:00:00. > :00:00.was to basically ignore what experts were saying, about the destination
:00:00. > :00:07.of our country should we leave the European Union. My right honourable
:00:08. > :00:11.friend is right. We should take, pay attention to those who know what
:00:12. > :00:15.they are talking about. The reality is our currency has fallen
:00:16. > :00:20.significantly in value, following the referendum. That means that we
:00:21. > :00:24.are poorer than we were before, that has already happened. But the real
:00:25. > :00:30.damage is going to be when jobs start to be forced out of Britain as
:00:31. > :00:33.they will be, I'm afraid, over the next few year, some I know will
:00:34. > :00:38.argue that the loss of jobs in Britain will be a price worth paying
:00:39. > :00:44.in the short-term for a better, long-term future. I don't agree with
:00:45. > :00:49.that view. The fact is we will always be dependent on close
:00:50. > :00:55.partnerships with other country, I cannot share the view that we would
:00:56. > :00:58.be better off replacing annoying interference from Brussels with
:00:59. > :01:02.annoying interference from Washington, but that appears to be
:01:03. > :01:10.what some people believe we should be now heading towards. I won't be
:01:11. > :01:15.able to give way again. But in any case, we mustn't dismiss short-term
:01:16. > :01:20.job losses, over the next few years as unimportant. The Prime Minister
:01:21. > :01:25.rightly aims for barrier free access to the single market. The problem
:01:26. > :01:32.is, that without signing up tow at least some version of free movement,
:01:33. > :01:36.he stands no chance whatever of getting barrier free access to the
:01:37. > :01:41.single market. And in this house, we need to be frank with people about
:01:42. > :01:48.what the prospects are for us over the next few years.
:01:49. > :01:54.We have heard from the financial sector, and many of my constituents
:01:55. > :01:59.and those of my honourable friend working the financial sector in the
:02:00. > :02:05.City of London, just in that sector alone, one study suggests 70,000
:02:06. > :02:09.jobs being lost. And there will be that scale of damage in other parts
:02:10. > :02:16.of the economy as well. In my view, that's much too high a price to pay.
:02:17. > :02:20.I agree with those who say the various forms of so-called soft
:02:21. > :02:27.Brexit wouldn't solve the problem. Because we would then end up having
:02:28. > :02:31.to apply all the rules that were devised in the EU without having any
:02:32. > :02:36.influence at all over what those rules would be. I think that's not a
:02:37. > :02:42.viable position for the UK in the future. I think the one glimmer for
:02:43. > :02:46.a Brexit without the economic damage I'm concerned about would be if we
:02:47. > :02:51.signed up not to the current version of free movement of people, but to
:02:52. > :02:59.free movement of labour, play EU citizens can come to the UK if they
:03:00. > :03:02.have a firm job offer in the UK. If I understand, this is how things
:03:03. > :03:08.worked in the common market in the past. That would, I believe, if we
:03:09. > :03:11.were to agree something along those lines, buy us a good proportion of
:03:12. > :03:15.the barrier free access to the single market that the Prime
:03:16. > :03:21.Minister says she wants. But she seems to have set her face against
:03:22. > :03:25.that concession on immigration policy that would be needed, and we
:03:26. > :03:31.would therefore pay the price. I must say, I think it's very strange
:03:32. > :03:36.that our economic, future economic well-being, is being relegated to
:03:37. > :03:40.the importance of reducing net migration to the tens of thousands.
:03:41. > :03:48.The Prime Minister was Home Secretary for six years. In that
:03:49. > :03:51.time, non-EU net migration, which we have completely controlled, is
:03:52. > :04:00.nowhere near the tens of thousands. Last year it was a. And the EU net
:04:01. > :04:05.migration on top of that. -- last it was 150,000. The only way of
:04:06. > :04:11.bringing that to the tens of thousands would be an extraordinary
:04:12. > :04:19.economic cost to the UK and I don't believe any government would be
:04:20. > :04:29.willing to sign up... SNEEZING IN BACKGROUND. How we got ourselves
:04:30. > :04:33.into such a mess, I think the problem is hard-wired in once David
:04:34. > :04:37.Cameron removed his MEPs from the main centre-right bloc in the
:04:38. > :04:42.European Parliament. Because from that moment on, British influence in
:04:43. > :04:47.the EU was diminished. It was increasingly clear, unlike
:04:48. > :04:52.conservative and Labour governments in the past, that the coalition and
:04:53. > :04:56.Conservative government in the UK were unable to get their way in the
:04:57. > :05:01.debates in the EU because their influence was so diminished. An
:05:02. > :05:09.example I'm particularly aggrieved about is the future, the failure of
:05:10. > :05:13.our government to protect the viability of cane sugar refining in
:05:14. > :05:18.the EU, as practised at the Tate Lyle sugar refinery in my
:05:19. > :05:24.constituency. Previous governments, Labour and Conservative, were able
:05:25. > :05:29.to secure the future of cane sugar refining. This one tragically has
:05:30. > :05:35.failed. And that's a reflection of the loss of influence from the UK,
:05:36. > :05:39.the failure of the British government to achieve its objectives
:05:40. > :05:45.in negotiations in the UK. The most spectacular failing of all was David
:05:46. > :05:53.Cameron's failure to secure a meaningful renegotiation in his last
:05:54. > :05:58.efforts as Prime Minister. Mr Deputy Speaker, my conclusion is that what
:05:59. > :06:03.we actually need is a much more engaged British government, able to
:06:04. > :06:09.win arguments in Brussels, as previous British governments were
:06:10. > :06:12.able to. The failure of David Cameron's attempted renegotiation
:06:13. > :06:19.highlights very spectacularly just how big a problem as developed. But
:06:20. > :06:28.we shouldn't now be pulling out all together, and I will be posing the
:06:29. > :06:33.-- second Reading tomorrow night. I'll be what to make a short
:06:34. > :06:38.contribution for what in my opinion is a very short bill. I know she's
:06:39. > :06:46.just about to leave the chamber, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I would like to
:06:47. > :06:54.remind the honourable Lady, the member for Richmond Park, that her
:06:55. > :07:01.leader in May 2016 said in a speech that this is a once-in-a-lifetime
:07:02. > :07:05.decision. I would have happily given way to her to tell her whether she
:07:06. > :07:12.agrees with her leader or not. Clearly the opportunity has been
:07:13. > :07:23.lost. I would like to point out that I voted, along with the majority of
:07:24. > :07:27.this house, by a margin of over five for everyone against, that the Prime
:07:28. > :07:34.Minister sign Article 50 by the end of March. I would be very
:07:35. > :07:41.disappointed if this Haas does not now pass this legislation to
:07:42. > :07:48.facilitate this. I get the impression that some in this place
:07:49. > :07:54.are trying to frustrate the clear will of this house, and more
:07:55. > :08:00.importantly, the will of the people by adding in matters that surely
:08:01. > :08:04.should be left for the white paper and the wider negotiation with the
:08:05. > :08:12.EU. I will happily give way. I'm very grateful indeed to the
:08:13. > :08:22.honourable lady for allowing me. I am not, and I emphasise, not trying
:08:23. > :08:27.to defy the will of the United Kingdom. I'm trying to keep the
:08:28. > :08:30.United Kingdom together. I am a unionist. This house needs to be
:08:31. > :08:34.aware that we are sensitive to the fact that we have a Republican Party
:08:35. > :08:38.called Sinn Fein, four absentee members of this house, in the middle
:08:39. > :08:42.of an election campaign in Northern Ireland, who are using the Brexit
:08:43. > :08:45.decision to campaign for an increased vote in the assembly
:08:46. > :08:49.election. That's my reason for voting against this bill, nothing to
:08:50. > :08:55.do with breaking up the union. It's maintaining the union that I want.
:08:56. > :09:00.I'm absolutely delighted that he honourable lady has clarified her
:09:01. > :09:09.position. I'm sure that her words have been taken on board by everyone
:09:10. > :09:15.here. Let's not tie our Prime Minister's hands. I ask this house
:09:16. > :09:23.to respect the will of the people of my constituency in South East
:09:24. > :09:29.Cornwall, and the wider country, who voted to leave. Let's pass this
:09:30. > :09:35.bill, trigger Article 50, and let's get on with leaving the European
:09:36. > :09:42.Union as our masters, the public, instructed us to do on the 23rd of
:09:43. > :09:57.June. I thank my honourable friend for giving way... Sorry! Mr Deputy
:09:58. > :10:02.Speaker, I am minded to support the bill at second reading, because,
:10:03. > :10:06.like my honourable friend for Holborn and St Pancras, I respect
:10:07. > :10:11.the overall referendum outcome, even though I campaign for a different
:10:12. > :10:17.result. I believe the government is entitled to comments leave leave
:10:18. > :10:21.negotiations by the 31st of March. But that we are entitled to some
:10:22. > :10:26.assurances about their intentions and the way they planned to proceed.
:10:27. > :10:31.I don't think the limited time allowed for the bill is right, and
:10:32. > :10:37.it would be possible to allow more time and still meet the government's
:10:38. > :10:40.deadline. The impression the Prime Minister and her ministers have
:10:41. > :10:47.given since they assumed power is that they want to silence MPs and
:10:48. > :10:51.sideline Parliament and rely solely on their interpretation of the
:10:52. > :10:55.referendum result. Increasingly that looks as if it means ignoring the
:10:56. > :11:02.views of the 48% who voted to remain. And even a large number of
:11:03. > :11:07.those who voted to leave when it comes to issues like the single
:11:08. > :11:10.market. I heard the honourable member for South East Cornwall say
:11:11. > :11:13.in an earlier intervention in the debate that it's only eight to
:11:14. > :11:19.clause bill and she didn't understand the need for a White
:11:20. > :11:23.Paper. But I ask, is it sensible to embark on an epic journey without
:11:24. > :11:27.some idea of where we will end up or how we will get there first and mark
:11:28. > :11:35.it's one thing to give approval to start the negotiations, but
:11:36. > :11:39.something else to wash our hands of constituents concerns and give the
:11:40. > :11:44.government a free hand to do just as they please. I will give way. Did
:11:45. > :11:48.the honourable gentleman not acknowledged that the Prime Minister
:11:49. > :11:57.has already promised to issue that White Paper at the earliest
:11:58. > :12:03.opportunity? I acknowledge that after a lifetime of denial she said
:12:04. > :12:08.that we would get it, and we would get it in the vote of the bill.
:12:09. > :12:12.Doesn't seem much use to me, Deputy Speaker. The referendum, as has been
:12:13. > :12:19.pointed out, settled the question about our wish to leave the EU, but
:12:20. > :12:23.didn't shape the answer. When the Prime Minister is eventually broke
:12:24. > :12:27.her silence in a Lancaster house speech to reveal her intention to
:12:28. > :12:31.disengage entirely with the single market, I don't accept that she was
:12:32. > :12:36.reflecting the views of a majority of people in this country. We need
:12:37. > :12:43.to try and ensure continued access to that market on the best terms we
:12:44. > :12:46.can secure. And one I think that doesn't exclude others from
:12:47. > :12:52.regulatory decisions. Because without doing that, we are risking
:12:53. > :12:58.jobs, businesses and setting in train a period of uncertainty that
:12:59. > :13:04.may do untold damage to our economy. I accept that the Prime Minister's
:13:05. > :13:08.position is influenced by her desire to end freedom of movement, but
:13:09. > :13:13.where is the evidence that all those voting leave actually wanted to
:13:14. > :13:17.prioritise the concerns about freedom of movement against access
:13:18. > :13:23.to the market for our goods and services? Why is it unreasonable to
:13:24. > :13:28.try and reach agreement on controls and freedom of movement? Why is it
:13:29. > :13:31.so wrong to seek their movement arrangements, as my honourable
:13:32. > :13:34.friend for Wolverhampton North East suggested? Arrangements that allow
:13:35. > :13:42.for those we need to come here and work, while placing restrictions on
:13:43. > :13:46.those with no skilled labour. Perhaps one way of helping that
:13:47. > :13:49.process would be if the government were to indicate as a positive
:13:50. > :13:53.gesture that we are not going to use the rights of EU citizens already
:13:54. > :13:58.living and working here as a bargaining chip. It wouldn't
:13:59. > :14:02.actually be a massive concession because the Home Office has already
:14:03. > :14:09.calculated that 80% of EU migrants living here after 2019 will be
:14:10. > :14:13.entitled to permanent residency. I will give way. I thank the
:14:14. > :14:17.honourable gentleman for giving way. He makes a very good point about
:14:18. > :14:21.protecting the rights of EU citizens who are contributing to this country
:14:22. > :14:26.living here. When he makes the point about a bargaining chip, he also
:14:27. > :14:29.accept that other countries in the European Union, who are also
:14:30. > :14:33.potentially using this as a bargaining chip rather than this
:14:34. > :14:37.government. It's very difficult to enter negotiations unless we have a
:14:38. > :14:41.similar agreement on their side to protect the rights of British
:14:42. > :14:44.citizens living elsewhere in Europe. One way to start a negotiation is to
:14:45. > :14:51.offer up a gesture of goodwill. That's what I'm proposing in this
:14:52. > :14:55.situation. It seems to me that we are actually talking about people
:14:56. > :14:59.who are mostly engaged in crucial jobs which helps support and secure
:15:00. > :15:05.the jobs of many other British citizens. We were told the
:15:06. > :15:10.referendum was a decisive result, but of course, it couldn't have been
:15:11. > :15:15.much closer. There are many parts of the UK, and indeed England, that
:15:16. > :15:20.didn't vote to leave. My own constituency voted by a majority of
:15:21. > :15:28.just over 2002 remain. If I break that down further, -- by just over
:15:29. > :15:33.2000 to remain. Two of four wards voted to remain and two voted to
:15:34. > :15:37.leave. I have no intention of speaking for the views of one group
:15:38. > :15:41.and ignoring the feelings and opinions of the others. Rather
:15:42. > :15:47.helpfully I carried out a rather extensive survey of my constituents
:15:48. > :15:50.following the referendum because of the closeness of the result. And my
:15:51. > :15:57.wish to better understand what people were telling me. 64% said
:15:58. > :16:03.they want the UK to continue to trade our goods and services within
:16:04. > :16:07.the single market. 76% think that we should commit to giving EU citizens
:16:08. > :16:14.already living and working here the right to remain. People made clear
:16:15. > :16:17.their concerns about the cost of living, research funds and training
:16:18. > :16:20.programmes, employment and job security. We can't simply leave
:16:21. > :16:32.these things to chance. How are we to proceed, will we have
:16:33. > :16:40.three strands, administrative legal and trade? Will we try to deal with
:16:41. > :16:43.them all at once? Will there be parallel negotiations and talks with
:16:44. > :16:49.other countries? Who are the negotiator, how many do we have? Do
:16:50. > :16:55.we have the capacity for so many complex negotiations in so short a
:16:56. > :17:00.time? Do we have enough experts, he has left, I was going to say... Do
:17:01. > :17:07.we have enough experts at our disposal? We need to know what real
:17:08. > :17:10.progress is being made on the bright New World that enthusiastic
:17:11. > :17:16.Brexiteers are promising. I want to be optimist tick about our future,
:17:17. > :17:19.and I was slightly encouraged to that effect by elements of
:17:20. > :17:24.Government thinking in the recent green paper building our industrial
:17:25. > :17:28.strategy, but I don't feel sufficiently optimistic to want to
:17:29. > :17:33.trust our future to those who lied their way through the referendum,
:17:34. > :17:38.making promises of extra money for the Health Service that they have no
:17:39. > :17:42.intention of honour, it is for these reasons that this House needs to
:17:43. > :17:46.amendment with regular feedback on the shape and progress of these
:17:47. > :17:52.negotiations. A right to intervene on the final offer, and a right to
:17:53. > :17:59.reject that offer, if it's plainly against the interests of the vast
:18:00. > :18:03.majority of our constituencies. Thank you very much Mr Deputy
:18:04. > :18:08.Speaker. I was a Remainor and I think it was a mistake to leave. I
:18:09. > :18:13.still think it is a mistake to leave but that decision taken. And I think
:18:14. > :18:16.the House, tomorrow night, will respect the decision that has been
:18:17. > :18:21.taken. The question now is not whether we are leaving, the question
:18:22. > :18:27.is where we are going to arrive. We must focus on the best which of
:18:28. > :18:31.securing that, not only in our interests, but in the interest of
:18:32. > :18:34.the whole continent, we need to grasp the opportunities of Brexit,
:18:35. > :18:38.which do exist, and they are significant. The Prime Minister was
:18:39. > :18:43.right to say that she is going to seek a bold and ambitious trade
:18:44. > :18:49.agreement with the EU, anything which disrupts trade is likely to
:18:50. > :18:54.diminish it, and therefore output. A deal that safeguards both the UK and
:18:55. > :18:59.our counterpartties from that disruption is much-needed and in
:19:00. > :19:04.practise, there may be only a little over a year to negotiate it. That
:19:05. > :19:08.brings me to my first point. It seems to me that a transitional
:19:09. > :19:15.arrangement, probably a formal agreement is going to be absolutely
:19:16. > :19:19.essential. Without it, firms in the financial sector for example, will
:19:20. > :19:23.act to protect their shareholders from the consequences of a cliff
:19:24. > :19:25.edge. A large number have given evidence to the Treasury committee
:19:26. > :19:30.on exactly that point. They are not all making it up. The action they
:19:31. > :19:35.will take in a small way has already begun and this is much more than
:19:36. > :19:40.just brass plating. We need to be clear that the absence of a
:19:41. > :19:45.transitional agreement will cost jobs and economic activity at least
:19:46. > :19:50.in the short to medium term and we shouldn't just let that slip. Slip.
:19:51. > :19:56.My view, a clear and early commitment from the Government to a
:19:57. > :20:00.transitional period or, I, along with a number of others have been
:20:01. > :20:05.calling it a stand-still. At the end of the Article 50 process should be
:20:06. > :20:11.priority number one for the start of the negotiations and it should be
:20:12. > :20:16.born in mind... I will give way. I am grateful for him giving way, does
:20:17. > :20:20.he also agree such arrangement are not only in our national interest
:20:21. > :20:24.but in the interest of every other EU state which is why they should
:20:25. > :20:28.agree to that suggestion from the Government soon eraer than later. I
:20:29. > :20:32.agree with that. They have an opportunity to agree with it because
:20:33. > :20:37.it will be on stainable under voting. That point wasn't initially
:20:38. > :20:40.understood if you look carefully at Article 50 you will see that to be
:20:41. > :20:46.the case. I want to make a couple of other point, one about the customs
:20:47. > :20:50.union and the single market. On the customs union if the UK leaves, a
:20:51. > :20:54.huge amount of work will be required to develop an enforce ruled of of
:20:55. > :20:59.gin, despite the extra bureaucracy, I still think there is merit in
:21:00. > :21:03.leaving. If the greatest opportunities do turn out to be in
:21:04. > :21:06.Asia, in the medium to long-term as many forecast, then we should put
:21:07. > :21:12.the country in a position to benefit. I strongly agree with my
:21:13. > :21:18.honourable friend, he is not here, the member for Gainsborough, that a
:21:19. > :21:23.liberal economic nationalism should underpin everything... I will give
:21:24. > :21:30.way. I am grateful. I agree with much of what he has to say. Would he
:21:31. > :21:35.agree that city UK's analysis has changed dramatically, and that it,
:21:36. > :21:39.like him, can see the add van tajss there may be -- advantages there may
:21:40. > :21:43.be in Brexit having once been of the opinion that Brexit would be the
:21:44. > :21:49.worst possible thing for the financial sector in this country?
:21:50. > :21:52.Well they did say it was and they have decided the best thing to do is
:21:53. > :21:55.look for the opportunity, rather than spend their time moaning about
:21:56. > :21:59.where they are, but it is the customs union point they have
:22:00. > :22:04.focussed on, on the basis of what I read on my iPad, they only announced
:22:05. > :22:10.that, at least I only saw it since came to the House. I will say a few
:22:11. > :22:12.words about the single market. The Treasury committee has heard
:22:13. > :22:17.convincing evidence that both parties in the negotiation, the EU
:22:18. > :22:22.and us, have a lot to gain from maintaining a high degree of access,
:22:23. > :22:29.and a lot to lose, in the absence of that access. We should bear in mind
:22:30. > :22:33.that the EU, like the you, benefits from integration with the supply
:22:34. > :22:38.chains in automotive and aerospace sectors and we benefit from access
:22:39. > :22:43.to London's deep financial market, which lower the costs of capital, to
:22:44. > :22:47.European firms and of course to British firms. Restructuring
:22:48. > :22:54.manufacturing supply chains would cost both sides a lot, and so too
:22:55. > :23:01.would the fragment takes of... I won't if my right honourable friend
:23:02. > :23:05.will forgive me for the same reason that my right honourable friend said
:23:06. > :23:09.I don't get bonus points. Unlike the customs union access to the singing
:23:10. > :23:12.market is opt in a binary choice, a wide variety of options is possible.
:23:13. > :23:16.We don't need to look into the crystal ball for this, we can read
:23:17. > :23:20.the book, Switzerland has better access than Saudi Arabia, Canada has
:23:21. > :23:24.better access than Colombia, reverting to WTO rules would be a
:23:25. > :23:38.huge risk for the UK and one we should do a great deal to avoid. It
:23:39. > :23:43.must mean an end to the direct applicability of EU law and control
:23:44. > :23:49.and a restoration of control over EU migration. But we should also bear
:23:50. > :23:53.in mind there is a majority in the country for a high degree of
:23:54. > :23:59.continued engagement with our closest neighbours.
:24:00. > :24:05.It is one many on the Continent also want. Huge advantages can flow from
:24:06. > :24:10.maintaining a high degree of political engagement from outside
:24:11. > :24:13.the EU. It will be as economically beneficial as politically expedient
:24:14. > :24:19.to try and construct it. It can help heal the Brexit wounds to which the
:24:20. > :24:23.Prime Minister referred in her outstanding speech, and it can
:24:24. > :24:28.address the deep unease that seems to be developing about Brexit among
:24:29. > :24:34.the young. Many of them are rejecting much of the rationalety of
:24:35. > :24:40.current political discourse and many are certainly rejected the populist
:24:41. > :24:45.economic nationalism which President Trump represents and some
:24:46. > :24:48.adistribute to Brexit -- attribute. In demonstrating we understand and
:24:49. > :24:54.are responding to those voices of concern, we can win support at home,
:24:55. > :24:58.and we can construct alliances among our counter parties abroad. By
:24:59. > :25:04.making clear that we want to engage deeply with the EU from outside it,
:25:05. > :25:10.and that is why if we can avoid the politics of unreason, if we can
:25:11. > :25:14.avoid too the divisions at home and abroad it could bring, we can still
:25:15. > :25:19.reap considerable opportunities from the Brexit decision.
:25:20. > :25:25.Mr Deputy Speaker I too supported the argument for Remaining in the
:25:26. > :25:30.European Union, and I would do so again. Nevertheless, I respect the
:25:31. > :25:36.decision which was made in the referendum. And hence my support
:25:37. > :25:47.without qualification for the second reading of this bill. I am not in
:25:48. > :25:55.favour of referendums, since I, a very strong up holder of democracy,
:25:56. > :26:00.it would be a contradiction if I was advocating referendums on various
:26:01. > :26:08.topics but the fact remains that the Cabinet Office in February found 16,
:26:09. > :26:12.2016, said four months before the referendum took place, the result of
:26:13. > :26:17.the referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union
:26:18. > :26:23.will be final. And it would be unfortunate if the view was taken,
:26:24. > :26:27.that the votes of some people and the, in the Black Country and the
:26:28. > :26:31.West Midlands where there were majority strong majorities for
:26:32. > :26:35.leaving, be it in my borough and Walsall and the other three
:26:36. > :26:40.boroughs, if those votes were counted, were considered to be less
:26:41. > :26:45.important than others. Now, I respect fully the strongly held
:26:46. > :26:49.views of those who don't and can't suppose the second reading. But
:26:50. > :26:55.nevertheless, that is not my opinion, that is not my view and
:26:56. > :26:59.hence the reason I think it is important, that the decision taken
:27:00. > :27:03.in the referendum, the majority decision should be accepted. It is
:27:04. > :27:09.said it is a narrow, it was narrow, of course it was narrow, but so have
:27:10. > :27:15.been the result of many general elections. It is said that lies were
:27:16. > :27:20.told, certainly many lies were told by the Leave people. One must say
:27:21. > :27:27.lies have also been told in general elections as well. Now it is one of
:27:28. > :27:31.The Ironies that the Leave people made a great deal of emphasis on the
:27:32. > :27:35.sovereignty of Parliament. Parliament. Parliament, it was said
:27:36. > :27:39.it should be supreme, it shouldn't be subject to the use one European.
:27:40. > :27:43.What happened in this case. -- European Union. When it came to
:27:44. > :27:48.triggering Article 50, instead of having the debate we are having at
:27:49. > :27:52.the moment, we went to courts, the Government went to the courts or
:27:53. > :27:57.tried to use the royal prerogative. I would ask what kind of respect for
:27:58. > :28:03.sovereignty of the House did the Government show by going to the
:28:04. > :28:09.courts? And I am very pleased indeed that the courts did what they did,
:28:10. > :28:12.the judges far from being enemies of the people were the defenders of
:28:13. > :28:16.Parliamentary democracy and we should be very grateful indeed for
:28:17. > :28:25.the decision of the High Commission and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court
:28:26. > :28:30.court. Now, immigration or the free movement of labour which ever
:28:31. > :28:36.category one wants to mention was an issue during the referendum
:28:37. > :28:40.campaign. Strong feelings. And one doesn't have to be aist Orr
:28:41. > :28:44.prejudice and undoubtedly there where people who were deeply
:28:45. > :28:50.prejudiced, racist adds they may be who did want to leave the European
:28:51. > :28:54.Union, I wouldn't sce that for one moment, but there were many others,
:28:55. > :29:00.the majority who voted to leave, who are not racist, but who do have and
:29:01. > :29:05.continue to have strong feelings over immigration, and my view, it
:29:06. > :29:10.may well be wrong, I may be wrong on this, if the European Union has
:29:11. > :29:14.shown some flexibility on the movement of labour, it may well be
:29:15. > :29:20.that this debate would not be taking place today. And I would also say
:29:21. > :29:25.this about the free movement of labour, if the European now would
:29:26. > :29:30.look at that issue, it may well be it would be far less ammunition to
:29:31. > :29:36.the parties of the far right within the 27 states.
:29:37. > :29:40.Leading, leaving the European Union, must not leave so many of my
:29:41. > :29:46.honourable friends who have rightly said to a backward right-wing
:29:47. > :29:51.agenda, protection for worker, many which laws which have come about,
:29:52. > :29:54.arising from membership where the EU, combatting gender discrimination
:29:55. > :30:00.or indeed any form of discrimination. Those sort of rules
:30:01. > :30:07.and regulations, must be defended at all costs. I have from the start of
:30:08. > :30:11.my political life perhaps even before my political life fought
:30:12. > :30:17.discrimination, in Parliament and outside, and I shall continue to do
:30:18. > :30:27.so, until the crematorium makes its claim. Leaving the European Union
:30:28. > :30:31.must not mean less cooperation on combatting criminality. Above all
:30:32. > :30:35.else the Government must learn this lesson about the Royal Prerogative.
:30:36. > :30:40.That the ongoing negotiations which are going to take place must be the
:30:41. > :30:45.subject of debates in this House, from time to time. There might be
:30:46. > :30:49.statements from minister, we can't have a situation where Parliament is
:30:50. > :30:52.silent until the outcome of the talks. Parliament has a right. A
:30:53. > :30:57.sovereign Parliament which we say we are. Nod of to have statements on
:30:58. > :31:01.and questions put to minister, about what is going to go on in the First
:31:02. > :31:04.Minister's Questions two or so years on this very important issue.