17/01/2017 House of Commons

in view of the high levels of personal debt? We are looking very

closely at, we will see some progress in the vein of future.

Statement, the Secretary of State for Health man. -- the Secretary of

State for Northern Ireland. Secretary James Brokenshire. Thank

you, Mr Speaker. With permission, I should like to make a statement

regarding forthcoming elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly. As

the House is aware, Martin McGuinness resigned as dippy Defence

Minister of Northern Ireland on Monday. As a result of which, the

First Minister also ceased to hold office. -- Deputy First Minister.

This began a seven-day period in which to fill both positions,

otherwise it would fall to me to fulfil my statutory obligations as

Secretary of State to call a fresh election to the Northern Ireland

Assembly. Over the past week, I having gauged intensively with

Northern Ireland's political parties to establish whether any basis

existed to resolve the tensions within the executive without

triggering an election. I've remained in close contact with the

Irish foreign minister, Charlie Flanagan. In addition, my right

honourable friend the Prime Minister has been kept fully informed and has

had conversations with the former first and deputy first ministers and

the Taoiseach Enda Kenny. Regrettably and despite all of our

collective efforts, it has not proved possible to find an agreed

way forward in the time available. In the Northern Ireland as the

yesterday, the Democratic Unionist Party nominated Arlene Foster as

First Minister whilst Sinn Fein declined to nominate anybody to the

post of Deputy First Minister. While I have some discretion in law over

the setting of a date for an election, given the circumstances in

which we find ourselves in Northern Ireland, I can see no case for

delay. As a result, once the final deadline has passed -- had passed at

5p and yesterday, I proposed Thursday the 2nd of March as the

date of the Assembly election. The Assembly itself will be dissolved

from the 26th of January, meaning the last sitting day will be the

25th of January, allowing time to conduct any urgent remaining

business before the election campaign begins in earnest. I am now

taking forward the process of submitting an order in council for

approval by Her Majesty the Queen on the advice of the Privy Council,

formally setting in law both the dates of the dissolution and the

election. In setting the stakes, I have consulted the chief electoral

officer for Northern Ireland chosen he has given the assurance in

operational matters relating to the running of the election. -- in

setting these dates. The decisions that I've taken have also been

informed by my ongoing discussion with Northern Ireland's political

leadership. All right honourable and honourable members in this House

will understand that elections by their nature are hotly contested.

This is part of the essence of our democracy. And nobody expects the

debates around the key issues in Northern Ireland to be anything less

than robust. I would, however, like to stress the following. This

election is about the future of Northern Ireland and its political

institutions are not just the Assembly, but all of the

arrangements that have been put in place to reflect relationships

through these islands. That is why it will be vital for the

campaign to be conducted respectfully and in ways which do

not simply exacerbate tensions and division. Once the campaign is over,

we need to be in a position to re-establish strong and stable

devolved government in Northern Ireland. And let me be very clear, I

am not contemplating any outcome other than the re-establishment of

strong and stable devolved government. For all the reasons I

set out in my statement last week, devolution remains this government's

strongly preferred option for Northern Ireland. It is about

delivering a better future for the people of Northern Ireland, and

meeting their expectations. For our part, the UK Government will

continue to stand by our commitments under the Belfast agreement and its

successors. We will do all that we can to safeguard political

stability. Over the past decade, Northern Ireland has enjoyed the

longest run of unbroken devolved government since before the demise

of the old Stormont parliament in 1972. It has not always been easy,

with more than a few bumps in the road. But with strong leadership,

issues that might once have brought the institutions down have been

resolved through dialogue. And Northern Ireland has been able to

present itself to the world in a way that would have been unrecognisable

a few years ago. A modern, dynamic and outward looking Northern

Ireland, that is a great place to live, work, invest and to do

business. Mr Speaker, Northern Ireland has come so far. We cannot

allow the games that have been made to be derailed. -- the gains. So,

yes, we have an election but once it is over, we need to be in a position

to continue building in Northern Ireland that works for everyone.

That is the responsibility on all of us and we all need to rise to the

challenge. And in that spirit, Mr Speaker, I commend this statement to

the house. Mr David Andersen. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Can I

thank the Secretary for his statement? Like most of us, I am

saddened we are here today. I know many good people in Northern Ireland

will feel exactly the same, the deep regret we have reached this impasse.

I've personally been involved for almost three Deco Baku -- decade in

Northern Ireland related issues and I have learned one thing, a

political vacuum should be avoided at all gods. I say to the Secretary

of State today, you must make sure that you are not only willing to

fill the vacuum but you must work with all parties to try and seek a

way forward so we avoid the nightmare scenario of six weeks of

increasingly bitter campaigning, which leave us in the same place as

when it started, with no solution in place to heal a huge divide and to

bring together those elected representatives of all the people of

Northern Ireland. I realise that the tension of an election dominates

people's minds and the news agenda may well be focused on other issues.

But Mr Speaker, I would suggest for the sake of all of us on these

islands, we highlight the critical importance of maintaining devolved

and functioning government in Northern Ireland. I want to see

young men and women from Blaydon continue to go to Belfast with

rucksacks on the backs, not back to the days when they went there with

rifles on their shoulders. Anyone who thinks this is some form of

local difficulty in Northern Ireland should think again. I want to see

the continuing peace and prosperity in Northern Ireland that is helping

to grow the economy and the life chances of all who live there. I

want the world to look at Northern Ireland and rightly applaud the

success we have witnessed over the past decades and hope none of us

want to see a divided Northern Ireland that turns itself, as we

have seen so often and so sadly in the past. There are huge issues

facing the people of Northern Ireland. Our exit from the European

Union and the real change it will bring to everybody's everyday lives.

The uncertain position from the government on the UK's land border

with Europe, how we keep improving economic performance, and

critically, how we deal with Northern Ireland's unique and

painful past. And without a stable, workable government, all these

issues will be much harder to progress. Last week, the Secretary

of State and the Prime Minister showed both myself and it out there

will be scope for the Northern Ireland first -- voice to be heard

in the run-up to negotiations on the EU, by the joint ministerial

Council. If that is the case, then secretary of state, I say to you

today, there's no reason for you not to engage with the parties and

communities and begin to resolve the issues that have led to the

breakdown, over the next six weeks, over the next eight weeks, and not

let the election be an excuse for not getting people together. And

let's Biglia, what is happening in Northern Ireland is just about who

is or isn't First Minister or Deputy First Minister or the debacle that

is the RHI scheme. There are real underlying issues. How we support

the victims of the troubles. The women's rights and the equality for

the LGBT communities. The treatment of ethnic minorities and migrant

groups, and above all, how we deal with Northern Ireland's past and the

crucial issue of trust and mutual respect. The Secretary of State has

to face the fact that he has the responsibility to ensure the

government deals with all parties in Northern Ireland on an equal basis

because that clearly is a matter of huge concern to the parties in

Northern Ireland. I wanted you credit to the Secretary of State,

for the common measure Tony is adopted by Robert at the same time,

I won't deny myself the optimism that those love Northern Ireland

still feel, and to that end, I will this house that we will do

everything we can develop but all parties need to look at what they

can do to prevent present impasse degenerating into total collapse let

me be very clear, we need to avoided if at all possible return to direct

rule. We need Northern Ireland politicians to stand up and be

counted, recognise their responsibility and accept that the

vehicle for addressing the needs and concerns of their communities if the

assembly and its executive. The need for continuing with the assembly

should be the number one priority for them and all of us in

Westminster. And the imposition of direct rule will serve no one. In

the weeks to come, no one's personal or political position, posturing

differences should get in the way it operates return to government and

work in Northern Ireland. Secretary of State. Thank you Mr Speaker and

can I welcome the right honourable gentleman's comment added emphasis

on seeing that we return to shared government within Northern Ireland

at the earliest possible opportunity. I welcome it support

and his comets in underlining the focus that we must all have, and the

shared responsibility that I think we all keenly feel in seeking to

achieve that outcome. And indeed, how we use the time ahead as best

and effectively as possible. He is aware that there is a relatively

short period of time following an election, around three weeks, in

order to form an executive. And we do need to use all of the time, up

to polling day and beyond, to see that we bring people together and we

retain the set of dialogue, as difficult and challenging as that

may be during an election period but it is important that we continue to

do so. It is that sense of political stability that obviously is the

primary responsibility of government and we recognise that very firmly.

Indeed, I have had discussions with all parties over the period since my

last statement and have been very focused on engaging widely, seeking

to encourage and promote a way forward, and that is absolutely what

I will continue to do in the time ahead. I don't think anybody should

prejudge the outcome of this election. And therefore, I think it

is right that we are absolutely focused on seeking to get the right

outcome, which is absolutely the continuation of devolved government

in Northern Ireland. That is what I think is in the absolute best

interests of the people of Northern Ireland, that allows things to move

forward. And I think as the honourable gentleman said, we must

all work collectively to that end and approach this in a positive way,

as to what we can achieve. Mr Laurence Robertson. Thank you, Mr

Speaker. Returning from Londonderry this morning, following meetings

yesterday, I detected and witnessed a great sense of frustration about

what is happening, and a great sense of disappointment that the assembly,

yet again, was under threat and indeed, this time, has fallen. Does

the Secretary of State therefore agree with me and indeed, the

proposal made by the shadow Secretary of State, that the coming

weeks should perhaps be used to explore all possibilities? Because

none of us want to see a return to direct rule but the worry is that we

are holding elections, as the secretary of state is indeed

required to do, and the possibility, the strong possibility must be that

those elections deliver the parties back to storm in roughly the same

numbers as they are now. So what is indeed the likelihood of making

progress under the present arrangement? -- back to Stormont.

Surely we should use the coming weeks to put in place a plan B,

where we can continue with some kind of devolved government and not bring

powers back to this house because direct rule is not a satisfactory

way of running Northern Ireland. I'm grateful to my honourable friend for

his comments and as he rightly identifies, the key issue is the

maintenance of devolved government in Northern Ireland. He is also

right, I think, to see how we ensure that we use the time available to

us, that communication lines, the dialogue remains open during the

election period. However difficult that may appear. But equally knowing

that the issues that have been highlighted, in terms of trust and

confidence in the institutions, the ability for parties to be able to

work together in that shared government arrangement, will still

need to be resolved. And therefore, I think it is with that sense of how

we can use this time to bring people together, that must be at the

forefront of our minds. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Secretary of

State for advance notice of his statement and I support the call is

made yesterday for the election to be conducted in a manner which looks

to the future and anticipates difficult but reasonable

negotiations for the establishment of an effective administration after

the election. No one will get everything they want from this

election or from the formation of the new executive but the people

that politicians serve deserve our best and most faithful efforts. The

victory in this election should belong to the people, not political

parties. This election has been brought about by a set of

circumstances that have their genesis in Belfast and will also

have their solutions in Belfast. And we will be onlookers to a great

extent but there are some areas in which the efforts made here may

actually help. I'm pleased to hear that dialogue between the secretary

of state and the parties in Northern Ireland will continue throughout the

election period so the ground is prepared for the negotiations over

holding office in March. Can he tell us whether he will take those

opportunities to reassure the parties that funding will not be

cut, particularly from the support for addressing the legacy issues.

The assembly suffers from the austerity fetish as much as the rest

of the UK but it carries additional burdens, and it needs those extra

resources. The past couple of months in the assembly have been marked by

some serious allegations. What support will he be able to offer the

assembly to have those allegations properly investigated and

resolutions found? The uncertainty of this election, with the

peculiarities surrounding it, adds to the uncertainty of the Brexit

mess. What support can the government offered to people and

businesses in Northern Ireland to smooth the next few months? And

finally, can you clarify what special arrangements he is putting

in place to consult on the Brexit negotiations while the election is

ongoing? I'm grateful to the honourable lady for highlighting the

issue in relation to the nature of elections, and again, the issues

that I think we all recognise that are at stake here. I can assure her

that we will be doing our part to maintain communication channels, to

maintain that open dialogue, and to again continue to encourage the

parties to think carefully about the nature of the campaign ahead on how

best to be able to bring people back together afterwards, to get on with

devolved government in Northern Ireland. She asks a number of more

detailed questions, and in relation to the issue of legacy, she will

know that it remains this government's intend to give effect

to the Stormont House agreement and the funding commitments that were

made in respect of that remain very firmly in place. In respect of

support to investigation and the enquiry in relation to the

allegations that in many ways have provided the trigger or the catalyst

to the situation that we now find ourselves in, as she indicated, I

continue to believe that the best solution for this lies within

Northern Ireland. This is a devolved matter and therefore, in terms of

the way in which answers are to be provided, it still seems right that

it should come from that direction. But I remain open to work with

parties on a cross community basis to see what support can be given

because ultimately, it is about getting answers to a number of these

issues, that matters so much. On the issue of the UK's departure from the

European Union, well, I think that as honourable and right honourable

members will have heard, the Prime Minister set out a very clear

position in respect of this government's approach and indeed,

emphasising those issues around the Common travel area, and indeed

strengthening the union as well. I know honourable and right honourable

members will have plenty of opportunity to raise further

questions on that later today. Project may I make a fervent plea to

my right honourable friend, that he should protect the interests of

former British soldiers currently being charged by the Sinn

Fein-supporting Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland,

with respect to events which took place more than 40 years ago. It

appears that the Director of Public Prosecutions issued a notice to news

desks, not for publication. Is this not an attempt to muzzle

Parliament and indeed to question the right of this House to support

those soldiers who sought to bring about peace in Northern Ireland? In

my usual way, I have been, as I think the House would acknowledge,

extremely generous to the honourable gentleman. The honourable gentleman

has asked a most interesting question and has delivered it with

his usual eloquence, but it does suffer from one disadvantage, and

that is that it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the

statement the Secretary of State is made. Nevertheless I have indulged

the honourable gentleman, and he can thank me on a daily basis. Secretary

of State... Mr Speaker, my honourable friend raises the

important issue in relation to legacy. As I indicated to this House

last week, I will never tyre of my praise for the work of our armed

forces personnel in actually securing the peace, securing the

stability and securing the arrangements that we see in Northern

Ireland today. Yes, I do have some concerns about imbalance within the

system, and therefore why I believe it is right that we do move forward

with the Stormont agreement and the legacy bodies that are set up there.

I will not comment on any individual decisions, and indeed, justice is

devolved in Northern Ireland and also it has its own processes that

remain in place in an independent way. But I hear very clearly the

very general and firm point that my friend makes in relation to balance

within the overall system trick of it is something I'm very keen to

address. Mr Speaker, this party has worked tirelessly in recent years to

move Northern Ireland forward, to make devolution work and to create

conditions for stable government in Northern Ireland. So we are deeply

disappointed, frustrated and angered by the decision of Sinn Fein to walk

away from devolved government and cause this election. And what is

this election about? It is fairly clear, it is not about the RHI

issue, because had it been, then we could have got on with sorting it

out, and indeed this election will serve to disrupt and delays ordering

those issues out. What it's about is Sinn Fein sinking opportune

political advantage, seeking to overturn the result of the election

held just a few months ago, and seeking to gain a list of

concessions from the Government on legacy issues, such as rewriting the

past and putting more soldiers and police men in the dock, and other

issues, and other concessions from the DUP. Let us be clear, we will

work through this election and afterwards to create devolved

government that is stable in Northern Ireland. But let this House

know and the people of all Ireland know that just as we have not even

into Sinn Fein demands in the past, we will not bow down and give into

Fein 's unreasonable demands going forward, because that is what this

election is all about Mr Speaker, I Recognise That There Are Strongly

Held Views On All Sides, And we do enter into an election period when

I'm sure that these issues will be hotly and keenly contested. What I

do very much welcome from what the right honourable gentleman has said

is that willingness to engage, to work things through, and that desire

to get back into stable, shared, devolved devilment. And I think that

is the focus that we all have in our minds in looking to the future of

Northern Ireland and how we can get on with governing in the best

interests of all in Northern Ireland. Does the Secretary of State

agree with me that all encumbered, unhindered press is absolutely vital

to the future elections? And would he agree that any chilling effect or

threats could actually undermine the very democratic essence of these

elections? We must have a free press. Well, I think the issues

around the election will I'm sure be keenly and hotly contested. From all

of my experience in seeing the experiences in Northern Ireland, the

press is fair and free and open and it has wide debate contained within

it. And so I think those building blocks that we see as a government

on freedom of the press, and indeed the strength of our judiciary and

legal processes as well, and seeing that those pillars of our democracy

are upheld. In truth, Northern Ireland has lurched from one

political crisis to another in recent years. Is it not time that

the Government urgently reviews constitutional arrangements covering

power-sharing, looking at issues like the title of First Minister and

the pity First Minister but also a range of other issues? Is that not

how the Government could add value in terms of long-term stability,

reviewing those Costa to show arrangements? I think we need to be

very careful at the moment as to the approach that we take. We are now

embarking on an election which, as I have said, I do not want to prejudge

the outcome of the election were indeed discussions that take place

during this period and through and beyond the short window of time that

we have after the election period, either. We will do all that we can

as the UK Government, that primary responsibility that we hold in

providing political stability within Northern Ireland. Clearly, the

parties will need to discuss and have that open dialogue which I hope

brings people back together again, but I think at this stage, seeking

to try and widen the debate can I think we need to be very focused on

the task at hand in bringing people back together again. Yes, the UK

Government will play its part in supporting the Belfast agreement and

its successors and bringing that element of stability and getting

devolved government back in Northern Ireland, which is what we all want

to see. Can I congratulate my right honourable friend for his calm and

measured approach during these difficult circumstances? Does he

show my concern that if indeed the resignation of Mr McGinnis was

political and not over the environment in issue, that the

intent of Sinn Fein is to halt these elections and then not to reappoint

afterwards, which would put pressure on my right honourable friends to

resort to direct rule, and all the consequences of that. Does he share

my concern that this is a real possibility? I have said that I am

concerned that an election campaign which seeks to divide and seeks to

make it that much harder to bring people back together again

afterwards clearly is a risk and one which I am concerned about, and one

which I would again remind and encourage people to think about

these issues very, very carefully. It's clear that the issues at stake

here go much wider than simply the renewable heat scheme which perhaps

was the issue which customised this. But I think we need to be very

careful and appreciate quite what is at stake. -- which crystallised

this. It is very important for people to be able to work together,

to maintain communication and dialogue so that we do see the

return of shared government in Northern Ireland for all communities

at the earliest possible opportunity. The Secretary of State

has rightly touched upon the fact that trust and confidence has to be

rebuilt in the suggestions in Northern Ireland. One of the best

ways of doing that is transparency. Transparency around the renewable

heating scheme and also, with the greatest respect to the Secretary of

State transparency around political parties and their donations to

elliptical parties operating in Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein has

precipitated this election. The people in Northern Ireland are

entitled to know, who funds Sinn Fein? Who is funding this Pallo

Jordan Assembly election? And by the same token, who is sponsoring and

funding the other political parties in Northern Ireland? Please don't

tell me he will reflect upon it, what is the Secretary of State going

to do about it? The honourable lady has made the point about political

donations and transparency over a number of weeks and months. And I

have a huge amount of sympathy for the view that she rightly takes the

Government that's why I did write out to all of the party leaders a

very short time ago to ask them for their views, to come back to me by

the end of this month, to be able to move things forward. I think it is

right that we look at that reform and that we actually start to put in

place changes that give that rate transparency to politics in Northern

Ireland. That's why I look forward to receiving those responses so that

we can move forward. Can I commend my right honourable friend's calm

and measured approach? Could he update the House on what he's going

to do to facilitate the voice of Northern Ireland, from politicians,

into the run-up to triggering Article 50? Obviously, the Assembly

will be the move very quickly, there is an election can do very short

period of time before we will trigger Article 50, and we want to

make sure that the voice of Northern Ireland is heard in our approach to

our future. I think it's important to recognise that while an election

has been called, that ministers other than the first and Deputy

First Minister remain in place within the executive, and that

therefore we will continue to issue invitations to the executive, to

send representation to each of the meetings that will continue through

the joint ministerial committee or through other means, and therefore,

it is that approach that will be taken as we look towards the

triggering of Article 50. But obviously, I will continue to have

my broad engagements across community, with business, with the

voluntary and community sector and more broadly, to ensure that we

continue to listen to and reflect upon the views of people in Northern

Ireland, as we look to the negotiations ahead. Could the

Secretary of State share with us something more of his thoughts on

what he expects to happen after an election in Northern Ireland? Does

he accept that the problems will remain, and without him calling a

public enquiries into renewable heat, or if he cannot find a way to

do that, making it clear that he fully supports a public inquiry?

Because without a public inquiry, public confidence in our political

settlement will sink even lower and make restoration of the executive

even more difficult. That's what people are telling me on the streets

over the last few days and the last week, that they basically need to

see clarity. That we are having an election here in a fog. It is quite

clear that the issues surrounding the renewable heat incentive scheme

are very much at the heart of what has led to the election that I have

now called. I think it is right that we do get answered around this. I

think it is absolutely critical in terms of re-establishing trust and

confidence and accountability, giving answers to the public in

relation to what has taken place here. As I've indicated, I think

that it is right for that, as much as it possibly can do, to come from

Northern Ireland itself. This was a devolved issue, this was something

that relates to decisions within Northern Ireland. But I stand ready

to work with and consider options on a cross community basis which will

command support across the community. It is actually how we get

those answers and see that we are injecting those back into the whole

process. I'm sure the Secretary of State and others in the House may

reflect on the irony that this election has been caused by the

resignation of a man who spent a lot of his life trying to use violence

to overcome the democratic will of the people of Northern Ireland to be

part of this United Kingdom. But will he also agree with me that it

is vital that work is done to ensure that in dealing with the past, those

who have put their lives on the line to defend this democracy, are not

unduly hounded by these legal processes? I think it is absolutely

right that we have a system that is fair just, balanced and

proportionate. I've been very clear on that on a number of occasions.

That's why I strongly believe that the framework of Stormont house, the

legacy institutions which are contemplated within that, divider

framework and way forward to achieve that. Because I am concerned that

there is an imbalance in the system with a focus on state -based actors.

And actually getting answers for those who lost loved ones as a

consequence of terrorist atrocities is really, really essential. That's

why I want to see this moving forward, and why we strongly believe

that change is required. We all wish everyone well in Northern Ireland in

trying to resolve these current difficulties. Can I pass the

Secretary of State on what he's doing with respect to the Irish

government, working in partnership with the Irish government? The

British and Irish governments are co-and tours of the Good Friday

Agreement. So what plans has he got to work with the Irish government,

is he planning a summit, is he panning talks, what concrete

measures is the Secretary of State planning to take with the Irish

government, to help resolve these difficulties together? As I've

indicated to the House, I've had regular, ongoing communication with

Charlie Flanagan, the Irish foreign minister, and indeed the

conversations that the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach have had

together. I certainly do intend to meet Charlie Flanagan in the very

near future. So that we can assess the current situation, and determine

how we as two governments can seek to encourage, promote and see that

we are bringing people together in this way, such that, as I've said,

we see the maintenance and continuation of devolved government

in Northern Ireland. What alternative to direct rule

would be available in these elections do not see an immediate

power-sharing government? Mr Speaker, I indicated that it is, I

think it would be premature and wrong to contemplate something other

than devolved government in Northern Ireland. I think that is where we

have to have all of our focus in the weeks ahead. That encouragement to

the parties, the dialogue, the communication that I think is

absolutely necessary. And while I know that others will say what is

this, what if that, what if we don't get to a position where we have

that, well, I'm not contemplating that. I'm contemplating how we use

the time available to us, to maintain devolved government, to get

people back into that power-sharing arrangement, and getting on,

frankly, with what people in Northern Ireland want which is a

settled situation, taking Northern Ireland forward and seeing that

positive, optimistic Northern Ireland I know if parent has so much

more to give. Thank you Mr Speaker. Central to those political

institutions has been the principle of power-sharing. So what efforts

will be Secretary of State and the British government, working with the

Irish government do to ensure that those principles of power-sharing on

a mutual understanding, respect for political difference, which have

been withered away over the last number of months, will be strictly

adhered to following these elections and what work with the Irish

government will actually take place within the next number of weeks to

do just that? Well, I've already indicated to the house the dialogue

and discussion we have had with the Irish government. And the work that

we will continue and the discussions that we will continue to have. But I

would stress as I said in my statement that this government

remains committed to the Belfast agreement and its successors. All of

what that means. Therefore, we will play our part to support the

parties, to support discussion and dialogue, to see that we move to

that stable, devolved government position that I think underpins so

much of the work, so much of the positive work we see in Northern

Ireland. And returning to that period of stability which is what

everybody would wish to see. Foreign direct investment into Northern

Ireland has been a great success in recent years. Will my right

honourable friend reassure me that he had his office will do all they

can to maintain a positive momentum during this period of political

instability? Absolutely, I can give that assurance to my honourable

friend because Northern Ireland has seen so much success in terms of

foreign direct investment. I think the region with the greatest foreign

direct investment outside of the City of London. I think that

underlines the huge potential I see, the huge ability for Northern

Ireland to continue to flourish and do so much more and absolutely yes,

we will continue to underline that message. Jeffrey Donaldson. I echo

the comments made by the honourable member for South Belfast. He and I

and many others in this house have worked hard to bring the peace

process to where it is today and we have taken risks and I despair of

where we are just now. But can I say to the Secretary of State that if he

is going to sit on his hands in the next six weeks and do nothing about

the current crisis, then he can forget three weeks after an election

to get devolution up and running. I support the suggestion made by the

honourable member for South Belfast for which there is cross community

support, that this government get on with holding a public enquiry into

the RHI scheme that Sinn Fein have blocked. -- public inquiry. I can

say to the honourable gentleman that this government will continue to do

all it can to support the parties to find a resolution and the way

through. As I have already indicated in answers the previous questions, I

remain open to consider issues that command cross community support in

order to find answers to be able to get to the root of issues in respect

of the RHI enquiry and therefore, I will continue to hear those points

that are made on that costume unity basis because ultimately, whatever

is done must command confidence and support in Northern Ireland in order

for this to be successful. Alison McGovern. The connection between the

people of Merseyside and the people of Northern Ireland are many and

they run deep. Can I press the Secretary of State on what he's

doing, given the current political situation, the effect on Stormont's

budget, to absolutely make sure the people of Northern Ireland lose out?

The obvious way for the people of Northern Ireland not to lose out is

to see the re-establishment of devolved government at the earliest

popular -- possible opportunities work can continue, but it can get

set and programmes can be put in place to take Northern Ireland

further forward. That is why I make the point in those clear terms, in

the focus and attention and effort that give in working with the

parties to encourage dialogue, discussion, to bring people together

because that is the most powerful and effective way to give effect to

what the honourable lady was saying. Alistair Carmichael. Mr Speaker, we

can have as many elections as we choose to hold but we will only get

the strong and stable devolved government that the secretary of

state says he wants when we have trust between the parties and

transparency in the workings of the executive and in order to get that

now, we need an independent examination of the conduct of the

RHI will stop the secretary of state as the locus under the 2005 act to

order that enquiry. It is surely apparent that nobody else is going

to do it. He must. Well, I agree with the right honourable gentleman

in terms of that sense of trust which has clearly broken down in

Northern Ireland, hence the situation that we now find ourselves

in. I hear the point that he makes clearly in relation to the need to

get answers, the need for that transparency, the need for an

inquiry and as I previously indicated, I strongly believe the

best way to achieve that is by Northern Ireland being able to do

that itself because that is where the issues arose, that is where

devolution holds fire. But as I have already indicated to other parties,

I will listen to and reflect upon suggestions, proposals that come

forward on a costume unity basis because ultimately, it is that cross

community bases -- cross community basis, it is that cross community

basis which command confidence and respect and ensure that any

investigations and inquiries are balanced and ensure they get to the

answer is that people want and that accountability is shown. Mr Speaker,

the Secretary of State... As he charts the course set by the Good

Friday and St Andrews agreement in re-establishing the devolved

institutions but the Prime Minister's commitment to data hard

Brexit will cause widespread concern in Northern Ireland. Can I ask him

to outline how he will work in full partnership with the Irish

government on this matter while the assembly and executive is not

functioning? I welcome the honourable gentleman's support for

our work to ensure the return of stable devolved government, although

I don't recognise his characterisation of what the Prime

Minister has said. I think she has set out a bold, positive vision of

what this country can be and what this country will be outside the

European Union but yes, of course there is a negotiation to come. Of

course we have had initial dialogue and discussion with the Irish

government on how we get the best possible outcome for Northern

Ireland and how that has been reflected in what the Prime Minister

has said today, around the Common travel area and strengthening the

union. That is precisely the approach we will take. Jim Shannon.

Would be secretary of state care to outline exactly what people are

voting for if Sinn Fein refused to work with the DUP or set a possible

criteria or ask for possible concessions? How is the Secretary of

State ensuring that Sinn Fein are not calling the shots, excuse the

pun, on the elected government of Northern Ireland, and the electorate

know their vote will not be ignored by the pithy fascinations of a party

who simply want their own weight and do not like being challenged by a

strong DUP team? Ultimately, this election is about the future of

Northern Ireland, its future direction. In a democracy, I'm quite

sure that these issues will be debated to and fro in the coming

weeks. That is absolutely the whole point of the political and

democratic system that we operate. How much is at stake here. As I said

yesterday, how much I would encourage people to take part and

vote at that election. Karen Smith. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The people of

Northern Ireland are magnificent people and they have got used to

living with a sense of peace over the last 18 years and they need hope

now going forward. I have just listened to the Prime Minister's

speak and she talked about making practical arrangements about the

border, about making it a priority. Those are warm words in this context

today. She has managed a phone call. She should be here. She should have

been there. I've listened to the Secretary of State talk about his

phone call and his activity over the last week and with due respect, I

think it is wholly inadequate. The elections are about the future of

Northern Ireland but they are actually about all our futures, on

the island of Ireland and the island in which we live. What meetings will

he be having with the Irish government with the Taoiseach? What

will those conversations involving the next few weeks? What hope can he

offer today to the people of Northern Ireland? As I have

indicated, it is this government's clear intent and focus on seeing the

return of devolved government in Northern Ireland. That is what I

think is absolutely in the best interests of Northern Ireland. That

is why I will be continuing to do all that I can to bring the

political parties together because ultimately, that has been a part of

the issues at stake here, in terms of some of that political division.

But yes, of course, as I have indicated to the house today, we

have had continued dialogue and discussion with the Irish government

as well. We will continue to keep them closely informed. And as I have

indicated to my right honourable friend, I intend to meet the Irish

Foreign Minister very shortly to discuss the current position, how we

can work together and ultimately, get the re-establishment of the form

of government, that sense of the politics moving forward, and yes,

how we should I think be positive about what we can achieve here. I'm

certainly not going into this in a negative way. It is about how we can

get on with this and make it happen. Sammy Wilson. The secretary of state

has said today that he is committed to any action having cross community

support in Northern Ireland. Since this crisis has been brought about

by Sinn Fein's demand to have more security force personnel placed in

the dock, taken to court and to have politically motivated inquests into

deaths caused by the security forces, will he give a commitment

today that there will be no money for inquests which are politically

motivated, no releasing of security force files which have security --

national security implications and that he will not persuade Sinn Fein

to re-enter government at the expense of soldiers being dragged

through the courts? On the issue of legacy, I think Stormont House,

which all the parties signed up to, provided the right framework and way

forward. I hold very keen responsibilities in relation to

national security and I feel those very starkly in terms of the here

and now of safety on the streets of Northern Ireland and what that means

more broadly. I think it is important that we are able to find a

way forward in relation to the whole issue of legacy. That it is more

balanced, more proportionate, is able to see Northern Ireland looking

to the future rather than looking to the past and I think it is that

framework that we must be focused upon to be able to move things

forward in that way. He will well know the issues that are set out

there, the bodies that are set out their, the weighing gateman has

taken place over many months. I believe there is a way forward in

that but it is having the framework and intent and having the balance

and proportionate approach that I continue to underline. Margaret

Greenwood. What assessment has been made of the effect of the political

instability on potential investment into Northern Ireland? I have

certainly had some discussions with some business representatives. It is

important that we get back into a stable devolved government at the

earliest opportunity. Again, that is the most powerful way to underline

Northern Ireland's moving forward and there is so much we can be

positive about, the jobs that have been created, the foreign direct

investment that has gone in and so many fantastic businesses in

Northern Ireland. That is what we should be celebrating and it is that

positive, optimistic viewpoint of what Northern Ireland's economies

that we should be advancing and taking forward. Mr Speaker, after

the assembly election in March agreement will need to be reached on

a new power-sharing executive. However, if this doesn't happen,

there is a very real possibility of returning to direct rule from

Westminster. Does the secretary think it is acceptable for the

people of Northern Ireland, who voted to remain in the European

Union, to witness the triggering of article 50 while they live in total

political limbo? It underlines my general point on the need to get

back to devolved government at the earliest opportunity. But as I have

indicated, we do intend to trigger Article 50 by no later than the end

of March that is the approach we have taken. That is the work that

continues and indeed, the way in which, as I have said, invitations

will continue to be made to appropriate meetings to the

executive, notwithstanding the current situation.

Further to the comments made by my colleague from East Antrim, there

are concerns within my constituency with the Government's eagerness to

set up an Assembly immediately after the elections, that they could

possibly contemplate some form of side deals with Republicans in order

to get it up and running. Can I gently warm the Secretary of State

that that will be an unacceptable situation to have? Well, I say to

the honourable gentleman that there is a limited period under law in

order to form a new executive. It is around three weeks following a poll.

That's why I make the point about maintaining open dialogue, thinking

about how we can bring parties together. It has to be that sense of

commanding support from across community, which is why we do need

to listen keenly and intently to the voices of his party and other

parties in respect of this process ahead. But I do stress to him that

need for dialogue and discussion and the need to focus on those

principles in the Belfast agreement and its successors, those things

that all parties have signed up to. I think that provides us with the

framework, and that's what we need to get on and do. As we face the

current phase of challenges, I think it is right that we should mourn the

passing of Dermot Gallagher, former bullion of the department of foreign

affairs and one of the linchpins for so much of this process come

bringing us from transfixed to transactions to transformations. We

need to emulate his purposeful ethic in the time ahead. Will the

Secretary of State recognised that after the elections, there will be

negotiations, and will he recognise that those negotiations will have to

be more inclusive, Morecambe free hands of a more fundamental than

what passed for negotiations in Stormont house? And the outcome will

have to be more robust and reliable than what we got with the fresh hour

agreement? I certainly pay tribute to Dermot Gallagher and obviously

send my condolences to all his friends, family, all of those who

remember him and the conjugation that he made. As I've indicated, I

don't want to prejudge the outcome of this election, nor indeed

discussions that take place. I earnestly want to see that through

this election period, however possible that can be achieved. And

equally in terms of discussions that take place there afterwards. But it

has to be a position which creates that stability and sense of shared

power arrangements, which allows Northern Ireland to move on from

where we currently sit. That has to absolutely be our focus and

intention and indeed why I make the points which I do about being

thoughtful and conscious of the nature of the campaign itself, such

that we are able to bring people back together afterwards. Mr

Speaker, can the Secretary of State confirm that post-election, the

framework of a devolved Assembly, of a shared executive, is the settled

framework for moving forward? And that joint authority with the

Republic of Ireland or wholesale renegotiation of the agreements that

are already in place to not form part of his plan for moving forward?

If he does not give expression to that certainty, further drift will

occur, and we've got to net this in the bud now. I can confirm that that

is absolutely my intent, that is absolutely the approach that I take

to this. It's about getting through the election, about seeing the

re-establishment of the executive, seeing the re-establishment of

devolved government in the way that we have seen. And therefore whilst I

hear order of the broader discussions and broader talk,

actually that has to be where we focus, how we re-establish that

trust and confidence in the institutions that we have, such that

Northern Ireland is able to move forward. The Ulster Unionist Party

want to see a strong and stable devolved government that works for

everyone. But this crisis is about trust, relating to the two main

parties in Northern Ireland. The Secretary of State has said that he

is committed to the Belfast agreement and its successors. And

yet this morning on the radio, we heard the DUP executive minister

saying he had no intention to increment the St Andrews agreement

in full. Surely this undermines all agreements, if you're not willing to

tie yourself to what you've agreed? With the minister looked at the

structures of the Belfast agreement and how we get back to the joint

election of the first and Deputy First Minister? I did not hear the

comments this morning when it's difficult for me to comment

directly. For as I've indicated, the UK Government stands by its

commitments under the Belfast agreement. I think it is how we are

able to use the time ahead to look at ways in which we can, which gaps

and in which we can see devolved power-sharing arrangements put in

place at the earliest opportunity. With the Secretary of State agree

with me that in the past months and years, the way in which problems

have been resolved is when all parties dedicated themselves to

working through those problems? Yesterday we had a Sinn Fein Deputy

First Minister refusing to be re-elected, and even after the

election, indicating that they will not nominate then. Walking away is

not the solution, working through the problem is most certainly is. I

think we can look to Northern Ireland's past, where division has

existed and some people have said that it's not possible to breach

that. And yet Northern Ireland has shown what can be done. And I think

we need to reflect on Northern Ireland's past, the political

achievements that have been reached and the strengths of dialogue, of

discussion, of bringing people together in that way as we look to

the future. I hope that we will see that return of devolved Vermont.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. -- devolved government. Belfast politicians

begin a leak quote the dogs on the street, but if they were to

summarise their position on this, it would be barking mad. This is not

the time, Secretary of State, for you to be a bystander in these

discussions. Or to fail to recognise what the Prime Minister last week

recognised, that no-one can or should benefit from their

instability, and for wrecking the progress of the political

institutions that we have fought so hard to attain for Northern Ireland.

I say to the honourable gentleman that I do not and will not be a

bystander in relation to these issues. It is important that the UK

Government plays its role in supporting the parties, in

fulfilling our obligations in relation to providing political

stability in Northern Ireland. That is what we will use the time ahead

to achieve. Because the issues at stake are significant. The issues in

relation to the political future of Northern Ireland are very, very

clear. That's why I make the points that I do about the collective

response River Tees that we all hold and all feel in being able to take

this forward and get back to that positive outlook for Northern

Ireland. -- collective responsibilities. Mr Speaker, the

Secretary of State stated that with strong leadership, issues which

might once have brought their own institutions could be resolved

through dialogue. Could he therefore assure the House that the Prime

Minister will give that strong leadership, and as the vice-chair of

the all-party group on Ireland, I echo the sentiment of my honourable

friend the member for St Helens come in calling the Prime Minister to put

foot to the pedal and get that 100% support. I can underline to the

honourable gentleman the commitment that the Prime Minister gets to

these issues. The way in which she has been kept very closely informed

and updated, the discussions that she has had with the former First

Minister and Deputy First Minister. And indeed, the discussion that she

had with the Taoiseach. We are committed as a government to seeing

the return of devolved government, to seeing a positive outcome after

these elections take place. That is what the people of Northern Ireland

want to see and what we all have that shared and collective drive to

achieve, and we all need to be focused on achieving. Point of order

which relates I gather to the immediate next business. Thank you,

Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, in our constitution, Parliament and sure

you will agree is supposed to be sovereign. We need a system which

gives Parliament hours over ministers and restores public trust.

Not my words but the use of the now Prime Minister in 2007. I will be

scrutinising a minister shortly on the applications of Brexit for Wales

- but you share my concern that one of the most fundamental issues

facing this country in a generation, the Prime Minister chose not to

speak to this this morning but to the media and foreign ambassadors?

Churchill would not have done it, a little bit would not have done it,

but when it comes to this House, Mr Speaker, this lady is not for

turning up! I am grateful to the honourable gentleman for his point

of order. I have not got all of the Presidents in front of me but I

think there has been a developing phenomenon in recent decades whereby

under successive governments, important statements have sometimes

been made outside the House, which would have welcomed being made first

inside the House. I am pragmatic in these matters, and what I would say

to the honourable gentleman and two others who might share his concern

is, I heard of the Prime Minister's important speech today, and my first

concern was that a senior member of the government should come to the

House on the same day to address us on the same matter. And I had

contact with the powers that be to make precisely that point. I am

pleased to say that we do have in our midst and indeed in my line of

vision the Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union, whom I

imagine the honourable gentleman will wish to interrogate in due

course. Meanwhile, let's hear from the Secretary of State. I will say

to the honourable gentleman who has just spoken that I have spent many

years sitting on those benches, hoping... We did not have the

opportunity at all to interrogate Mr Tony Blair after he had been on the

radio and television! But today is a Parliamentary day and I wish to

share with Parliament what I think are some important points. I would

like to the House on the Government's plans for exiting the

European Union. Today, the Prime Minister is setting up a plan for

Britain. It is a plan to ensure that we embrace this moment of change to

build a confident global trading nation that seizes the new

opportunities before it and a fairer, stronger society at home and

bracing bold economic and social reform. It is a plan which

recognises that the referendum vote was not one to pull up tall, which

is and retreat from the world, but rather a vote of confidence in the

UK's ability to succeed. It is a plan to build a strong new

partnership with our European partners while reaching beyond the

borders of Europe to forge deeper links with old allies and new ones.

Today, we set out 12 objectives in the negotiation to come. They answer

the questions of those who have been asking what we intend while not

undermining the UK's negotiating position. We are clear what we seek

is that new partnership, not a partial EU membership, not a model

adopted by other countries, not a position which means we're half in

and half-hour. Let me address of our aims in turn. First, we will provide

certainty wherever possible, while recognising we are about to enter a

two sided negotiation. We have already made announcements about

agriculture payments and student funding. Our proposal regarding EU

law and UK law is designed to make the process as smooth as possible.

At the point of exit, the same rules and laws will apply, and it will

then be for this Parliament to determine changes in the country's

interests. For we also intend to take control of our own laws and end

the authority of the European Court of Justice in the UK. Laws have been

made in this Parliament and in the devolved assemblies and interpreted

by our judges, not those in Luxembourg. -- laws will be made. We

will continue to engage with the devolved administrations and ensure

that as powers our return from Brussels to the UK, the right powers

come to Westminster and the right powers are passed to Edinburgh,

Cardiff and Belfast. Another key objective will be to maintain the

Common travel area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland. No-one

wants to see a return to the borders of the past. In terms of

immigration, we will remain an open, tolerant nation. We will continue to

welcome the brightest and the best and ensure that immigration continue

to bring benefits in terms of addressing skill shortages where

they exist. But we will manage our immigration system properly, which

means free movement from the European Union cannot continue as

before. We want to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens

who are already in this country and make such a great contribution to

our society already, and in tandem with that protect the rights of UK

citizens in EU countries. Would like to resolve this issue at

the early possible moment. -- earlier. Already UK law goes further

than EU minimums in many areas but as we shift the UK law, we will

ensure that workers' rights are not just protected but enhanced. In

terms of trade, we want to build a more open, outward looking,

confident nation that is a global champion for free trade. Membership

of the EU's internal market means accepting its four freedoms, in

terms of the movement of goods, services, capital and people, and

complying with the EU's rules and regulations. That would effectively

mean not leaving the European Union at all. So we do not propose to

maintain membership of the EU single market. Instead, we will seek the

broadest possible access to it through a comprehensive free trade

agreement with the EU. We want it to cover goods and services and be as

ambitious as possible. This is not a zero-sum game. It should be in the

interests of both the UK and the European Union. It is in all our

interests, that financial services continue to be provided freely

across borders, that integrated supply chains are not disrupted and

that trade continues in as barrier free away as is possible. While we

will seek the most open and possible market in the European Union, we

also want to further trade links with the rest of the world. So we

will deliver the freedom of the UK to strike trade agreements with

other countries. The Department for International trade has already

started to prepare the ground and it is clear there is enormous interest

around the globe in forging new links to the UK. Full membership of

the EU's Customs union would prohibit new international trade

deals so we do not intend to remain part of the common commercial policy

ought to be bound by the common external tariff. Instead, we will

seek a customs agreement with the European Union with the aim of

ensuring that cross-border trade remains as barrier free as possible.

Clearly, how this is achieved is a matter for negotiation. The UK is

one of the best places in the world for science and innovation, with

some of the best universities in the world. So we must continue to

collaborate with our European allies. When it comes to crime,

terrorism, security, we will aim to further cooperation with EU

countries. We will seek practical arrangements in these areas to

ensure we keep our continent secure and defend our shared values.

Finally in terms of our exit, we have said repeatedly that it would

be no one's interest for it to be disorderly, with any sort of cliff

edge, the word used over there, as we leave the European Union. So we

intend to reach broad agreement about the terms of our new

partnership with the EU by the end of the two-year negotiation

triggered by Article 50. But then we will aim to deliver an orderly

process of implementation. That does not mean an unlimited transitional

period where the destination is not clear but time for both the UK and

EU member states to prepare for new arrangements whether it is in terms

of customs arrangements, regulation of financial services, cooperation

over criminal justice and immigration controls. These are the

aims and objectives we set today for negotiations to come. So our

objectives are clear, to deliver certainty and clarity wherever we

can, to take control of our own laws, to protect and strengthen the

union, to maintain the Common travel area with the Republic of Ireland,

to control immigration, to protect the rights of EU nationals in the UK

and UK nationals in the EU, to protect workers' rights, to allow

free trade with European markets, to forge new trade deals with other

countries, to boost science and innovation, to protect and enhance

cooperation over crime, terrorism and security and to make our exit

smooth and orderly. It is the outline of an ambitious new

partnership between the UK and the countries of the European Union. We

are under no illusions, agreeing terms that work for both the UK and

the 27 nations of the European Union will be challenging and no doubt,

there will be bumps on the road once talks begin. We must embark on a

negotiation clear, however, that no deal is better than a bad deal. As

the Prime Minister made clear today, the UK could not accept a punitive

approach. So let me be clear, we do not expect this outcome. We are

confident that if we approach these talks in the spirit of goodwill, we

can deliver a positive deal which works to the mutual benefit of all.

It is absolutely in our interests that the EU succeeds and in the EU's

interest interests that we succeed, too. We do not want the European

Union to fail. We wanted to prosper politically and economically. We

will seek to convince our eyes that a strong new partnership with the UK

will help them to do so. -- our allies. Our approach is not about

cherry picking but reaching a deal which fits the aims of both sides.

We understand the EU wants to preserve its four freedoms and chart

its own course. That is not a project UK will now be apart of. And

so we will leave the single market and the institutions of the European

Union. We will make our own laws and decisions about immigration. And let

me be crystal clear today, if there was any doubt, the final deal agreed

between the UK and EU will be put to a vote in both Houses of Parliament

before it takes effect. To conclude, we are leaving the European Union

but we're leaving Europe. We will continue to be reliant on partners,

willing allies and close friends to European neighbours. -- we are not

leaving Europe. We anticipate success, not failure but we are

ready for any outcome. The UK will embrace its new place in the world

with optimism, strength and confidence. Thank you Mr Speaker.

Sur Keir Starmer. Thank you Mr Speaker, and can I thank the

secretary of state for giving me an advanced copy of this statement? Mr

Speaker, the Prime Minister's speech which she has just given is the most

important one she has made, it is about the future of our relationship

with the EU and our position in the world. The place for such a speech

is here. At this dispatch box. That is not just a convention. That is so

that MPs across this house can ask the Prime Minister directly on

behalf of their constituents about the plans she has for their future.

There are many questions. For many months, the Labour Party has been

demanding fullest possible access to the single market, emphasising the

risks of leaving the customs union, arguing for a collaborative

relationship with our EU partners, emphasising the need for

transitional arrangements, and the need for entrenchment of workers'

rights. Today, the Prime Minister has rightly accepted these in her

plan and I acknowledge that. She has given little detail about how that

is to be achieved and there are some unanswered questions and some big

gaps. It is, in truth, a half in, half out plan. She has not... Let me

give an example. The Prime Minister says that she doesn't want the

jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. But she wants a

comprehensive trade agreement. Sooner or later, she and others will

have to face the fact that any such agreement will have a dispute

resolution clause and that will have to be independent of this country.

It will not be by reason and resolution in the High Court in

London, according to English law. So there will have to be, as she has

avoided fronting up to some of these essential questions. But if the

Prime Minister achieves all she has set out to achieve, she will fall

short of hard Brexit, that many in business and trade unions have

feared, the Brexit of no deal, their trade agreements, out of any customs

union and at arms length with our EU relations. -- their trade

agreements. It is good she has ruled out hard Brexit at this stage. But

as the Prime Minister knows, setting out ambitions is the easy bit.

Delivery is more difficult, much more difficult. The Prime Minister

has taken the precarious course of taking the UK out of single market

membership and changing the customs arrangements. This will cause

concern to businesses, as the secretary of state knows, and to

trade unions and the Prime Minister should have been more ambitious. But

I accept that form follows function. So let me set out in terms what

Labour will hold the Prime Minister to account for, as far as trade is

concerned. Tariff free access to the single market. Access to the single

market unencumbered by impediment, and I paused there, this is what was

in the exchange of letters with Nissan, it is what all businesses

want, and all trade unions want for those dealing in goods and services.

Alignment of regulatory bodies to avoid dual bureaucracy or worse,

diverted. And a deal that works for goods and services. That is the test

we set out today. It is the test we will return to throughout the

negotiations and it is the test to be applied when the deal is reached.

And that is why the concession on a vote at the end of the negotiations

is significant. We have been demanding that for months. It has

not been given before today. It is significant because it means that we

can ensure that those tests are met throughout the process and at the

end of the process. The sting in the tail in the plan this morning if the

threat to destroy the economic model which has been in place for many

decades if the ambition is not reached. This is a very serious

threat. That model, a shared model, about which there has been consensus

for decades across this house, is designed to share prosperity,

protect workers' rights, and improve living standards. There is no

mandate for reckless disregard of that model and of so much that this

country stands for. The Prime Minister described that model,

resorting to that model, as an act that would be one of self harm for

the EU. It would, Mr Speaker, be an act of huge self harm for the UK to

abandon the economic model that we have had in place for so many years.

It is also totally inconsistent, totally inconsistent with any

meaningful commitment to workers' rights and a fairer society. So that

sting in the tail, that threat undermines the ambition is a plan

that I recognise. Let me touch on wider issues. The UK and EU have

usually benefited from our collaborative work in the field of

criminal Justice, anti-terrorism, research, medicine, science,

technology, arts and culture and much else. We should be seeking to

preserve that collaboration, not destroy it. Yet the Prime Minister

said today, and I quote, "We do not seek to hold onto bits of membership

as we leave". Let me give some examples of the bits she should seek

to retain... Order. No, the honourable gentleman is a learning

and celebrated and cerebrally individual. I don't want to

interrupt him but the convention is that the reply is normally half the

length of the statement so I can indulge the honourable gentleman

modestly. There normally a bit of attitude but I was concerned when he

had some, particularly as he is a lawyer! Mr Speaker, without details,

the European Aviation Safety Agency which deals with safety, the

European medicines agency and of course, Europol, which I worked with

for many years. These are the bits of the EU we should be seeking to

retain and not to throw away. Mr Speaker, I end by saying this. It

was the previous Prime Minister who got us to this place without any

forethought or planning. This Prime Minister has now chosen a risk

implementation plan. She owns the consequences now. She owns them in

2019 and beyond that. Thank you. The secretary of state. When we started

down this route, I said to the house that the government have been given

a national instruction which we would attempt to interpret in the

national interest. It seemed to me that was the right approach to this,

not a 52-48 approach but one that encompassed the interests of

everybody. And I hope today that we had done that today. I mean in terms

of the honourable gentleman's, and he's a very talented man, his

questions were Azarenka as you'd expect, asking us about membership

of the single market and we answer that. We laid out the claims of a

customs union, another of his questions. He asked for detailed to

scrutinise the plans and we will give it. In the context of not

undermining our negotiation, that is entirely what we have tried to do. I

had hoped that we would see support from some members of the benches

opposite for what we think is a responsible, thoughtful, but

realistic plan that takes on board the instructions we have been given

by the British people. -- people, to take us out of the European Union

but in a way which preserve that interest as best we can, whether

they are security, economic interests or whatever. Let me deal

with all the specific points he raised. I will put aside my

disappointment at tone. He says a free trade arrangement will have do

have a dispute resolution procedure. So it will cover they nearly all do

but it does not have to be the European court of justice. We can

agree but he has got the thrust of it wrong. As for other things,

tariff free, I agree, impediment free, I agree, alignment regulation

May be necessary in some aspects and we will see at the negotiating

developments. -- develops. On goods and services, I agree. He's not

putting up any hurdle but frankly we don't intend to cross ourselves.

This question of threats, it is not a threat, this was the Chancellor,

in response to an interview, saying, if you go down the route of a

punitive approach, this is the consequence, what will happen.

Nations defend themselves. No one says what we want to do, it is

specifically what we don't want to do. We want the freest possible

relationship, the most friendly possible we can get and that is what

we will set out to do. You can take it as read that all the

issues he raised, we will be addressing over time in this House

and most particularly we'll be addressing in the negotiating

chamber with the Europeans. I think that they'll have as much interest

as we do. That is what the negotiation is predicated upon. We

are going to do what is in the interests of everyone, ourselves, if

Europeans and owl our neighbours in part of globe -- and our neighbours

and our part of the globe. That's what we intend to do.

I'm sure we'll acknowledge the Prime Minister's speech, it's principled,

reasonable and statesmanlike. Does he agree that, in relation to

what the 27 member states, heads of Government said, only a few weeks

ago, the last counsel sum commitment, that there would be no

access to the single market unless we accepted all the four freedoms --

summit. That this does represent a difficulty. Does he accept therefore

that it's essential that we clear that with the other member states on

the basis of principle, reasonableness and statesmanship?

I have tried throughout the six months so far not to respond to

sometimes the emotional comments we've heard from various people

around the continent. I'm sort of slightly surprised in him, however.

He of all people would pull me up if I confused access to single market

with membership of single market. Pretty much every country in the

world that's not subject to sanctions has access to the single

market. We will have access to the single market. The question that

this is about is the terms. My job, and the job frankly of everybody,

including the opposition, is to persuade our opposite numbers in

Europe that it's in their their interests too that we all have

access to each other's markets. That's what I intend to do.

Thank you Mr Speaker. I thank the secretary for advance sight of the

statement. We have seen the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State

today complete an un-Holy Trinity of Westminster promises to people of

Scotland. They promised to take account of the 62% remain vote in

Scotland. And to consider all options for Scotland's future.

They've broken that promise today. They promised during the referendum

and in the election manifesto that leaving the EU doesn't mean we have

to leave the single market. Today they are making that promise. As for

the promise in 2014 remaining in the United Kingdom guaranteed Scotland's

place in Europe, we all know where that's gone. I have to say to the

Secretary of State, I hope he'll pass the message back to his boss

that if she insists on giving Scotland only one option to remain,

Scotland will take that option. We do have certainty, we know with

certainty that Brexit means hard Tory Brexit. Can I ask the Secretary

of State, even at this late stage, to accept that the promises that he

and the Prime Minister have made must be honoured. Will he tell the

House how he proposes to recognise the 62% Remain vote in Scotland and

the overwhelming unanimous view in Scotland that our free movement of

people is essential for our well-being. Can he tell the House if

he's read the Scottish Government paper on Scotland's place in Europe

and give than he's nodding, will he undertake this paper will be

properly and thoroughly discussed at the joint ministerial council next

week. Will he undertake, that before any non-returnable steps are taken,

that Members of Parliament of all devolved nations will be given a

chance, even on an advisory basis to consider the Government's plans,

even before they are implemented. I thank the honourable gentleman for

his question. It's been my privilege to chair the joint ministerial

committee on European negotiations on which Mike Russell broadly

represents the Scottish Government's position. I gave him an undertaking

that we'd debate that paper at the next JMCEN, as it's known in

Whitehall jargon. That's what we'll do. One of the things I've been very

careful not to do is comment publicly on it because I said we

want to give it the most open debate possible. There are parts of it I

disagree with and parts I agree with. On the question of protection

of workers' rights or maintenance of our terrific universities, I'm

entirely on the side of the paper. On areas of devolution, Mr Russell

may be surprised on how pro-devolution I am. There'll be

nothing taken away and we'll have to decide what passes to them from the

European Union. That will be a rational debate, based around the

interests of the UK and Scotland. So he must take it as read I think

that we will take very, very seriously the idea that we do not

allow any part of the United Kingdom, any nation, Scotland,

Wales, Northern Ireland, England, to lose out by this process. We are

determined of that. THE SPEAKER: Anna Soubry? Thank you

very much. I'll continue to come pain for membership of the single

market and to make the positive case for immigration because I believe in

the free movement of the people from the European Union. But can I make

it very clear that I welcome the - I nearly said Her Majesty - the Prime

Minister's speech and the statement made by my right honourable friend.

I think it's realistic. It's much-needed clarity. I think the

tone is to be hugely welcomed. It marks in that tone, a genuine

desire, to bring about a consensus to reunite our country. So, in that

spirit, would my right honourable friend commit, please, to putting

those 12 objectives, this is not unreasonable, Mr Speaker, into a

White Paper, bringing it into this House so that we can finally,

because we haven't, and many others feel that Parliament's been

deliberately procluded from this, that we can debate the single

market, the customs union and free movement of people. I'll say first

to my right honourable friend about her slip of the tongue, I often make

the same mistake. Probably why I am where I am!

As for her request to the you believe stance of this, I've tried

today and the Prime Minister's tried today to answer all the questions we

are able to answer without undermining the negotiation. But in

terms of debates in the House, I can see in this chamber entirely a part

for debating the very thing she talked about. So that's why I'll

seek to get. THE SPEAKER: Ed Miliband. Thank you,

Mr Speaker. The Secretary of State and the Prime Minister have both

more or less admitted today what's been obvious for months, that it

will take more than two years to have a trade deal with the EU ready

to go. But there then follows a crucial question for many, many

businesses up and down this country which is what the arrangements will

be when we leave the EU and that trade deal is not yet completed. But

listening to the Secretary of State today and indeed reading the Prime

Minister's speech, we are not the wiser what that will be. Can the

Secretary of State now enlighten us on this crucial point which matters

to families and businesses hugely. I'll correct one or two things what

he got wrong. He's wrong to interpret what I said as any

suggestion that we'll not be able to negotiate this outcome in the

timetable in front of us. The issue I said was that we'd look at

implementation issues because I may well take time and I cited the

borders and customs and various other aspects which might take time

to take effect. It will be in the joint interests of the European

Union and ourselves to put that in place. More widely, I cannot think

how I could have been clearer. I've answered every single question with

one exception that his spokesman of the party put to us. I've tried to

answer as many as I can of the ones the Select Committee put to us. We

have been very clear. I don't think out there anybody will believe the

Labour Party now when they say we don't know what the negotiating

strategy is. It's as plain as a pike staff and he should recognise that.

The Prime Minister's given clarity, we are leaving the single market and

customs union. Further to the point that's just been asked, in the

implementation phase of the Prime Minister's proposal after article

50, that period of adjustment to a deal, will all of the detailed terms

already have been finalised or, is the period during which the details

of the so-called bold and ambitious deal, as she put it, to be still

worked out during the phase? My right honourable friend wrote a very

wise paper which I referred to previously in a previous exchange

here and he'd recognise that the negotiating balance changes at the

end of the two-year period, so it's very, very important that we

conclude the deal by then. The implementation is a different

matter, it may take time and it does take time and we can't control

whether we say putting in place a new customs arrangement or whatever

it may be. It's the practicalities of it and that's what will drive it.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. While the Prime Minister's made

things clearer today and I welcome in particular the commitment that

Parliament will have a vote on the final deal and that the Government

will seek transitional arrangements, both things the Select Committee

called for in its first report, there is one big issue where there

is still uncertainty for businesses and that is the continuation of

tariff free and barrier free trade. Now, given the Government's

unequivocal commitment today to that goal, can the Secretary of State

tell the House that if remaining in the customs turns out to be the only

way of assuring that that is what we'll get what we asked for, can you

ensure that's what we'll do to honour that commitment to

businesses? Zbloo we'll abide by the instruction given to it by the

British people and the instruction was to leave the European Union.

I'm afraid that is inconsistent with membership of the market. What we

have said in terms, is that we intend to deliver the very thing

that he says British business is uncertain about. That is tariff free

and barrier free access to the European market.

Can I welcome the contribution to increased clarity that the Prime

Minister's brought to the EU debate today. I just hope that the 27

remaining countries in the EU will take this opportunity to embrace the

positive spirit in which this plan's been put forward. But the Prime

Minister actually said in her speech that she was putting the

preservation of our precious union at the heart of everything and, in

that spirit, can I ask the Secretary of State if there is parts of the

country that are net beneficiaries from the EU, such as Wales and

Cornwall, will continue to get that level of funding so they can take

advantage of the great opportunities ahead. The aim of the entire

strategy is to improve the economic prospects of the country and to do

that properly, the Prime Minister has been very forward in terms of

talking about the benefits of that. One of the things which has passed

almost unremarked but was in fact remarkable, was the speed with which

the Treasury stepped in very early on universities and farming and

structural funds. It made a decision in four weeks in the middle of

August, something which I don't think I can remember in my lifetime

in this parent which is quite long. So I think she can take it as read

that we'll do everything possible to make sure that awe parts in the

United Kingdom benefit from this policy.

I applaud the Prime Minister's speech and her vision of a liberal

Brexit. Can the minister confirm that where mutual cooperation is

needed between the EU and UK after we've left such as

intelligence-sharing, that arrangements will be put in place on

the basis of bilateral treaties, rather than us being the supplement?

One of the things the Prime Minister's made plain is that we are

not the supplement here or in what follows afterwards. Britain is the

intelligent super power, we are critical to the fence of Europe from

terrorist threat and we are also critical to the military support of

Europe and dealing with migration, the navy at work -- with the navy at

work. They are often on a bilateral basis now but they'll be done on a

treaty basis equal to both sides. I think we should loyally support

the Government. Hear-hear! LAUGHTER

Will the Secretary of State confirm this, that insist on controlling

your own borders and insisting on doing international trade deals is

inconsistent, not just with membership of the European Union,

but also the customs union and the single market, so I agree after the

welcome turn of today's speech it's not hard Brexit, it's full Brexit.

Well, I will start by saying with respect to his opening remarks, my

health is fragile these days, careful about such assertions of

supporting the Government! But it is plain, I mean, we have endeavoured

to put together the option which gives the best outcome for Britain

whilst obeying the decision of the people. That's what we have done and

it will work. Thank you, MrSpeaker. The Prime

Minister in the first part of her speech made a welcome commitment to

enhance and protect workers' rights but at the end was threatening to

take them away and to undercut the rest of Europe and rip up the

British economic model if we don't get what we want. Can he now

withdraw that threat and be clear that Britain will not do that

because otherwise if the Government is prepared to rip up workers'

rights as soon as the negotiations get difficult, how can we trust them

to ensure that the rest of Britain's interests are protected if the

negotiations get difficult, as well? I will say to her what I said to the

head of the TUC a couple of weeks ago, there is no circumstance under

which we will rip up worksers' rights. That's my commitment from

the beginning in this job and it will be my commitment for as long as

I am in it. The governor of the Bank of England

said the financial stability risks to the eurozone are greater than

those faced by the UK, will he undertake to offer the European

Union a full agreement to ensure that through the withdrawal

agreement the eurozone continues to enjoy access to the City of London?

Well, the governor and my honourable friend make a good point. The City

of London, the existence of the City of London ensures both a pool of

liquidity and a source of almost bottomless source of low cost

finance for most of the industries of Europe. So, I think they've every

interest in doing the deal we described and that again I reiterate

is what we are relying on that's in everybody's interests economically,

socially and in terms of financial stability. As the Secretary of State

knows I support reform of freedom of movement but in a way that does

least damage to the economy and particularly the regional economy. I

see in the Prime Minister's speech she makes specific mention of

protecting the interests of Cardiff, Edinburgh, Belfast, the City of

London, but there is no mention of the north-west of England, Greater

Manchester or indeed any English region. Rather than leaving these

crucial decisions to a London centric click isn't it take to open

up this debate, give Greater Manchester a voice in it and

establish a Brexit committee for the nations and regions?

If he is not very careful, I shall invite him to jump on to the M62 and

visit me at my home in Yorkshire, this right-wing bastion in the north

of England. Firstly, as you he - as he might imagine, I am acutely

conscious of the needs of the north and what I am intending to do, I had

intended to announce it - I hadn't intended to announce it today but I

will as he asked, after the mayoral elections I intend to All Yours the

mayors to have a meeting to talk about precisely that.

It's a makeshift plan but before he is able to negotiate it, can I urge

on him enormous patience because our partners will first want to discuss

the money, the division of the assets and liabilities. I shall

almost reiterate the answer I gave to the previous question. I am from

Yorkshire and we are known to be just like the Scots, but a lot less

generous! Today's speech is a result of what

you get when you allow immigration policy to dictate economic policy,

rather than considering these crucial questions of immigration and

economics together. The Prime Minister set out a plan to leave the

European Union but she did not set out a plan to keep anything like the

current access to our biggest single market for jobs, businesses and

trade and during the referendum campaign she said that pulling out

of the single market would mean a loss of investors and going

backwards on international trade. Let me ask the Secretary of State,

what economic assessment did the Government make on the impact of

today's speech on jobs, trade and prosperity or was the speech made

without any such assetment at all? The first thing I will say to him is

that the outcome of the referendum last year was not principally, it

was a large part about immigration, but not principally about

immigration, it was about control of our country. If you talk to the

people who voted that was what they were concerned about. That's what

this is about. Since I was party to the writing of this speech I can

tell him, we had the economic future of the country, the security of the

country, the sovereignty of the country and our part in the world

all squarely in our sights when we wrote it.

My right honourable friend in his speech made clear that no deal is

better than a bad deal. In the unlikely I am sure event that we

were to get a bad deal and the House were to vote against it, what would

be the impact in terms of our status within the European Union?

Well, the referendum last year set in motion a circumstance where the