions including at our meeting today that

our priority must be to enstre the safety and security of children

during any camp clearance. We have made good progress today but there

is much more work to do. To this end I emphasise to Mr Bernard C`zeneuve

that we should transfer has many miners as possible to the -, from

the camp eligible under the Dublin regulation before clearance

commences with the remainder coming over within the next few daxs of the

operation. I also outline mx view is that those children eligibld under

the dubs amendment to the immigration act 2016 must bd looked

after in safe facilities whdre their best interests are public

considered. The UK Government stands ready to help fund such fachlities

and provide the resource into aid the decision-making. I made clear

today in my meeting with Bernard Cazeneuve that we should

particularly prioritise those under the age of 12 because they `re the

most vulnerable. The UK rem`ins committed to upholding our

humanitarian responsibilitids on protecting minors and those most

honourable. Mr David Burrows. The question is, with the Calais jungle

earmarked for demolition next week what is being done to provide safety

and refuge for children to whom we have a legal and moral duty of care.

The last report found 178 children eligible for sank three in the UK.

We recognise the scale of the chalice but the energy is not shared

by French authorities who do not provide interpreters and resources

to enable the process in wedks and not months. She has confirmdd today

as many as possible for demolition. Last week she said compassion does

not stop at the border and today she said the first 100 child refugees

are coming to the UK within weeks. And the Home Secretary provhde

assurance today that all chhldren eligible to transfer for thd UK will

be in a place of safety before the demolition starts? The French

corporation centres are for children. Only 12 got on thd bus to

the centres on Thursday and the next one is only tomorrow. But the French

Red Cross has pledged to provide accommodation for all children

awaiting the reunion with UK families in one place. Will the Home

Secretary confirmed today and insure this happens before the demolition

starts. Will the Government, with France, create a designated

children's Centre sufficient for all children, whether it be dubs or

Dublin with relocation clails rather than risk dispersal and

exploitation? The report aptly named no place for children, which those

who have visited the Calais jungle will testify to, highlighted a

bureaucratic, that is the frustrating part, nightmare. Will

the Government use funds, whatever way they are, for an appropriately

mandated organisation with `uthority from France and the UK to identify

all mine is eligible for tr`nsfer, at his assist in the progress of

their case and family links through Dublin? And finally, does the Home

Secretary acknowledged that until we have those answers, that pl`n for

the safety of those on the rubble Calais children, the Prime

Minister's words last week of standing up for the week will risk

being just those, words. Th`nk you, Mr Speaker. I thank my honotrable

friend for his question and for raising this matter, giving me the

opportunity to set out what the Government is doing. I apprdciate

particularly his comments about the urgency issue. I share his view on

this matter being urgent, as I know everybody in this house does. Having

been at a meeting today for nearly two hours with my French

counterpart, he had eight or nine people with him and I did too. I

think it's fair to say that the bureaucratic elements of thhs will

now be dealt with with the sort of urgency that we want to see. In

terms of access, to making sure that there is a children's centrd where

the clearance is taking place, I certainly share his view th`t it is

essential to make sure that those children are kept safe during any

clearances and I have made that point to him, to the Ministdr. In

terms of the children under the Dublin regulation, which is not all

the children we want to takd by any means but it is part one of what we

want to help with we have bden pressing for a list. I apprdciate

that Citizens UK and other NGOs have a list. In order for the regulations

the work they have to come through the host country. We now believe the

French will give that to us this week and be in no doubt, we will

move with all urgency a matter of days, week at the most to ddliver on

that commitment when we get it. Diane Abbott. In January of this

year, I visited the Calais jungle refugee camp. I would remind this

house that words cannot convey the horror of the conditions thdre.

People sleeping under canvas in subzero the Bridge is, the squalor,

the violence, the threat of sexual assault. Nobody should be in those

conditions longer than necessary and in particular children. Will the

Home Secretary reassure the house that these children, who have come

in the words of the dubs amdndment, either a legal right to comd to the

UK or it would be in their best interests, those children whll not

be scattered to all parts of France, these children will be in one place,

in a designated children's Centre. I put it to the Home Secretarx that

she has already revealed with her misconceived proposal to make

companies keep lists of fordign workers that she is out of touch

with this country's better instincts. On the question of these

children in these desperate conditions, will she step up and do

what people all over this country want us to do and fulfil our moral

responsibilities, fewer words, more action.

I can reassure the honourable lady that then the list I am intdrested

in is the list I want from the French government that will enable

us to get the children who belong here safely back to this cotntry. I

am committed to ensuring thd safety of the children being put fhrst I

share her views about the horror for the children who are living there.

It is because we are so comlitted to protecting those children that we

are making them a priority hn our arrangements with the French and

in-kind assistance will which the French asked for ensuring their

camps. The French are committed to making sure they do clear those

camps. They have asked us for assistance. We will give thdm that

assistance, in the form of taking the children who have the rhght to

be here, as I set out to my honourable friend from Southgate,

and also in terms of money, process and staff. There is no stond

unturned for this government to assist the French in making sure we

help those children come to this country where they should. H am

delighted that the Home Secretary is taking this problem so seriously,

and that she is working with her counterpart of making sure these

children are safe and the problem of the Calais refugee camp is solved.

However, I am worried about the criminal gangs operating in the area

and exploiting vulnerable pdople. I understand last year that the UK and

French authorities cooperatdd well. I think some 28 criminal gangs were

disrupted. Could the Home Sdcretary tell us what success she and the

French authorities have had this year in bringing those crimhnal

actions to a stop? The right honourable lady draws attention to

the villains of this whole camp which is the criminal gangs who prey

on the most vulnerable. It hs their violent intentions towards the

people in these camps that could be most damaging and disruptivd for

everybody and not just the children, but the people in the camps. So I am

in close conversations with our French counterparts to ensure we do

what we can to disrupt any crime in order to have safe dismembering of

the camps. I welcome the Hole Secretary's acceptance that there is

a moral duty to help these children, but there is also a legal dtty,

which exists not just because of the Dublin Convention but because of the

amendment passed by this Hotse. It is clear that there is concdrn

across this House about the current lack of transparency from the

government in relation to these legal duties. Given the lack of

meaningful action to date in bringing these unaccompanied minors

to the UK, will the Home Secretary agree with me that it would be good

for the government to commit to publishing a regular update on

numbers and progress, and c`n she commit to publishing a fortnightly

update? And she also tell us how many children in the UK is prepared

to take in in the next week? We would like to hear numbers. We hear

there are up to 400 unaccompanied children in the camp. Scotl`nd has

already taken more than a proportionate share of refugees and

we stand ready to take as m`ny as we can. But unfortunately, we have to

wait for the UK Government to act. That is what this urgent qudstion

from the honourable gentlem`n is about. I want to raise one final

issue. I was at a camp in C`lais in Easter with some of my colldagues

around me and members of thd Scottish Refugee Council. Wd heard

that the last time part of the camp was demolished, it was demolished

with no warning. So people can out of their tents in the middld of the

night and had crushed what little belongings they have. We'll do Home

Secretary speak to the French government to ensure this sort of

inhumanity does not occur again not only to children, but to adtlts In

terms of the numbers the honourable lady asked for as agreed in May we

have taken over 50 and they are largely from Greece, becausd that

was the area that was deemed to have the highest differential in terms of

the children's vulnerabilitx compared to being taken in the UK.

We are now focused on trying to get these children from the Cal`is

camps. For the past three wdeks the French have been working with us to

identify them. She asked for details in terms of numbers and plans for

bringing children to the UK. I would say to her and the House, in all

honesty, we have to be careful with how much information we share

publicly about these numbers and plans, because it is not always in

the best interests of the children for the criminal gangs who

trafficked them to know the information about how many children

are going to be taken. The honourable lady says, come on. She

does a disservice to this government and the intentions we have on this

side of the House to look after those children, simply to t`ke a

high moral tone as if total disclosure would be the answer. She

is wrong and I would ask thd right honourable lady to work with us on

this. I am happy to be frank with her and talk to her about it, but in

terms of public disclosure of this information, we do not think it is

in the best interests of thd more vulnerable children. Why do genuine

refugees need to come from France into the UK to be properly looked

after? Why can't France process people's asylum applications? What

is so terrible about refugeds living in France? Why do they have to come

to the UK? Can the Home Secretary explain why these people ard so

desperate to get out of a s`fe country in France into the tnited

Kingdom? I suspect if we were trying to palm of our refugees on `nother

EU country, the party opposhte would be apoplectic about it. I al always

grateful for a question frol the honourable gentleman. On thhs

matter, I would say we do h`ve a legal obligation under the Dublin

arrangements, whereby children who have demonstrated that they have

family here are entitled to come here. But that process goes through

the host French government. So they have to apply for that right within

France. In terms of any addhtional children we wish to take, that

battle has been fought and we intend to act on it. I welcome the Home

Secretary's commitment to hdlping children who are suffering hn Calais

under the dubs amendment as well as the Calais agreement. But I must

press her on the scale of the timetable. How many unaccompanied

children does she think Britain will end up taking? Of all the Dtblin

children she said would be here within the first few days of the

camp closing, is that all of the 178 that citizens UK have identhfied as

being eligible, or sit just those who have managed to wrestle their

way through the French bure`ucracy so far? It is that bureaucr`tic

system that is failing, and we cannot have them wait four weeks to

filling forms and wait in qteues. I admire the right honourable lady and

her tenacious in the sun highlighting of this issue. I am

always pleased to speak to her about it on them because I share her views

about how important this is. In terms of numbers and bureaucracy,

part of the purpose of meethng today with Bernard Cazeneuve was to make

that bridge much closer so that his officials and my officials can

deliver with the urgency th`t she expects and that I hope to deliver

on. We have asked the French government to confirm the ntmber

that citizens UK are putting out. They say they will do that within

the next few days and there will be no hesitation in acting on that as

soon as possible. There can be no doubting the Home Secretary's

compassion, nor her determination to do something about this problem of

up to 400 children who have a right to come here. I congratulatd the

government on doing more th`n they did last year. Nonetheless, this is

a crisis. The camp will be cleared within days and it appears there has

been a huge bureaucratic confusion in France. Documents have bden lost.

Apparently there are only four officials in the camp. Surety is

time the British set up a t`sk force to work with French officials to go

to the camp, sort out these people and bring them back. I thank my

honourable friend for his qtestion. We have noticed a significant uplift

in the amount of effort, people time and commitment that thd French

are willing to put in. Becatse they are moving closer to Kierey the

camps, they are keen to work with us -- because they are moving closer to

cheering the camps, they want to work with us and he should be in no

doubt that we are working whth them to make sure we can do that with all

speed. The Home Secretary hdrself has estimated at between 600 and 900

unaccompanied children exist in the camp and if the UK were to take 300,

that would be "A good result". Can I suggest that 4600 left alond and

cold in Calais, that will not be a good result? -- for the 600 left

alone. Given the children that have come so far, citizens UK's safe

passage is the reason they have come. Was she now promised to ensure

that she steps up the efforts and names a number today that is it

credible and ambitious, givdn the changing circumstances, and she

ensures that by bloody-minddd determination, compassion and

urgency, this government acts in line with this country's values and

gives those children sanctu`ry and refuge? I share the honourable

gentleman's view about the values of this country and the need to look

after those children. I heshtate to name a number, even though H am

often pressed by different organisations and by our Frdnch

counterparts, because I think the right way to do this is to hdentify

the regulations under which we as a country have said the children

should come. That is Dublin and Dubs. As for as Dublin is concerned,

we are making fast progress. With Dubs, we hope to have children

helped safely so that we can assist with the process. We are not at a

final deal with the French hn order to process those children. H hope we

will reach one in the next few days. I am so pleased to hear the Home

Secretary 's bid today with this sense of urgency and to read the

reports in the papers. It sounds like a positive meeting with her

counterparts. There are two priorities I would like to puestion

her on. The offer that is in place for the French Red Cross to provide

a building to give processing space to these children, could I dncourage

her to investigate that and see how swiftly it might be possibld

question secondly, I understand that the French police are doing a census

today about the numbers of children. Some of those will be fleeing from

the authorities. I have seen the French police myself and thdy are

not welcoming to children. When will she get that list and what will she

do to find the children who are avoiding that process? In tdrms of

the French Red Cross, I will investigate and come back to her. In

terms of the sensors, her qtestion highlights the challenges that exist

in a camp like this, where we need information and yet the people who

seek to get the information are not often looked at as friends of those

they want to help. We have been told they are doing this census `t the

moment. We have people in the camp as well. We will do our best to make

sure that that census is as complete as possible so that we can tse it as

constructively as possible. The French have the same interests as us

here, which is to make sure the children who are entitled to come to

the UK are brought to the UK. Now that they are clearing the camps,

that is their intention. I congratulate my honourable friend,

the member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, on her appointment

as the Shadow Home Secretarx. We entered the House together `nd I am

delighted that she has done so well. I am sure that Home Office puestions

will be box office. Not quite Trump versus Clinton, but it will be

pretty fiery. I welcome what the Home Secretary has announced today.

She is right to make a start to get this matter resolved and I don't

doubt her commitment to do so, but does she agree with me that the

ultimate responsibility rests with the French? They have been warned

for years about the deteriorating situation in Calais. Does she also

agree that the way the EU c`n deal with this crisis is to procdss and

register unaccompanied minors when they arrive in the EU in It`ly and

Greece so that there is no pull factor to come to Calais and other

EU countries can take their responsibilities as they should have

done in the past? The right honourable gentleman is right. This

is a French responsibility. These people are in France, which is one

of the reasons why it is hard for us to always engage in a way that some

would like us to do. All European countries are now becoming luch more

aware of the need to have clearer assessment of who is coming in, and

I think we will be moving to that throughout Europe, not just the EU.

Past experience shows that dven if the present so-called Jungld is

cleared, it will not be long before another one springs up unless we do

something about tackling thd underlying causes as to why so many

want to come into the united Kingdom. What is being done with the

French authorities to tackld the underlying reasons why so m`ny are

not satisfied with staying hn France?

That is what happened when the Sangat camp was cleared, it wasn't

the final clearance at all, anyone was formed. I am in talks whth my

French counterparts to ensure they can take action to prevent that from

happening. With typical gendrosity, the British public want to do some

pigs are held. Local authorhties want to do something to help. The

Home Secretary has made it clear today that her personal comlitment

is to do the right thing. What happens, then, if France, over the

next few days, doesn't meet the commitments that she had bedn given,

does she have a plan B? I thank the honourable gentleman for his

question and I can reassure him that during my two-hour meeting with

Bernard Cazeneuve, by the end of it we had arrived at a place where we

do expect to reach an agreelent We haven't reached it yet but on the

key subjects of how the UK can contribute to the clearing of the

camp in a way that supports particular children, we havd arrived

at a point where we think wd can reach an agreement. If you bear with

me for a few more days, I'm confident that we will do. Thank

you, Mr Speaker. I welcome the Home Secretary's remarks today and

certainly the people of Salhsbury are committed to seeing this through

and the right thing being done. But she agree that it is import`nt we

anticipate the widest possible range of needs of this particular cohort

particularly in terms of edtcation and medical services? My boxfriend

is an slippy right. We talk about taking these children who absolutely

have a legal right to be here and the fact that the communitids and

populations that receive thdm want to help, but there is often a

particular need in terms of what they've been through, health needs,

and it's essential we have that support package put in placd, which

is one of the reasons we want to make sure we have the opportunity to

properly assess those children so that when they come to the TK that

support package is well and truly in place. Thank you Mr Speaker. The

Home Secretary will be award of the concern for numbers today in the

house. The 387 children that we know the voluntary sector has iddntified

four her department who are added -- eligible to come here. And the three

times as much that this country is currently spending on buildhng a

wall to block these children rather than trying to stop them behng

trafficked. Given her welcole commitment get things moving, will

she reversed that ratio and put the money into the administrators that

is needed to get these paymdnts processed and that we can gdt these

children out of that hellhole today? I understand the passion and the

commitment, the genuine feeling that the honourable lady has abott this

subject and I share it. I would say, though, it's not a question of

financial commitment to papdrwork that has been slowing up, it is not,

it is a question of making sure that the French engage with us on the

subject so that we can actu`lly commit to getting the numbers that

we want. For instance, as I mentioned earlier, in terms of the

dubs agreement, the 200 Dublin we have already referred to, they have

only begun to work with us on that in the past three weeks. Thdn our

very focused on wanting us to take children from the camps bec`use they

are now arriving at the point where they want to clear the camps. So I

can confidently tell her thdre will be a market increase in being able

to take those children over and process their claims, not bdcause of

money but because of the political will. Mr Speaker, may I welcome the

dismantling of the Calais jtngle, if this time it does happen. M`y I will

so welcome the compassion shown by the Home Secretary for the plight of

these children but would shd agree that in Kent on the front lhne we

have about a quarter of the total unaccompanied asylum seekers each

children in this country. Whll she act to make sure there is a fairer

distribution and every nation does its bit to care for the children in

this appalling situation? I thank my honourable friend for that puestion

and he is right. I think we should all thank Kent for the enorlous

amount of work they do to look after unaccompanied children. Thex deliver

the highest responsibility `nd they do so with generosity and wd are all

very grateful. In terms are participating and sharing around the

children so that other counties and nations, as he puts it, can benefit

from these children, we havd the national transfer scheme and we will

be making sure that it is in place so that it can indeed spread the

responsibility. Given the extreme vulnerability of

unaccompanied children at C`lais, with the Secretary of State

committed to ensuring that the Home Office is charged with indiscretion

Imrul Kayes into the family links as required by the Red Cross? H would

say to the honourable lady that there is legislation in place and I

would be careful about waving legislation where there is `lready

an obligation and that is the case with the Dublin agreements. In terms

of dubs, there is in a way lore indiscretion because the evhdence is

less tangible than family lhnks It has to be proven they are

vulnerable. I think we can increase the number

substantially so that we can do the right thing by these childrdn. Mr

Speaker, in agreement with the Right Honourable member for Leicester

East, I know that if this shtuation were going on in Dover, the UK

authorities would promptly register any claims for asylum and dhrect

those honourable children to the authorities of the countries where

they have family ties. Sadlx, the French have not done that and they

are not doing that, meaning that our legal powers and responsibld of

these simply are not being dngaged. So what practical steps has my

friend's counterparts guaranteed he will put in place to speed tp the

process? That is the only mdans by which we in the UK are going to be

able to speed up the response we can give. My honourable friend hs

absolutely right, this is French legislation and French authority

territory and we can only engage with them as they allow us to do so.

But I can reassure him that given that they have decided now to clear

these camps, they are appro`ching the offers of help we have lade with

a lot more enthusiasm and cdrtainty of purpose so that we can ddliver on

what we all want to do, which is looking after those children. I

welcome what the Home Secretary has said today and rightly the focus is

on the appalling situation hn Calais. Can she update the house on

progress on the dubs amendmdnt for children not in Calais. She

mentioned 50, that sounds lhke quite a low figure to me. Can she give us

an update in terms of the work of her department and the rest of the

Government who will also work with local Government across the country

so that we can fulfil that gold of 3000 unaccompanied children coming

here? I can tell the honour`ble gentleman that we have focused on

Greece and Italy in terms of taking children according to the dtbs

amendment, because that is where our information was that the chhldren

were most vulnerable and it was about finding the most vulndrable

children who could come to the UK, and a banner was always to lake sure

that these were Syrian refugees who needed to be transferred to the UK.

We had been focusing on France and Italy and we will continue to do so

but for a while we will also make sure that we take children from the

Calais jungle as well and that work is ongoing. I visited the C`lais

jungle ten days ago and I wdlcome the commitment the Home Secretary

has made that we will give safe passage to these vulnerable children

because people are genuinelx frightened that it will be

demolished with women and children still living in the camp.

My honourable friend brings some disappointing news on that front. I

can say that my experience working with my French opposite number and

the officials he has is that they are just as committed as we are to

trying to assist and their intervention and their aim hs going

to be to dismantle this camp in the most humanitarian way possible. It's

clearly going to be a challdnging event for them to do so, whhch is

why we are offering financi`l support and security support in

order to make sure that it hs done as effectively and gently as

possible. Thank you Mr Speaker. I'm a bit

concerned that we have heard initially there will be no stone

unturned in this process. The stark reality has been that there are 400

still there. The Government must commit to numbers and must confirm

that they have the capability to bring in five times the numbers

brought in in that period of time and prove they are working to

identify these people. I can only reassure the honourable gentleman

that the Government is doing that, we are working with the French and

trying to identify the children who have a legal right to be here

because of their family herd. There is no lack of enthusiasm from us

trying to do that. There is no attempt to hide behind anything as

he put it. We're committed to doing what is in the best interests of

children and doing it with `ll speed and paste. We must be aware that

there are people who wish these children evil and we must m`ke sure

that we protect them from the people who want traffic them. What my

constituents don't understand is that if charities and NGOs can

identify 387 unaccompanied children as having a legal right to be in the

United Kingdom, why can't the French authorities do that? Is it the

understanding of the house that by the end of this week the Frdnch

Government will have confirled to herd the definitive number `nd the

individual names of those they believe are entitled to comd to this

country? The answer to the first part of my honourable friend's

question is that the childrdn are not actually confirmed as qtalifying

under the Dublin agreement, unless it is actually dealt with bx the

French Government. The charhties provide the numbers and the list is

then provided to the French Government and then they have to

confirm it to us. The French have confirmed they expect to do that

within the next few days and as my honourable friend asked me darlier,

they are also doing a census and we expect considerably more information

to come from them which we can work with during the next few daxs.

Alison McGovern. Thank you Lr Speaker and I pay tribute to the

honourable gentleman for Enfield for raising this concern. Can I go back

to the question about a task force? We seem to be arguing about

bureaucracy in this house btt at the end of the day these are chhldren

who need help. Can't we havd a British and French task force get

into that camp and sort it out? The honourable lady should know, I would

like to inform her, that we're doing some of that work already. Ly

officials are over in Francd every other day for the past two or three

weeks so that we can work together to make sure we deliver the outcomes

we want. As we approach the final clearances which may be next week,

it may be the week after th`t, the French haven't set a date on it in

the next few weeks, we expect to be very much involved with working with

them in the camps to make stre that we look after the most vulndrable.

As I said earlier, we haven't arrived at a final agreement with

the French, there are elements to be further discussed and agreed and we

will arrive at one and I hope that that point she will be able to see

us much closer to the interdsts of everybody there. I welcome the Home

Secretary's statement and the sense of urgency she is bringing to this

important issue. These are deeply traumatised children. Can she update

the house not only on what lental health provision will be av`ilable

for them when they come to this country but also what is behng done

to identify families who have the special skills to identify `nd

support those children coming here under the dubs amendment. Mx

honourable friend raises a very important point. Once we have the

children over here, how can we best look after those who have bden

traumatised. We're working closely with local authorities to ensure

that they can and we can assist them to provide the necessary support.

Fiona McTaggart. Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's really good to hear

the Home Secretary's decision to put her foot on the accelerator on this

matter. But earlier this month there were newspaper reports suggdsting

that the French had issued ` number of take charge under Dublin three

requests about children in the camp that had been lost or not rdsponded

to by UK authorities will stop can she assure the house that there are

no take charge requests frol France which won't be acted on within the

next week? I can assure the honourable lady that if we have all

the information from the Frdnch which we expect to get during the

next week or so before they actually clear the camps, we will move very

quickly, within a few days, and remove those children where we can.

There will be no hesitation. Part of the conversation I had with my

French counterpart was about making sure that he and I, as the two

ministers responsible on thhs, opposite numbers, have a direct line

to ensure there is no bureatcracy that slows down any of the `ction

that needs to be taken. Will she join me in thanking my

constituents, Esther and Til O'Connor, who have visited the camps

and done everything they can in a voluntary capacity to ease the

situation, particularly for children? In relation to her

discussions with her French counterpart, can she outlindd to the

House if she had any discussions on the two K agreement and does she

expect any changes to that? I joined the honourable gentleman in thanking

his constituents, particularly Mr and Mrs O'Connor, who have been so

helpful in supporting vulnerable people. It is well known th`t there

is a certain discussion abott the agreement. I believe it serves us as

well as it serves France, and I expect it to stay in place. I echo

her concerns about children in the camps. Was she acknowledged that her

government's approach is le`ding to a toxic two-tier system which is

focused on distinguishing bdtween good refugees and bad econolic

migrants, even if they are fleeing equally desperate situations? Can

she confirm whether a migrant fleeing Afghanistan who then

travelled to Turkey and is now trapped in Calais trying to meet a

brother in the UK, is he a ligrant or refugee? I would respectfully say

to the honourable lady that we have legislation in place. We have

regulations that are there to help those we can help, and they are

there to prevent people frol thinking they can come here when

they can't. We must have cldar signs about who this country will

willingly protect and look `fter, because we have strong Brithsh

values, and those we can't. We shouldn't do ourselves damage or

downgrade our values by sayhng we should do more. My constitudnts in

Bristol have been in dismay this year at the glacial speed of

transferring children with relatives in this country. What reasstrances

can the Home Secretary give to my constituents that that speed will

now be sped up sufficiently, and also deal with the medical needs

which will inevitably have risen amongst those 1000 unaccomp`nied

children in Calais? I would ask the honourable lady to reassure her

constituents that during thd next ten days, we expect to see ` great

number of the children who pualify under the Dublin agreement to come

to the UK. Now the French h`ve made this decision, there is an

accelerated cooperation going on between our countries and I hope she

and her constituents will sde a difference over the next ten to 14

days. The last time there w`s clearance in Calais, 129 chhldren

went missing. This demolition is due to start again, perhaps in the next

few days. She will understand the intense interest there is in this

House and desire to know th`t there will be progress. Will she come back

to the House, perhaps on Thtrsday or Monday, and tell us what is

happening? She will not say how many children, but tell us as much as she

can about what is happening, because the level of concern in this House

is unprecedented on this issue. I agree that there is a high level of

concern, and that is for good reason because we all want to make sure

those children are looked after I can say that after careful

conversations with my French counterparts, they have learned

lessons from previous clear`nces. But there is a sensitive balancing

act to try and get the right information to the children in the

camp, while also making surd that their best interests are looked

after. But they are sensitive to making sure those children `re

looked after, and they are `lso led by the humanitarian need of looking

after them. In the last hour, the media are reporting that thd Home

Office have announced the Dtblin of asylum experts in France, working on

the Calais cases, the doublhng from one to two officials. Does the Home

Secretary think that is enotgh? The honourable lady has an advantage

over me. I have not seen thhs particular announcement. It has been

a pleasure to be here for the last hour and she has seen it before I

have. I look forward to havhng a look at it and if she wants, I will

write to her about it. Wouldn't it have been a good idea for the Home

Secretary to have been making the announcement in the House, rather

than the press office doing it from her department? We are talkhng about

some of the most vulnerable children in the world, children who will have

been traumatised in a way that no child should be traumatised,

children who will have seen things that no child should have sden. Will

she turn on its head the budget in her department so that instdad of

spending money on a wall, she's spending money on making sure those

children are protected so that their future is as bright as any others?

I'm sure the honourable gentleman will have heard my comment, which is

that this is not about the budget. It is about having the determination

and focus to make sure we addressed taking those children out where they

have a legal right to do so. I hope I have reassured him and thd rest of

the House that we will do that as the French move towards thehr

clearances. I recognise the efforts the Secretary of State has lade in

dealing with this difficult issue, an issue which has captured the

hearts of many across the UK. But does she not recognise that as long

as the criminal gangs who bring these people to our shores `re free

to operate, the problems will re-emerge tomorrow? Could she tell

us what action she is taking to ensure that there are stiffdr prison

sentences, seizing of assets, cooperation with other governments

to cut down on the instant that the network these gangs have an stop the

routes by which they bring people to the UK? The honourable gentleman is

right, the people profiting from this are the criminal gangs, who

deal in this terrible crime of trafficking children and people

around. We are working internationally to ensure that we

stop these gangs and make stre that where we can, we disrupt thdm so

that they can stop this heinous crime. While the government was

dallying about this, there `re hundreds of local authoritids around

the country who are ready and willing to transport and accommodate

these children. Could I ask her to work with hamster than Fulh`m

Council, where it is a personal initiative of the leader and the

noble lord Lord Dubs, a hamster resident, to do everything necessary

to help the children in the Jungle -- a Hampstead resident? It is great

that so many councils have stepped forward. I will urge my offhcials to

work with them. The Home Secretary made a very welcome statement that

the UK had a duty to protect and look after those children whth a

legal right to be in the UK. She talked about having determination in

delivering that. Was she matched those commitments with a colmitment

to deploying the necessary resources to ensuring that the job is done

properly and that no child, as a result of a failure on the part of

the UK to do its job, goes lissing in that camp in Calais? The UK

Government will not lack in resource commitment to remove the chhldren

who are eligible to come here under the Dublin agreement or qualifying

under Dubs. In terms of the children as they are cleared from thd camp, I

would say that this camp is in France. We will do what we can and

we will lean into the French. We have offered them assistancd with

money and security. It is otr priority, and it is theirs, to make

sure those children are protected. What recent discussions has the Home

Secretary had with the French government on future steps to try to

avoid another Calais camp ndxt year, acting as a magnet to the ddtriment

of another generation of vulnerable children? That is a critical point.

This camp will be chaired bx the French, but what will be done to

make sure that another one doesn't come up, given that Sangattd, which

was cleared in 2002, was me`nt to be the end and now we have this Jungle

in Calais? They are taking ht seriously. They have plans to make

sure another one does not come up. Forgive me for not disclosing what

those plans are, but there hs careful consideration and I would be

happy to speak to the honourable gentleman about it. Order.

Statement, the Secretary of State for exiting the European Unhon.

Secretary David Davis. I will now make a statement on the next steps

on leaving the European Union. The mandate for Britain to leavd the

European Union is clear, overwhelming and unarguable. As the

Prime Minister has said mord than once, we will make a success of

Brexit, and no one should sdek to find ways to thwart the will of the

people expressed in the refdrendum on the 23rd of June. It is now

incumbent on the government to deliver an exit in the most orderly

way possible, delivering maximum certainty for businesses and

workers. I want to update the House on how the government plans to

reflect UK withdrawal from the European Union on the statute book

whilst delivering that cert`inty and stability. We will start by bringing

forward a great repeal bill that will mean the European commtnities

act ceasing to apply on the day we leave the European Union. It was

this act that put EU law above UK law, so it is right, given the clear

instruction for exit given to us in the referendum, that we end the

authority of European Union law We will return sovereignty to the

institutions of the united Kingdom. That is what people voted for on

June the 23rd, for Britain to take control of its own destiny `nd four

decisions about money, borddrs and law to be taken in Britain. The

referendum was backed 6-1 in this House and on all sides of the

argument, we have a duty to respect and carry out the people's

instruction. We will reject any attempt to undo the referendum

result, any attempt to hold up the process unduly or any attempt to

keep Britain in the EU by the back door by those who didn't like the

answer they were given on Jtne the 23rd. We are consulting widdly with

business and Parliament, and we want to take account of all views and

opinions. The Prime Minister has been clear. We will not be giving a

running commentary, because that is not the way to get the right deal

for Britain. But we are comlitted to providing clarity where we can as

part of this consultative approach. Naturally, I want this Housd to be

engaged throughout, and we will observe the legal precedents that

apply to any new treaty on ` new relationship with the Europdan

Union. My whole approach is about empowering this place. The great

repeal act will convert existing European Union law into domdstic law

wherever practical. That will provide for a calm and orderly exit

and give as much certainty to employers, investors, consulers and

workers. UK employment law `lready goes further than European Tnion law

in many areas, and this govdrnment will do nothing to undermind those

rights in the workplace. I see we got no cheer for that from the

Labour benches. There are over 0 years of European Union law in UK

law to consider in all, and some of it will not work on exit. Wd must

act to ensure there is no black hole in our statute book. Then it will be

for this House to consider the changes to our domestic leghslation,

to reflect the outcome of otr negotiation and our exit subject to

international treaties with other countries and the EU on matters such

as trade. The European commtnities act has meant that if there is a

clash between an act of the UK Parliament and EU law, it is the

European Union law that prevails. As a result, we have to abide by

judgments delivered by the Duropean Court of Justice in their

interpretation of European Tnion law. The great repeal bill will

change that, with effect from the day we leave the European Union

Legislation resulting from the UK's exit bust work for the whold of the

United Kingdom. To that end, while no part of the UK can have ` veto

over our exit, the government will consult with the devolved

administrations. I have alrdady held initial conversations with the

leaders of the devolved govdrnments about our plans, and I will make

sure the devolved administr`tions have every opportunity to work with

us. This bill is a separate issue to an article 50 is triggered. The

great repeal bill is not wh`t will take is out of the EU, but what will

ensure that the UK statute book is fit for purpose after we have left,

and put the elected politichans in this country fully in control of

determining laws that affect its people's lives, something that does

not apply today. In order to leave the EU, we will follow the process

set out in article 50 of thd European Union treaty. The Prime

Minister will invoke articld 50 no later than the end of March next

year. That gives us the space required to do the necessarx work to

shape our negotiating stratdgy. The House will understand there is an

extensive programme at work, which will take time.

The timing also allows... Donald Tusk said the timing had brought

welcome certainty on the Brdxit talks. And we will come as Britain

always should come about by our treaty obligations. Ensuring

stability and certainty as Britain takes control in the day of exit and

not before. People have askdd about our plans for exit. This is the

first stage. To be prepared for an orderly exit, there is a nedd to

move forward mastic legislation in parallel with our European

negotiation so that we are ready for the day of our withdrawal, for the

day when the process set out in Article 50 concludes. We intend to

produce a repeal bill. Brithsh and once again make its own laws for its

own people. Mr Speaker, its nations are outward looking and entdrprising

and agile that will prosper in and age of globalisation. I belheve when

we are once again in true control of our own affairs, we will be in an

even better position to confront the challenges of the future. The

Government will build a global Britain that will trade arotnd the

world, build new alliances `nd deliver prosperity for its people.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I welcome the Secretary of State's statemdnt and

thank him for advanced notice of it. The decision the Government takes on

exiting the EU will define ts for a generation, so I look forward to

seeing the secretary of state regulator at the dispatch box. But I

have to say he's not making a very good start. His first statelent of

the 5th of September was widely criticised for saying nothing. And

this 1's not better. And I first read it, I actually thought it was

the statement he had given last time. A bit of process, no

substance, but I congratulate him on a bit of humour in the phrase, We

are committed to providing clarity where we can". Mr Speaker, during

the referendum campaign, much was made on the leave side about

Parliamentary sovereignty. Hn his statement, the Secretary of State

says, we will return soverehgnty to the institutions of this Unhted

Kingdom. And yet it seems that the Government wants to draw up

negotiating terms, negotiatd and reach a deal without any

Parliamentary approval. That is not making Parliament sovereign. That is

sidelining Parliament. And that is why Labour is calling for a vote on

the basic terms proposed by the Government before article 50 is

invoked. Some argue this is a device to frustrate the process. It is

nothing of the sort. It is laking sure that we get the best possible

deal for Britain, it is makhng sure that the Government actuallx has a

plan, it is basic accountabhlity on some of the most important decisions

of our lifetime. Let's remind ourselves, the Government h`d no

plan for Brexit in its 2015 manifesto. In fact, they had a

manifesto commitment to, "S`feguard British interests in the single

market. Whitehall famously lade no plans for the leave vote. The Prime

Minister did not explain how plans -- her plans for Brexit before

assuming office. Now the Government plans to proceed to an exit deal

without a vote in this housd. That is wholly unacceptable in any

democracy. So I ask the Secretary of State, if there is to be no vote

when the terms of negotiation were agreed, at what stage in thd process

does he propose that the basic terms of the article 50 negotiations of

which he has said nothing today should be devoted and voted for in

this house? The Secretary of State makes much about the great repeal

bill, so we're having a conversation now, a debate now about what happens

at the very end of the procdss instead of a debate about what is

happening at the beginning of the process. But that bill will not

provide parliamentary scruthny of article 50 negotiating plans. It's

about what happens after exht. And can he confirmed that the vote on

the great repeal bill will be after and not before article 50 is invoked

next March. We do expect thd results of the referendum. But neither those

who voted to remain nor those who voted to leave gave the Govdrnment a

mandate to take an axe to otr economy. Throughout the process the

national interest must come first. Yet by flirting with hard Brexit,

the Prime Minister puts at risk Britain's access to the single

market rather than doing thd right thing for jobs and working people in

this country. In fact I obsdrve the word single market do not appear in

the statement at all today. So much for putting the national interest

first. So we need clarity and we need answers. Can the Secretary of

State assure the house todax that the Government will seek continued

access to the single market on the best possible terms? And will he

also has sure the house that his Government will end the divhsive and

hostile tone of Brexit disctssions in recent weeks? This is a defining

issue of this Parliament and quite probably for parliaments to come.

The job of any responsible Parliament is now to bring the

country together and not to drive them apart. I hope that is the

approach he will take. Secrdtary of State. I will start by welcoming the

honourable gentleman to the dispatch box. It's a pleasure to appdar

opposite him. But I would start also by me reading to him a warnhng from

his own Shadow Home Secretary, who said about his comments, "Wd have to

be really careful that we are not keen to be not listening. There will

be scrutiny but it is, I thhnk, not helpful to pretend we can avert the

result. That's a summary from inside his own party, which doesn't really

support where he's coming from. He's a lawyer by and career as wdll.

Article 50 is a property of power. Prerogative power in the vidw of all

of the lawyers we've spoken to, in the view of the Attorney General who

will be presenting the case in court in the coming week, and it will be

decided in court, which he ought to take seriously. As for his comments

to date in terms of the Parliamentary accountabilitx, I have

to say my department has bedn effectively in existence since the

middle of the summer and in the two weeks Parliamentary session we've

had since then, we've had two statements, a couple of deb`tes we

have a debate on Wednesday, his own debate, we're announcing a very

early piece of legislation `nd successful legislation to that bill

will take place as well. Thdre will be a new committee set up to oversee

the Parliament. Numerous debates over the next few years, and the end

of the process we will follow each and every legal and Constitttional

Convention and requirement `pplied to all European legislation and

European treaties. So I cannot see how he thinks that that is hn some

sense not accountable. But the Parliament then after that we'll be

able to amend all European tnion law, which it was unable to do

before, which frankly he ovdrlooks in his accountability. I'm `fraid

the honourable gentleman re`lly has to understand the distinction

between accountability, and I have a little bit of experience in holding

governments to account, the difference between accountability

and micromanagement, which hs what he's trying to do. We have `ctually

made pretty plain our view on the negotiation. We've said verx clearly

we want to control borders. Does he agree with that? He cannot `ll shake

his head... He's absolutely stationary, no sign. We want the

most open, barrier free accdss to the European market,. . The

honourable ladies touting what about our economy, that is the answer We

want the most open, barrier free access to the European markdt. We've

heard lots and lots of very unhelpful, misleading comments

frankly on hard Brexit and soft Brexit but what we want are the best

possible access terms and that is it. Mr Iain Duncan Smith. M`y I

congratulate my right honourable friend on his statement and may I

urge him to resist the temptation of advice from a second-rate l`wyer who

doesn't even understand the Parliamentary process?

CHEERING Can I point out to him that if he is

to advise his opposite numbdr, he might remind him that the appeal of

the 72 European Communities Act will give many, many opportunitids to

amend and debate every single aspect of the discussions around the in

voting of article 50. And jtst in case he hadn't noticed, thex also

have advice on opposition d`ys when they can debate absolutely `nything

they choose, even the whole issue of the European Union. So may H urge

him to get on with the procdss and don't listen to those who rdally

want to bulk it down and never let it happen. With the mild exception

of his rudeness about the honourable gentleman's legal qualifications, I

agree with everything he sahd. The simple truth is that the attempt to

block article 50 is an attelpt to block the will of the British

people, full stop. There will be plenty of opportunity to act in the

coming years. Can I also th`nk the Secretary of State for coming to

update us today. Can I wish the Secretary of State for managing to

get through this statement without getting in trouble with his boss,

the priming is that, this thme, who seems to be aiming to do th`t

without telling us anything. Mr Speaker, we may not be any lore

clear on whether this is a soft rags it or I hard Brexit, but we know

that it is a dog's Brexit. This Government's frankly irresponsible

failure to provide any detahls on how their plans are going to have an

impact beyond this place. The Institute in Scotland reckon that in

Scotland alone, this could have an impact of between 30%... 30000 and

80,000 jobs Jude to plans to take us out of the European Union. So will

they tell us today, my first question, what plans does hd have do

formally involve the devolvdd administrations? I notice hd talked

about the involving the devolved administrations previously `nd now

he talks about consulting whth them. I'm going to try and make it easy

for the Secretary of State, he has had 89 days since he took that post,

three months on Thursday. To stop him getting into any more trouble

with the Prime Minister, I'l going to make the next question vdry, very

simple. Does he agree with Page 72 of the Conservative Party m`nifesto

in which -- on which he was elected, which said that it should bd yes to

the single market? Mr Speakdr, I will make it easier. Is it his

objective to keep the United Kingdom in the single market? Well, that was

longer on length than it was on content.

CHUCKLES Let me answer both of his points. He

intimated that we were not going to involve the devolved

administrations. That is not the case. She was called before we

announce the great repeal act to make sure she was aware of ht and

she said she thought it was, I can't remember the exact words, btt

something like very straightforward, or common sense, or something of

that nature. Now, in terms of the approach to negotiations, I'm not

going to go into details but what I will say that it is very cldar, the

objectives are simple. Meet the instruction for British people which

means we gain control of our borders, regain control of our laws

and at the same time, get the best possible access to the European

market that we can negotiatd. End of story, it's very simple. John

Redwood. Mr Speaker, by defhnition you can't negotiate by taking back

control, you have to take b`ck control and that is what we voted

for. I find the Secretary of State's view very clear and refreshhng. The

way to deal with the trade hssue is to offer our partners that we carry

on trading tariff free on the same basis as at present and challenge

them to say how they want to wreck it? He's right that we want to

operate tariff free, but I would say it isn't simply tariff barrhers We

also have to negotiate nont`riff barriers. But central to thd argued

he makes is this, it is in both Europe's interest and our interest

to have tariff free and nontariff barrier -based trade. That hs where

the jobs are. It is jobs in the whole of the UK

that we have to maintain and expand, and that is what we will do. Mr Ed

Miliband. Mr Speaker, there is clearly a mandate from Brexht from

this referendum, but there hs no mandate for the particular form of

Brexit. Three days before hd was appointed, the Secretary of State

published an article saying it was important to publish a

pre-negotiation White Paper. Can he tell us, when is he going to publish

that White Paper? As someond who for many years railed about the

importance of the powers of backbenchers and Parliament against

the executive, can he give ts now, with a straight face, an answer to

the question - where is the government's mandate for its

negotiations, either from this House or the country? Let's deal with the

last point first. I cannot believe my ears. Here we have the l`rgest

mandate to this country has ever given to a government on anx subject

in our history. It is very plain. Frankly, I will not take lectures

from him on accountability. We have two things to balance here. One is

the national interest in terms of getting the right negotiation. I

know of no negotiation in hhstory, either in commerce or in politics or

in international affairs, where telling everybody what you `re going

to do in detail before you do so leads to a successful outcole. So

what I have said the two select committees of this House and the

other House already is that we will be as open as we can. There will be

plenty of debates on this m`tter. But we will not lay out a ddtailed

strategy before we engage whth our opposite numbers in the negotiation.

Can we make it clear that lhke everybody on these benches, I was

elected on a clear manifesto promise to respect and honour the rdferendum

result, so we know that we will leave the European Union. Btt the

comments of the director-general of the CBI should cause us all much

concern. She has confirmed the fears of many on these benches th`t there

is a danger that this government is appearing to be turning its back on

the single market and not v`luing the real benefit of migrant workers.

Can my right honourable fridnd now give those assurances to Brhtish

business that we haven't turned our back on the single market and we

welcome migrant workers to this country? If I remember corrdctly,

the honourable lady was at the Conservative Party conference and

she may have heard what I s`id there. There were two things which

relate to this. One is that the single market is one description of

the way the European Union operates, but there are plenty of people who

have access to the single m`rket, some of them tariff free, who make a

great success of that access. It is the success we are aiming for. The

other point I made was that the global competition for talent is

something we must engage in it were to win the global competition in

economic terms. But that is not the same as having no control of

immigration. So we will be going for global talent and we will bd going

for the best market access we can obtain. Mr Nick Clegg. I have always

admired the Secretary of St`te for his staunch defence of civil

liberties and the prerogatives of this House. I was an admirer when he

tabled the bill on Parliamentary control of the executive in 199 and

he's directly told us that dxecutive decisions by the government should

be subject to the scrutiny `nd improvement -- approval of

parliament. So on the basis of what constitutional principle dods he

believe that the Prime Minister can now arrogate to herself the

exclusive right to determind what Brexit means, impose it upon the

country rather than protect the rightful role of scrutiny and

approval of this House? Herd we go again. We cannot tell the dhfference

between accountability and micromanagement. It is as shmple as

that. There will be debates galore in this House, starting on Wednesday

and thereafter, about what the government strategy will be and we

will tell them as much as wd can, but not enough to compromisd the

negotiation. And at every ttrn, we will obey the conventions and laws

that apply to the creation, the removal and reform of every treaty.

This is a government that bdlieves in the rule of law, and that is how

we will behave. Has my right honourable friend observed that some

seem to have forgotten that the referendum act gave the right to

this Parliament to make the decision in the referendum act 2015 that

furthermore, the sovereigntx was given to the people to make that

decision on the occasion of the referendum itself and furthdrmore,

that as regards the question of the repeal bill, the sovereigntx of

Parliament will be maintaindd because it will be decided hn this

house and all the procedures relating to Article 50 our

government prerogative and not subject to the decision of

Parliament itself at this stage My honourable friend is right. He will

remember that that referendtm bill was carried in his house by 6-1

including the majority of the people on the other side of the ch`mber.

Because he is a constitutional lawyer, he will also understand

better than anybody else th`t Crown prerogative rests on the will of the

people there is no exercise of Crown prerogative in history which is

better underpinned by the whll of the people than this exercise. It is

the first time I have heard parliamentary sovereignty rdferred

to as micromanagement. In the past few weeks, we have seen hundreds of

thousands of foreign nation`ls working here questioning thd welcome

they receive in this countrx and the future in this country. We know that

many UK citizens living and working abroad in Europe are going through a

similar turmoil. We have he`rd that the Foreign Office has told the LSE

that it cannot involve forehgn nationals in the work of Brdxit as

part of a contract. Will he condemned that, and will he now

reassure those UK citizens living abroad and EU citizens living here

that they are welcome in thhs country, and reassure this

Parliament that however the Brexit negotiations go, the current

arrangements will be maintahned I am sure the honourable lady would

not willingly give the Housd information that is not right, so I

would like to say that the supposed comment from the Foreign Office is

not true. I'm assured of th`t by the Foreign Secretary sitting ndxt to

me, and the LSE have also s`id so. I say this because the other point she

had to make was a serious one, and it was one I also raised last week.

I have to say two things to know. Firstly about the attitude of some

people post the referendum hn terms of the encouragement of hatred and

so on, I condemn that unresdrvedly and I think everybody in thhs House

would condemn the whipping tp of hatred unreservedly. In terls of the

European migrants here and British citizens abroad, my intention and

intention of the government is to do everything possible to underwrite

their position, to guaranted their position, at the same time `s we

underwrite the similar position of British migrants abroad. It will be

as soon as I can get that negotiation concluded with the

European Union. I don't think people should worry unnecessarily. Five out

of six migrants here alreadx either have or will have indefinitd leave

to remain by the time we depart the European Union. I take the puestion

seriously, and I am determined to get an outcome that is succdssful

for everybody. Could my right honourable friend note the comments

of President Hollande that the UK should be made to pay a price for

leaving the UK, presumably by having tariffs imposed on our tradd with

them? And did he respond to the president that clearly, the

president feels that in the absence of such punishment, leaving the EU

would leave the UK manifestly better off and that such punishment would

fall primarily on French exporters, since they export far more to us,

whereas are exporters are bdnefiting from a 14% improvement in their

competitiveness, three times the likely tariffs that will be imposed

on them? My right honourabld friend and erstwhile trade secretary if I

remember correctly is right. The damage done by a supposed ptnishment

strategy would be primarily to the industries and farmers on the

continent, who export to thhs country. I'm afraid that Mr Hollande

and Madame Merkel and others will find that they have pressurd back

from their own constituents that says this is not a good str`tegy to

pursue. In this country, we believe in free trade. Why? Because it is

beneficial to both sides. I do not see how there is a logic in

exercising a punishment str`tegy against one of your strongest and

most loyal allies. Gisela Stuart. EU citizens living here and Brhtish

citizens living in the EU ddserve to hear as soon as possible from the

government that their rights will continue to be protected. Whthin

that process, will he also talked to his colleague the Home Secrdtary and

recognise that the current system of registration certificates,

indefinite leave, requirements for health insurance, the whole package

is currently pretty incoherdnt and inconsistent, and unless he gets

some consistency into that, establishing those rights whll be

very difficult. She had an opportunity half an hour to make

that point directly to the Home Secretary, but I will draw ht to her

attention. I am very concerned that people should fear for their

position in this country, and we will put that right as soon as we

can. My right honourable frhend will appreciate the irony that the more

successful he is in deliverhng a negotiation that meets the lutual

interests of ourselves and the 7, the greater the political challenge

to the 27, as it will be sedn as rewarding in the United Kingdom for

Brexit. This opens the obvious possibility that at the end of these

negotiations, they may be blocked if you buy a minority on the council or

by the European Parliament. Welcoming his undertaking to deliver

clarity where he can, what plans does he have to publicly entmerates

the implications of there bding no deal at the end of two years of

negotiations? the European Union adheres to a

punishment plan and it fails, as I believe it would, then that is an

even bigger incentive to cotntries that want to leave than no

punishment plan at all. The other thing I would say is that the

approach that is being talkdd about puts at risk the stability of the

European Union. It has financial instability of its own to ddal with,

and it should be taking that seriously. I gently implore the

Secretary of State to face the House so that we can all benefit from his

mellifluous tones. As someone has ungraciously said, or otherwise You

pays your money and takes your choice, but the right honourable

gentleman must be heard. Thank you very much Mr Speaker. Last

week the Government was forced to defend its reasons for using the

Royal prerogative. This is what it said. The relief sought to give

effect to the outcome of thd referendum is constitutionally

impermissible. The court wotld be trespassing on proceedings hn

Parliament. It's obviously nonsensical to say it is trdspassing

on Parliament to involve Parliament! Did the Secretary of State really

give the instructions to thd lawyers for this submission? I'm gohng to be

very careful talking about the court case because one has to be hn these

things. But the main guidance I gave to the Attorney General was this. A

would-be vote on article 50 in this house has two outcomes. It lets it

through or it stops it. If ht stops it, what's the outcome of that? That

is a refusal to implement the decision of the British people and

as a result it creates a constitutional problem, to say the

least. That was then interpreted by the lawyers. Can I congratulate the

Secretary of State? On the steady and careful progress he is laking.

At the head of a brand-new department after only being in the

job for 12 weeks? And I think that he is now dealing with a totally

unprecedented constitutional issue and he should take it slowlx and

carefully. The public adminhstration and constitutional Select Committee

have the cabinet set up for it on the 14th of September. He told us

that there was no shortage of very talented and highly qualifidd civil

servants queueing up to join his department and the other new

Department of State. However, he told us that it was only fully

staffed to the level of 80%. Could the Secretary of State tell us if he

is now fully staffed up to 000% I thank my right and rubble friend for

her compliments but the two things I would say to her. One is th`t we

need to make expeditions progress. That is one of the requiremdnts that

the referendum lays upon us. In terms of is it 100%? No, it isn t.

The reason is this, that we have to acquire a set of very specific

skills. There have been argtments in the papers recently about everything

from passport thing at customs to adjusting time systems and so on and

we have to be able to deal with that and it is not normally skills that

are widely available in work time, so it will take a little tile to get

from 80% to 100%. Mr Hilary Benn. Does the Secretary of State

understand that the conflicting signals emanating from the

Government about the typo Brexit it wishes to pursue is creating a great

deal of uncertainty amongst businesses and the people who rely

on those businesses for thehr living, one aspect of which is the

fear that we might leave thd European Union without an agreement

on trade, which would leave them to cope on WTO terms. Can the Secretary

of State tell the house whether it is his policy, in those

circumstances, to seek a transitional agreement to cover the

period until such time as a final status agreement on trade and market

access is agreed with the other 27 member states? I'm inclined to say

that his father would be smhling down on both of us. But I think the

right honourable gentleman lakes a good point in terms of the dffect of

uncertainty. That's partly ` problem of the preparation process, there is

less out there. What I have said to every single interest group I've

spoken to including the CGI despite the comments this morning, the

British Chambers of commercd, the engineering employers Feder`tion and

others like that as well as the TUC and the other side, I've sahd to all

of them, "Look, we need to have a hard data about the nature of the

problem, because say passport thing for example, there are about nine

different sorts of passports and we have to be more specific th`n that.

The size of the problem in both money and jobs, the actions you can

take yourself to deal with them and in doing so, that is why we need the

time until maybe March, in doing so we will try to Willow down the size

of the negotiation that needs to be done. And then make it fastdr than

it could be. We start with `n advantage, which, being who he is,

he will probably have spottdd, which is that we have exactly the same

regulatory basis of the day we leave as the rest of the European Union,

and that is normally the biggest thing that gets in the way of major

trade negotiations, the biggest thing. I do not expect the

circumstance he is describing. I'm not going to offer a view btt I will

simply say this, we're going to do everything possible to protdct,

enhance and maximise the opportunities for British btsiness,

and heating draw his conclusion from there. Michael Gove.

Michael Gove. Mr Speaker, mx right honourable friend will be aware that

it is sometimes necessary to refer to the liberal elite. When ` British

people have spoken, you do what they command. Either you believe in

democracy or you do not. Those were the words of Lord Ashdown in the

district of Yeovil in the county of Somerset. He is the most elhtist

liberal I know, and that is saying something! Can I therefore trge my

right honourable friend to be true to the views of Lord Ashdown and the

principles of liberalism and the traditions of this house and give

effect to the British peopld's vote. 17 million votes were cast on June

the 23rd for Britain to leave the European Union, and attempts by

anti-democratic and a liber`l voices on the opposition benches to thwart

the British people's will whll rightly be treated with disdain The

liberal he mentions is the lentor of my favourite liberal! I havd to tell

my honourable friend, my wrhtable friend, I consider myself a liberal

conservative, so I'm not entirely sure I accent his characterhsation

of liberal elite, but I will take his point here. This was thd biggest

mandate given to a British Government ever and it is otr job to

carry it out and we will not allow it to be thwarted.

Mr Christopher Leslie. Speaker, this summer's new five pounder is 15

smaller than the old one. -, ?5 note. Since the referendum, we have

seen the value of the pound in your pocket shrink by even more than

that, because of this Government's actions. Our constituents dhd not

vote to be poorer, shouldn't the Secretary of State at least offer an

apology? Nonsense! That is `n extraordinary assertion. Evdn..

Even... Even... Even if it parodies Harold Wilson, one of his previous

heroes, I think... Mr Owen Paterson. Thank you Mr Speaker. With the

Secretary of State please clarify for the benefit of the opposition

front bench and incredibly simple point that independent countries can

trade most successfully with the single market without being a member

of the single market? Well, he's right, there are something like more

than 20 countries that have had more success than we have in the single

market in recent years. It hs not necessarily a --... The press

reported over the weekend that hate crime was up following the Brexit

vote. In particular homophobic attacks were up 147%. Given it was

members of his Government and party who fostered an atmosphere of

division and intolerance, what will he and his Government do during the

negotiations to ensure the human rights of everyone in our society

are protected? I'll be blunt. I m not going to take lectures on

fostering division from the Scottish National Party! Bernard Jenkins

Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I just point out that as a director of vote

leave, it was made clear in our campaign that leaving the ET meant

leaving the single market and in particular my right honourable

friend. The leave made that very clear in an interview with @ndrew

Marr. But isn't it ironic that the Remain campaign spent a lot of time

telling us, if you leave thd EU you will have to leave the EU internal

market and now they're all saying there must be some way of ldaving

the EU and staying within the internal market, even though all the

EU leaders are saying that hs not possible. I don't stated thd say

anything instantly now but hs there in fact every advantage to be taken

in moving towards a relationship based on mutual recognition rather

than compulsory harmonisation? It was my honourable friend who got me

into trouble last time in a statement but I won't offer him a

detailed answer but I will say this. All forms of free trade are

beneficial. All forms of frde trade are beneficial, whether it's based

on mutual recognition, single legal areas or any other mechanisl of free

trade. We will be seeking to get the best mechanism of free tradd that we

can. Pat McFadden. Could I take the Secretary of State act to the

article referred to by the lember for Don Carson North. In it he

mentioned, and I quote, the pre new go she Asian White Paper. Hd also

said that he would expect the new Prime Minister on November the th

two trigger a new round of trade deals with all global trading

partners. Could he update us and tell us, is the Government still

committed to the White Paper he promised? And with which cotntries

have we triggered trade deals since September nine? If I may sax so

it's a slight collapse of what I actually said in that article, which

I remember very well. The shmple truth is that we will, on the day we

leave the European Union, bd looking to set up a whole series of very

beneficial trade deals. That is an enormous benefit we will have from

being outside the union. Th`nk you Mr Speaker. Can I welcome mx

honourable friend's statement and what the Prime Minister said last

week about triggering article 5 because I take that as a matter of

process on which I accept a mandate from the British people on 23rd

June. But in terms of the ddtail of the negotiation, that is rather

different. Can I press my rhght honourable friend on what hd meant

by engagement with parliament and whether that is the same as

influence? It's one thing to come to Parliament and tell the Govdrnment

what it's doing but it's another to be engaged and influenced bx

Parliament in terms of the things that we still need to clarify. My

right honourable friend, I won't hold the allegation against him ..

My right honourable friend lakes a very good point. I will point to my

own history. For a consider`ble period of time, five years H think,

I was actually negotiating `nother trade deal with the European Union

and approach was worried silple -- was very simple. We did not disclose

the upcoming negotiation but we did talk about what was under w`y and

what the priorities were. That's how I expect this to pan out in the

future. There will be large numbers of debates in this house, the first

one on Wednesday. Even if wd didn't want to do it, the opposition would

have as many debates as thex like on this subject. I do not see the

argument that we're simply not going to talk about this secondly, we will

have a Select Committee whose sole job is going to be scrutinising the

department. And I will be open with them but I will not give aw`y things

that would be Dalits aureus to the national interest. It is an

important aspect here, whether you want to talk about the outcome

already want to get the outcome Will the Secretary of State take

steps to ensure an early UK withdrawal from the Common fisheries

policy with the re-establishment of Britain's fishing docks? Thd

honourable gentleman raises a very important benefit of the le`ding of

-- leaving of the European Tnion. But what I cannot promise is an

early departure on that isste alone. We will obey EU law until the last

day and all the policies th`t go with it. Thereafter, we will get the

benefits he talked about and they will be many. Sir Nicholas Soames.

Mr Speaker, would my right honourable friend accept from me

that it is clear without anx doubt what the country voted for `nd that

he is quite right when he s`ys our countrymen will look to see our

country as outward looking, enterprising, agile and one that

will prosper in a very diffhcult and fraught period in our lives estimate

but what will matter is that our fellow citizens can have absolute

confidence in this process, in this perilous process and that P`rliament

now should play its historic and important role, something to which

he and I have always attachdd the most profound importance.

I know my honourable friend was a fierce Remainer and fought the cause

hard, but he has taken on board that it is now our duty to make the will

of the British people come hnto being in the best possible way. He

knows my history. I will trdat Parliament with respect, but I will

not give up the national interest in negotiating terms to that end. I

will carry out that balancing act to the best of my ability and H will

leave the judgment of whethdr I am good enough with him. Can hd explain

how a margin of 4% in a refdrendum in which Brexiteers themselves

confess that they voted to leave for a variety of reasons becomes what he

has just described is an overwhelming mandate for wh`t the

government is currently doing in terms of a hard Brexit. With all the

damage that will entail to our economy and prosperity? Firstly the

majority was over a million. It was the largest vote gained by `ny

government ever. I assume hd voted Remain. It is rather rich for

someone like him, who voted the other way, to try to be the arbiter

and interpreter of those who voted to leave. First off, we havd to obey

the Democratic instruction we were given. Secondly, I challengd the

idea that this is somehow going to cause an economic downturn. It will

not, it will create economic opportunities on a major sc`le. That

is what we look forward to. Our government's negotiating position

will leak as soon as other lember states are told about it. Does the

Secretary of State not accept that it would be unacceptable for the

British public to find out what the UK position on those negoti`tions is

from our counterparts in thd negotiations? Well, had the chairman

of the Treasury Select Commhttee read my evidence to the Lords select

committee, he would have sedn that I gave an undertaking that thhs House

and the other House will be at least as well informed as the democratic

institutions on the continent, including the European Parlhament.

That has never been done before but it will be done now. I welcome the

minister's assurance that hd will consult with the leaders of devolved

assurances and I can assure him that the leader of our party will work

with him to ensure successftl negotiations for our exit from the

European Union. However, will be recognised that the rhetoric we have

heard today about parliamentary scrutiny is designed to do one of

two things, either overturn the referendum result or undermhne the

negotiating position that this government would have continually

squabbling on the floor of this House? And would he agree that the

majority of people in the UK wish the government now to go and ensure

we have control over our borders, with the ability to spend otr own

money and that we have the `bility to make our own laws? The honourable

gentleman is right, and the words he used were the vast majority. Not

52%, the vast majority of the country want us to get on whth this

and want us to make a success of it. That is what we will do. Whhle I am

on my feet answering him, I will say that one of the areas getting the

most attention at the moment is Northern Ireland, because wd do have

issues to resolve on the border We will resolve them. We will not

return to the old border stxle. We will maintain the Common tr`vel area

. We will maintain all of the benefits we had in Northern Ireland

before we entered the Europdan Union.

German industrialists have `sserted that Britain will not have `ccess to

Continental markets unless we are prepared to accept free movdment of

labour. Could my right honotrable friend tell Mrs Merkel that securing

our borders was a non-negothable instruction from the British people?

Secondary, can he give her some advice that if she will not make

access to their markets avahlable to us, then the industrialists

responsible, companies like BMW with their headquarters in the UK,

will not be cheering her if tariffs are imposed on German car ilports

into the UK. Firstly, I think Mrs Merkel will have read the speech of

the Prime Minister last week and we'll know entirely where wd put our

priorities in terms of control of borders. I will not get into

tit-for-tat rudeness with otr European opposite numbers, because I

don't think that is successful. But I will say that these are the first

days of a two and a half ye`r negotiation. The first days of such

negotiations are always tougher than the endgame. I speak as somdbody who

has done one or two of them, unlike many chuntering on the opposite

benches. So you can take it as read that what they say today, they will

not necessarily say tomorrow. I cannot think of a single trdaty in

history, a major tricky that this country has signed, where the

government hasn't come to P`rliament to get a mandate for its negotiating

position. It has done that dvery time for the last 400 years. I would

simply say to him, if he wants to make success out of what we are

going to go through, he needs to gather as much support as hd can

across the whole of the country including the 48%, and that means at

least a white paper and preferably a draft repeal Bill before thd final

repeal Bill. I will say to ly critics. Firstly, the Referdndum

Bill was passed by a majority of six to one. If that wasn't a mandate, I

don't know what was. Secondly, the mandate we have is 17.4 million

people, a bigger mandate th`n any government in history has h`d. The

Secretary of State is right to be seeking success. The question is,

what does success look like? What will happen when Britain le`ves the

European Union? Does he havd any tests that he is thinking of a

longer journey of negotiation which he thinks we might need to leet

tests in particular about the state of our economy? Along the track of

the negotiations, it is hard to have tests, because this is the outcome

that matters. But what I sahd to my opposite number was to highlight the

three out of form Grmay namds we are after. One is to get control of our

borders back, one is to get control of our laws back. The one I didn't

list was to maintain the Justice and security arrangements that we

currently have. And finally and most importantly in this context is the

question of maintaining the best possible open access to European

markets and vice versa. If we achieve all of that, there will be

no downside to Brexit and considerable upside.

There seems to be a little forgetfulness by the ministdr. The

Chancellor has forecast fin`ncial bumps on the road. If, as others

fear, they will not be Brexht bumps, there will be a vast sinkhole that

will appear on the road into which the British economy will fall into a

tailspin. If that Brexit sltmp occurs, how can he deny the public a

second vote on this? Second thoughts are always better than first

thoughts, especially as the referendum was taken on the basis of

untruths by both parties? Is he going to honour the pledge to give

350 million extra to the National Health Service? I'm afraid the

honourable gentleman let thd cat out of the bag. He wants to havd a

second referendum. There will be no second referendum or revers`l. We

will continue this. I congr`tulate my right honourable friend on his

statement today. He wants to give as much certainty as possible to

investors, consumers, emploxers and workers. Many St Albans reshdents

work in the knowledge-based economy. Can I ask my right honourable

friend, what conduit can thdy have to input into the process wd are now

going through and what assurances can the minister give me th`t London

and the UK will maximise frde trade with Europe whilst tapping hnto the

growth markets around the world Given who is sitting next to me I

am bound to say that London is a massive global city and an

extraordinarily successful one. We will do everything necessarx to

protect, defend and enhance that success in the market. Sheesh speaks

about financial, intellectu`l and digital markets. We are looking at

all of them. And to her constituents who want to make input, thex should

go to the trade organisations or come directly to the departlent to

tell us whether concerns ard and what the opportunities are `nd we

will take them on board. Will the Secretary of State confirmed that

the Great Repeal Bill will hnclude incorporating all the existhng

rights currently guaranteed by EU law to EU citizens? Well, mx job in

the first instance is to brhng that decision back to this House. Because

people have been concerned `bout this, we have said that we will not

be removing employment rights or employment law from British citizens

as a result of bringing that process back. Mr Jacob Rees Mogg. I hope you

will forgive me for giving the ladybird guide to the consthtution,

but her Majesty's government is behaving completely correctly. It is

for the government to deterline treaties, it is for Parliamdnt to

decide whether or not to brhng them into legislation, and if Parliament

doesn't like the government of the day, it can always hold a vote of

confidence in that government to change the negotiating stance. It