10/07/2017 House of Commons

encourage our prime contractors to see where they can use British Steel

and I am sure in due course he will be pleased to see progress.

Statement, the Prime Minister. With permission, I would like to make a

statement on the G20 in Hamburg. At this summit we showed how a global

Britain can play a key role in shaping international responses to

some of the biggest challenges of our time. On terrorism, trade,

climate change, international develop and, migration, modern

slavery and women's economic empowerment, we made leading

contributions on issues that critically affect our national

interest but which can only be addressed by working together with

our international partners. First on terrorism, as we have seen with the

horrific attacks in Manchester and London, the nature of the threat we

face is evolving and our response must evolve to meet it. The UK is

leading the way. At the G-7 and subsequently through a detailed

action plan with President Macron, I called for industry take

responsibility to more rapidly detect and report extremist content

online and industry has now announced the launch of a global

Forum to do just that. At this summit we set the agenda again. We

called on allergy 20 partners to squeeze the life blood of terrorist

networks by making the global financial system and entirely

hostile system for terrorists. And we secured agreement on all

proposals. We agreed to work together to ensure there are no safe

spaces for terrorist financing by increasing capacity building and

raising standards worldwide especially in terrorist finance

hotspots will stop we agree to bring industry and law enforcement

together to develop new tools and technologies to better identify

suspicious small flows of money being used low-cost terrorist

attacks such as those we have seen in the UK. And just as interior

ministers are following up on the online agenda, so finance ministers

will follow through on these T20 commitments to cut off the funding

that throws a terrorist threats we face. I also called for the G 22

come together to better management arrest throws for foreign fighters

as exposed in France were Syria and Iraq and we agreed we would work to

improve international information sharing the movement of individuals

known to have travelled to and from Dyche territory. By working together

in these ways we can defeat the terrorist threat and ensure our way

of life will always prevail. Turning to the global economy, we are seeing

encouraging signs of recovery with the IMF forecasting the will rise by

3.5% this year. But many both here and the UK and across the UK are not

sharing in the benefits. We need to build a global economy that works

for everyone be ensuring trade is not just free but also crucially

fair for all. That means fair people in the UK, which is why we are

forging a modern industrial strategy that will help to bring the benefits

of trade to every part of the country. It means fair terms of

trade for the poorest countries which is why we will protect their

trade preferences as we leave the EU, and in time explore options to

improve their trade access. And it means strengthening the

international rules that make trade fair between countries. At this

summit I argued that we must reform the international trading system

especially the World Trade Organisation given its central role

so that it keeps pace with developments in key sectors like

digital and services and so it is better able to resolve disputes.

Some countries are not playing by the rules. They are not behaving

responsibly and are creating risks to the global trading system.

Nowhere is this more clear than in relation to the dumping of steel on

global markets. The urgent need to react to remove excess capacity was

recognised last year at the G20's but not enough has been done since.

If we are to avoid unilateral action we need immediate collective action.

We agreed that the global Forum established last year needs to be

more effective and the pace of its work must quicken. In order to

ensure its work gets the necessary attention and there is a senior

accountability, I have pressed for aggressive ministers to meet around

the world. The UK will play a leading role in championing these

reforms so that all citizens can share in the benefits of global

growth. As we leave the EU, we will negotiate a new comprehensive bold

and ambitious free trade agreement with the EU.

LAUGHTER Yes. But we will also sees the

exciting opportunities to strike deals with old friends and new

partners. And that this summit I hold a number of meetings with other

world leaders, all of whom made clear their strong desire to form

ambitious new bilateral trading relationships after Brexit. This

included America, Japan, China and India. This morning I welcomed

Australian Prime Minister to handle to Downing Street where he also

reiterated his desire for a bold new trading relationship. All these

discussions are a clear and powerful vote of confidence in British goods,

services, economy and the British people. I look forward to building

on them in the months ahead. On climate change, the UK reaffirmed

our commitment to the Paris agreement which is vital if we are

to take responsibility for the world we pass on to our children and

grandchildren. There is not a choice between decarbonisation and economic

growth as the UK's own experience shows. We have reduced emissions by

around 40% over the last 16 years, but growing GDP by almost two

thirds. I am my counterparts at the G20 are dismayed at America's

withdrawal from the agreement. I spoke personally to President Trump

to encourage him to rejoin the Paris agreement and I continue to hope

that is exactly what he will do. On international development, we

reaffirmed our commitment to spend 0.7% of gross national income and an

element assistance and we set out plans for a new long-term approach

to reduce Africa's relies on aid. This includes focusing on supporting

asp and aspirations of trade and growth, creating millions of new

jobs and harnessing the power of capital markets to generate

trillions of new investment. We welcomed Germany's new compact with

Africa which reflects those bristles. On migration, I expressed

the UK continued support for the scale of the challenge facing Italy

and agreed with the Prime Minister that a UK expert Home Office

delegation will travel to Italy to see how we can help further. This is

yet further evidence that while we are leaving the EU, as a global

Britain we will continue to work closely with all our EU partners.

Did you 20 also agreed to use the upcoming negotiations on the UN

global compact is to seek the conference of approach that the UK

has been arguing for. This includes ensuring refugees claim asylum in

the first safe country they reach, Inc proving the way we distinguish

between refugees and economic migrants, and developing a better

overall approach to managing economic migration. It is so

includes providing humanitarian and vegetarian assistance. We committed

?55 million to support the Government of Tanzania in managing

its refugee and migrant policies and to support the further integration

of new naturalise refugees. Turning to modern slavery, it is hard to

comprehend that in today's modern world, innocent people are being

enslaved, forced to do hard labour. Raped, beaten and passed from abuse

to abuse for profit. We cannot it and will not ignore this dark and

barbaric trade in human beings that is simply horrifying in its

inhumanity. That is why I put this in shoe on the G20 agenda at my

first summit a year ago, and at this I pushed for a global and

coordinated approach to the complex business supply chains which can

feed the demand for forced labour and child labour. Our

ground-breaking UK modern slavery and it requires companies to examine

all aspects of their businesses including their supply chains and to

publish their results. I called IgE 20 partners to follow Britain's

lead. And I welcomed Germany's proposed vision zero fund to which

the UK is contributing as an important part of ensuring the

health and safety of workers in global supply chains. Finally, we

agreed to create better job of reduced the women, remove the legal

barriers and end discrimination and gender-based violence that restrict

opportunities at home and abroad, and as part of this the UK is

contributing to the women entrepreneurs finance initiative

launched by the World Bank which will provide more than $1 billion to

support women in developing countries to start agribusinesses.

This is not just Molly really right it is economically essential and the

UK will continue to play a leading role in driving forward women's

economic empowerment across the world. Of course we did not agree on

everything at the summit, in particular climate change. But when

we have such disagreements it is only more important that we come

together in forums such as the G20 to try to resolve them. And as a

global Britain we will continue to work at bridging differences between

nations and forging global responses to issues that are fundamental to

our prosperity and security and that of our allies around the world. That

is what we did at this summit, that is what the Government will continue

to do and I commend this statement to the house.

Jeremy Corbyn. Thank you Mr Speaker and I thank the Prime Minister for

the advance copy of the statement. I am surprised she had so much to

contribute to the G20 given that there was barely a mention of

international policy and her party 's election manifesto. Or any policy

so much so that the government is now apparently asking other parties

for their policy ideas. So if the Prime Minister would like it am

happy to finish with a copy of our election manifesto. Or better still

an early election so that the people of this country can decide! Lets

face it Mr Speaker the government has run out of steam out of the

pivotal moment in our country and the world amid uncertainty of

Brexit, conflict in the Gulf states, nuclear sabre rattling over North

Korea, refugees continue to flee war and discretion, ongoing pandemics,

cross-border terrorism, poverty, inequality and the impact of climate

change are the core global challenges of our time. When we need

strong government we have weakness from this government. The US

president attempts to pull the plug on the climate change deal. And only

Mr Speaker a belated informal mention and brief meeting with him.

No ability to sign a joint letter from European leaders at the time he

made the announcement. The UK's trade deficit, Mr Speaker, is

growing at a time when we are negotiating our exit from the

European Union. The UK backed Saudi war in Yeaman continues to kill,

displays and injure thousands. With 300,000 cases of cholera. And on

this, a man-made catastrophe but was, Mr Speaker the government

continues to sell arms to Saudi Arabia, one of the most oppressive

and butter regimes that finances terrorism and is breaching

humanitarian law. The court may have ruled that the government actively

gay. It certainly is not acting ethically. -- acted legally. We on

the ceasefire agreed, it is good news, did the Prime Minister play

any role in those negotiations. But she commit to work with them to

expand the ceasefire to the rest of that poor benighted country. The US

President's attempt to pull out of the climate change deal is both

reckless and very dangerous. The commitments made in Paris are a

vital move to stop the world reaching the point of no return on

climate change. The T20 leaders have been unequivocal with the US

president but not our Prime Minister who raised the is suing formally. I

don't know what that means but the Prime Minister can tell us exactly

what the nature of meeting was. What a complete neglect of her duty both

to our people and perhaps equally importantly to our planet as well.

We need a leader prepared to speak out and talk up follies of

international co-operation, of human rights, social justice and respect

for international law. She needs to listen. So I ask, will she condemn

attempts to undermine global co-operation on climate change. Will

she take meaningful action against our country's role in global tax

avoidance, which starts many developing countries of funding for

sustainable growth which is also sucking investment out of our public

services. Will she offer European union National is in Britain the

same rights as they have now. What proposals does she have, what

discussants did she have on Britain's membership of your Tom.

Will she hold immoral arms sales to Saudi Arabia as Germany has and will

she backed Germany's call to end the bombing in Yemen. We've heard of the

Prime Minister talk about safe spaces for terrorist finance. So why

are so government sat on the report into foreign funding of extremism

and radicalisation in the UK. When will this report be released. And

what new regulations is the UK bringing forward for UK companies

and banks as part of her new accord on terrorist financing. Mr Speaker,

keeping Britain global is one of our country's most urgent tasks. Yet the

truth is this country needs a new approach to foreign policy and

global co-operation. The Conservative government, simply

cannot deliver. Responding to the grotesque levels of inequality

within countries and between them is important to the security and

sustainability of our world. In a joint report published in April, the

World Bank, the IMF, the world trade organisation recognised what they

referred to as the long-lasting displacement as well as large

winning bosses of workers. And that the negative experience of

globalisation has informed the public 's rejection of the

established political order. The Prime Minister talks of the dumping

of steel in global markets but white as it failed to take the action that

the other European nations did of the most acute time an our steel

industry is suffering? This government is the architect of the

failed austerity policies and now threatens to use Brexit to turn

Britain into a low wage deregulated tax haven on the shores of Europe.

And narrow, hopeless vision of the potential of this country, which

would only serve the few. One that would ruin industry, destroy

innovation and hit living standards. And finally Mr Speaker the US

president said, a US- UK trade deal will happen quickly. Can the Prime

Minister give any detail or timetable or any of the terms of

this agreement on environmental protections, workers' rights,

consumer rights, product safety, any of those PCs that is so concerned

that so many people? Mr Speaker, she lost her mandate at home and know

she is losing Britain and her influence abroad. Prime Minister.

Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I say to the right honourable gentleman on

the issue of terrorist financing it is the UK that has been not only

developing approaches within the UK with working with our financial

sector but is taking this internationally and as I said raised

this at the G20 and has agreement from those countries sitting around

the T20 table that we will take this forward together. What was important

was that we had a separate communique on counterterrorism which

specifically identifies issues like working with the financial sector to

identify suspicious small flows of funding. This is what the UK has

been leading on, it was the UK's proposal and was in the communique

at the due 20. He talks of global tax avoidance. If the UK that has

led on the issue of global tax avoidance. Global tax avoidance is

only on the agenda at international meetings because right honourable

predecessor David Cameron put it there. It is the UK that has leading

on that. He talks about trade deals, I am very happy to say that we are

already working with the Americans and what a trade deal might look

like, we already have a working group with the Australians and one

with India as well. We are out there. He says what Britain needs is

somebody standing up and speaking about these things, what we need is

someone doing these things and this is exactly what we are doing. And on

the issue of climate change this country has a proud record on

climate change. We secured the first truly globally legal binding

agreement on climate change at the Paris agreement, we are third best

country in the world on tackling climate change, at the leading edge

on putting our own legislation through regarding emissions and we

will continue to lead on this issue. He refers to the question of the

sale of arms to Saudi Arabia. I welcome the High Court judgment

today. This shows that Mike right honourable friend the Defence

Secretary will make a statement on this later, but it shows that we do

operate one of the most robust export control regimes in the world.

And finally he talked of the government 's agenda. This

government has an ambitious agenda to change this country. There are

many issues... Mr Ashworth you are a cheeky and other excitable

whippersnapper. Calm yourself. Take some sort of soothing medicament. It

is a refrain of mine, with good reason. Per minister. Mr Speaker

that many issues on which I hope we will achieve consensus across this

House. Like ensuring that our police and security agencies have the

powers they need to deal with the terrorist threat we face. It is like

responding to the Matthew Taylor report which I initiated to ensure

that in the new gig economy as we see the world of work changing

workers have their rights protected. Finally I also hope we talked about

women's empowerment at this G20 summit. One of the issues that have

been concerned about recently is the fact that many female candidates in

the general election found themselves bullied and harassed. And

in receipt of bullying and harassment. I would have thought, as

has been referred to by the right Honourable Lady, the Member for

Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford, I would have hoped that

every leader of every party in this House would condemn such action and

it's time he did so. John Redwood. I congratulate the Prime Minister on

her many successes at a productive summit particularly on the trade

front. Would she confirmed that ministers are working not just on

trade deals with those countries who don't have once about the moment but

will when we are outside the EU but or making sure we transferred the EU

ones to the UK as well as to the rest of the EU on Brexit. Am happy

to give that confirmation to my right honourable friend. Three areas

in trade we are working on. One, looking ahead to trade agreements we

can have with countries we don't have them with as a member of the

EU, the second, ensuring that where there are trade agreements with the

EU, as we Lee Hook enrolled as Ford, the third area is working with

countries like India and Australia to say what changes we can make now

before we leave the EU to Wood EU to improve our trade relationship.

Thank you Mr Speaker. The G20's and was an eye opening event, the UK is

now floundering on a global stage desperately trying to win friends. A

disastrous, and predictable alliance formed with the American president

on trade. Goodness knows what a trade deal with America would mean

for public services, food quality and workers' rights. Talk about UK-

US trade deal was dubbed a blow by the Prime Minister 's own Justice

Secretary who only hours after the summit ended said it wouldn't be

enough on its own. The Prime Minister must now come to her

senses. The United Kingdom outside the single market would be ruinous.

Our EU friends and partners are moving on without us. This year

alone finalising trade deals with Japan and Canada while the UK turns

in on itself. Today's Scottish chamber of commerce shows 61% of

Scottish businesses feel the UK should remain in both the single

market and the customs union. It is quite scandalous that the Prime

Minister turns a blind eye to the economy in favour of Eurosceptic

colleagues. Mr Speaker, I welcome the progress made at the G20 summit.

I especially pay tribute to the work of the German Chancellor who hosted

and delivered a challenging agenda on global issues. The communique is

clear, we must redouble our efforts in the Paris agreement, calling it

irreversible. As the Prime Minister to set up the next steps in

delivering the Paris agreement. The communique also delivers the T20-

Africa partnership to boost growth and jobs across Africa including an

initiative on rural employment creating 1.1 million new jobs by

2022. Can the Prime Minister explain the UK's role in delivering the

initiative and confirm whether the UK role will continue after exiting

the EU. Mr Speaker, the agreement to take further action to achieve

gender equality is universally welcomed in this House. The

conclusions also push the T20 to taking immediate effective measures

to eliminate child Labour by 2025, forced Labour, human trafficking and

all forms of modern slavery, promising step indeed. However Mr

Speaker the Prime Minister went to Hamburg with an open message, she

wanted the T20 to tackle terrorism. In particular she wanted the G20 to

tackle terrorist financing. What staggering hypocrisy. The Prime

Minister, sitting on a board commissioned by her predecessor,

denying us the truth about terrorist financing in the UK had the brass

neck to call upon the G20 to do more. What an absolute outrage. Will

she publish the Home Office report on terror funding in the UK and

world she said at a public inquiry into questions around the funding of

extremism? I hope that the honourable gentleman was not making

a personal accusation against the Prime Minister. Order, order, I know

what I'm doing in these matters. I cannot believe that he would

knowingly do that, make a personal accusation against the Prime

Minister because it is disorderly and if he is not aware of that it is

time he was. I think he ought to spring to his feet and clarify the

position. I'm happy to clarify. Point of explanation. My sense was

that there was an element of an accusation. Withdraw. I will

withdraw the allegation against the Prime Minister. Per minister. -- per

minister. As I stepped out in my statement

earlier. We have set out with a number of countries, the United

States, Japan, China, India, and other countries at the G20. He asked

about the compact with Africa, this is not a unique EU -ish and

initiative, it is something that has been led by Chancellor Merkel under

the G20 and the UK is playing its role. The principles that underpin

the compact with Africa are principles we have used in our

systems we have been giving it development aid to do variety of

countries in Africa are already, and we already have a compact with

Ethiopian witness the UK has put forward which will create 100,000

jobs including jobs for refugees living in Ethiopia. Again, we have

shown by what we are doing a commitment to these issues already.

He talks about the issue of terrorist financing, of course what

we looks to cast is that we are looking across the board at all

aspects of terrorist financing and that means as we look at the

changing nature of terrorism that we do not just look at large-scale

financing we also look at the small sums of financing that are harder to

trace, harder to identify, but which could potentially underpin attacks

that take place. That is where the communique clearly put a focus and

that is a new initiative that has been taken. Then he talks about

modern slavery, I think it is important to eradicate that. It was

in the G20 agenda, because I put it there. Because modern slavery is an

issue this Government takes very seriously. We introduced a modern

slavery act, the first piece of legislation in its kind in the

world, and we are working with others to ensure we eradicate modern

slavery. I have to say, his portrayal of the UK's position at

the G20 was simply wrong. But then he wasn't there, and I was. If I am

to accommodate the extensive interests of colleagues in this

matter, there will be an imperative for great brevity, to be I hope

spectacularly exemplified now. That is kind of you, but I didn't

actually have a question. LAUGHTER

Well the answer is, the right honourable lady... All! I didn't

imagine it in my sleep, the Right Honourable lay lady was standing. If

she sees to do so I did not realise, but she has led to her feet with

alacrity, the house is in a state of eager anticipation and baited

breath. I would like to take the opportunity to say something. I

wondered if my right honourable friend could help is with the modern

slavery act because she rightly identifies we have led the world on

this sort of legislation and many of us are hugely proud of the work she

did when she was Home Secretary. Is she finding that across the world

there is now a desire for other countries to follow where she and

this country have led? I am pleased to be able to say to her that is

indeed the case. We are seeing a much greater awareness of this wish

you around the world and we are seeing a much greater willingness

for governments to look at this issue. First, I think governments

are looking at the human trafficking aspect across borders but as we know

in the UK it is also important to look at what happens in country two

to citizens of 1's own country, and that is what we are doing. I am

certain the member will be as brief as his surname. In the light of the

discussions of security, the Prime Minister will no doubt be aware

across the house about her proposal to withdraw the UK from the Euratom

treaty despite the concerns there are about the implications for

scientists, materials and is life-saving therapies. Can she

explained what the cake nuclear industry gains from such a policy? I

am sure he will be aware from his chairing of the select committee

that members see of Euratom is inextricably linked with membership

of the EU. What we are doing, as was signalled in the Queen's speech,

with reference to a future Bill on this issue, is wanting to ensure we

can in maintaining these relationships which enable the

exchange of scientists, material, there are countries around the world

that have that relationship with Euratom but are not memberships of

the EU. I look forward to the Bill. Does my right honourable friend

agree that free trade is going to be one of the great Brexit dividends,

that it will provide cheaper feud, clothing and footwear to the

greatest benefit of the poorest in our society? I agree that it is free

trade that enables us to grow economies, increase prosperity,

provide jobs. And there will be benefits from the trade agreements

that we want to negotiate around the whole of the world. But we also need

as a country to defend the concept of free trade because it is under

too much attack from protectionists. When journalists and have been

murdered in Putin's Russia, does the primaries to share my anger at the

chilling sight of Presidents Trump and Putin joking about the

inconvenience of a free press? Will she commit to raising the importance

of the independence of the media to both leaders when she meets them

next? We defend a free press, we think it is an intentional and

depending of our democracy here and we want to defend it around the

world. I can assure the lady that indeed we do regularly raise this

issue with the Russian president and at all levels in Russian

authorities. Can I also pay tribute to my right honourable friend for

the all that work she has done in the past on the issue of human

trafficking and slavery and I commend her for raising this at the

G20. With the world on the move unfortunately opportunities for more

of this rather than less are now there. So what can we do between the

G20's to ensure other countries take this as seriously as we do. We have

set the bar in this we need to raise others to it. That is right. We are

taking action across a number of areas. The specific area we focused

on the G20 was the business supply chains, but one of the key ways of

ensuring we can act against human trafficking and modern slavery is

through the cooperation of law enforcement agencies here in the UK

with others around the world, and that is exactly what we are

encouraging and what is happening with some success. A year ago the

then financial secretary told the house that the Government supported

a multilateral deal on public country by country reporting. He

said if we have not made progress by this time next year on reaching a

multilateral agreement we will need to look carefully at the issue

again. A year on, can I ask for confirmation of what discussant she

has had with G20 members to make sure we can cap tackle corporate tax

avoidance? This is an issue we regularly raise. It is true to say

that we are disappointed at the lack of progress that has been made in

this area. We will continue to press on this issue but if we are going to

get that multilateral agreement others have to agree to this concept

as well. We will continue to press it. It is there because the UK has

been putting it on the agenda in the past. We will continue to do so.

About this new love fest with the benches opposite, given the record

of the Leader of the Opposition on the counterterrorism and security

act, does she possessed a very long spoon?

LAUGHTER Yes, I can say to my right

honourable friend that I have in the past as Home Secretary welcomes the

cooperation which I have had from the Labour benches, not from the

right honourable gentleman who is currently the Leader of the

Opposition, but from others who have seen the need to ensure our agencies

have appropriate powers to deal with terrorist threats that we face. I

look forward to Labour MPs and indeed others across the benches

opposite in this house, coming forward and supporting those

counterterrorism measures when they are brought forward. The G20

communique includes important reference to investment in global

education, including the global partnership for education and

education cannot wait. The UK has a proud record in leading in global

health. Will she join with Argentina in the forthcoming G20 presidency to

give investment in global dedication the premise to it deserves? Indeed I

would say it is not about looking at ahead to the agenda for the next

meeting, it is also about what the UK has been doing practically

through our international development budget as significant

number of girls around the world being educated as a result of the

input we put in. We think that global education agenda is very

important. Thank you. As the Prime Minister said in her statement, as

we are leaving the EU we are not leaving Europe. Can I welcome the

announcement we will continue to work with our European friends and

allies in developing a better overall approach to managing

economic migration? He is right. I think this is an issue that the UK

again has been leading on. And increasingly we see other countries

recognising that what the UK has said about the importance of

differentiating refugees and economic migrants, we will continue

to work not just in the G20 on that but in the UN work that started last

year that will be progressing towards the end of this year in

terms of looking at the compact for migration and refugees across the

world. We know that US intelligence services leaked sensitive UK

intelligence in the hours following the attack on the Ariana Grande

concert in Manchester. This weekend we had Presidents Trump and Putin

discussing forming and penetrable cyber security unit so that election

hacking will be guarded and safe. According to Presidents Trump's

tweet. Can she guarantee that UK intelligence assets on cyber warfare

will not be compromised or shared in anyway as long as there is a risk of

this sort of bizarre and dangerous alliance with the Russians? I can

say to the honourable lady that we take the issue of intelligence

sharing very seriously. It is important we are able to share

intelligence with our allies in the US and with other allies around the

world, but what what matters is we are able to do that on the basis of

confidence, that that intelligence will be treated appropriately. I can

assure her we take the whole issue of cyber security extremely

seriously, that is why we set up the new National Cyber Security Centre

and we recognise and understand the threat Russia poses in that area.

The G20 summit we heard positive words from the president of the US

and more this morning from the President of Australia as to the

opportunities for rapid and comprehensive trade deals between

their companies and the UK. Does my right honourable friend agree that

new trade deals with old friends and knew that are only really a risible

outside the customs union will add to the prosperity of a new global

Britain? He is right. We have been very clear that we want to be able

to and take an sign up to and activate those new trade deals with

old friends and new allies alike, and that means not being in the part

of the customs union that would prevent it. It is important we are

able to negotiate trade agreement with the EU and the rest of the

world. Can I press the Prime Minister on the issue of migration

and displacement that affects 65 million people worldwide? She will

know since the 1st of January 82,800 people have risked their lives

trying to cross the Mediterranean and 2000 have died. The G20 leaders

run 84% of the economy of the world. Apart from the 55 million as you

mentioned going to Tanzania, what other resources are being given to

deal with this catastrophic problem? The resources being given to this

issue are significant and varied. From the UK's own point of view,

there is the work we have been doing through our development aid budget,

particularly in another of countries in Africa, I referred earlier to the

compact we have of Ethiopia, which is providing jobs there for refugees

and others, because we see it as important to ensure that there are

economic opportunities in the countries of origin for this

migration so people do not feel the need to make this journey. We have

also, as I announced, we are giving extra funding, 75 million to work

with Libya and Italy to ensure that there are humane conditions for

people to able to return to countries in Africa that we increase

the ability of the Libyan coast guard to ensure they are properly

intercepting those boats which could pose a risk to people in terms of

their life if they were to make it across the Mediterranean. It is

multifaceted, but the UK is involved in every aspect. The Leader of the

Opposition has spent his entire life opposing trade deals with countries

around the world such as Mexico and India. The Prime Minister success at

G20 means we can look both East and West securing trade deals and does

my right honourable friend agree that we should recognise and be

proud of the global confidence in British services, goods, and the

British economy? My honourable friend is absolutely right. I think

the fact that a number of leaders, those I have mentioned, but others

as well, have expressed their interest in trade deals with the UK,

it is a vote of confidence in the British people.

Mr Speaker, I would be interested to know when the Prime Minister expects

to sign a trade deal with Australia and India how much these deals will

be worth and how much extra immigration she will accept as part

of these deals. The honourable lady may know that there's a limit to

what we can put in place while we are still members of the EU but we

can still discuss what a future trade agreement might be and it

doesn't mean we can't discuss how to improve trade relations already,

there are some areas we can do that which are not covered in terms of EU

competences and those discussions are having. Has been found. There

does seem to be consensus that when we leave the European Union UK- US

free trade deal would be a good and necessary thing. Does the Prime

Minister welcomed the clear support of the American administration that

this is expressed at the G20 but the other important decision-makers in

this are the US Congress. Following her successful visit to Philadelphia

with the Republican caucus witchy enable the excellent Congressional

relations office of our office in Washington to up MPs make the case

to congressional colleagues for this free trade deal? My right honourable

friend is right about the role Congress will play, he has raised an

interesting idea. I did indeed have discussions with members of Congress

in Philadelphia and I know that my right honourable friend was

Secretary of State for International Development has been having

discussions recently in America with members of Congress as well. We will

certainly consider the proposal that my right honourable friend has put

forward. He's right, we will work with Congress and the American

administration on this. Mr Speaker she says she wants help for building

consensus on sensible policies, there a majority in this House to

stay in Euratom and also in the European medicines agency so why

not. As referred to the membership of ten 2-mac is inextricably linked

with membership of the EU and as we leave the EU we will leave Euratom.

Yet what we look to put in place is a similar relationship with Euratom

like other countries which are not members of the EU having access to

the movement of scientists and materials and the standards produced

under Euratom. We recognise the importance of this, this is why a

bill in relation to this was in the Queen's Speech. Sir Edward Lee. As

my right honourable friend is now open to ideas to a man who tried to

remove her from office will she take an idea from a friend who stood on a

platform of keeping her in office? And once it is day in office. The

honourable gentleman from Rhondda should come himself, I want to hear

what the honourable member the gains that has to say. We have warm words

on helping Italy of migration but as long as Italy is forced to take all

the refugees more and more will come. Will my right honourable

friend work with our allies to establish safe havens in Libya so

that people can be returned safely to Libya. That's a conservative

idea, not useless socialist one! I have to say to my right honourable

friend not only is that concept of being able to return people to Libya

a good one, it is one we already working on. This is one of the

issues we will be discussing with the Italians and others in relation

to the extra humanitarian aid we are making available. We've also made

available, offered to the Italians, support and help to return as to

Nigeria because a significant number of those reaching Italy are from

Nigeria and we have arrangements already run by the United Kingdom in

Nigeria to provide just that sort of area where people are able to stay.

Alison McGovern. May I ask the Prime Minister about Syria and the loss of

civilian life specifically as it relates to you as operations against

Morisi in Raqqa. It appears that the rules of engagement have changed. So

has she raised this with the US or have any of her ministers -- US

operations against Daesh. We regularly in discussion with the

Americans and others in the coalition about the action. The

action taken place in Mosul to drive Daesh of muscle is important and the

reaction in Raqqa will be important but as United Kingdom we take the

position that we want to ensure that these actions deal with those who

they are supposed to deal with, ie the terrorists, and don't affect

civilians. Mr Costa. Thank you Mr Speaker, may I add my welcome to the

statement from the Prime Minister particularly in respect of

assistance given to Italy to tackle migration. I am chairman of the APPG

research group and as my right honourable friend knows, Greece also

has a huge burden with the movement of migrants. Would my right

honourable friend agreed to consider whether the delegation that has been

sent to Italy might also be sent in due course to Greece? What we are

doing is mirroring in Italy something we have offered Greece and

which they have taken up. It's difficult because of the deal with

Turkey that EU did so we've seen a significant reduction in the number

of migrants trying to reach Greece. We've also seen people coming

through those roots and trying to go through Libya into Italy. But we

will certainly ensure that we are giving as much support as we can to

Italy in this matter. Sir Vincent cable. In the Prime Minister's

enthusiasm for a bilateral trade union with the USA Wilshere accept

American insistence that we don't loot food standards and agree to the

establishments of investment protection mechanisms which override

British courts -- Wilshere accept? . Nash will she accept that we dilate

food standards? This hasn't yet taken place, we will be negotiating

trade commissions with the Americans. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Many countries are eager to trade free from punitive tariffs, does my

right honourable friend agree that Britain can be a leader in free

trade fair trade once we leave the by setting off our own standards and

striking our: trade deals. It's important, we will have that ability

once outside the EU to strike deals around the world, underpinning what

my right honourable friend asks is the need for the UK to stand up and

promote free and fair trade around the world. As I said earlier in

response to another honourable friend, there is this attempt in

some areas to towards protectionism. I think we should stand against

that. We should show clearly that it is free trade that brings prosperity

and jobs and help is not just economy is like ours but some of the

poorest countries in the world to develop. Given the special

relationship the Prime Minister enjoys with President Trump can she

explain why she failed to influence him from preventing him from pulling

out the Paris climate agreement? And will she commend that decision and

refrain from rolling out the red carpet in the form of a state visit

to him. We made, i-mate, the UK made, our views on the Paris climate

agreement is well-known, the US takes its own decisions, this is a

commitment President Trump made in his electoral campaign, I said to

him more than once that either the USA can be encouraged to come back

into the Paris agreement, I think it is important and we will try to work

to get them back in. David TC Davies. Mr Speaker given that most

of the MPC are stored on a platform backing tracks and including the

Leader of the Opposition isn't it time people stopped using these

negotiations for political or personal advantage and united behind

the Prime Minister and her ministers to get on with the deal that works

for the Halliburton? Whole of Britain. My honourable friend is

right, 80% of votes in the general election were for parties that

wanted to deliver on the Brexit decision taken by the British people

in the referendum master. That is what the government will get on and

do and I hope others in the House was aborted. The Prime Minister said

in a statement that women and children are being enslaved, forced

into hard Labour, raped and beaten and passed from abuse and to abuse

of profit. Does she agree that this is no more true than the depravity

of child prostitution in India and did she raised this with the Prime

Minister of India? I have raised this issue previously with the Prime

Minister of India, the question of modern slavery, as we have, to

address this particular issue. We are very clear that we want to see

this issue being dealt with, this is one reason why we have put into

legislation requirement for companies in the UK who will be

manufacturing and sourcing products from around the world that they need

to look at their supply chains and make sure and report on they find in

their supply chains and whether or not modern slavery is taking place

within those supply chains. Does the Prime Minister agree that while we

are still leaving the EU there are many manners in which we still need

to cooperate, especially dealing with the migrant problems, how we

will manage international trade and work with Europe to tackle the evil

of people trafficking, and also cooperate to stop multinationals

abusing tax systems across the continent. I agree with my

honourable friend, there is much on which we will continue to cooperate.

With countries in the European Union, the relations we have with

French and Belgium in particular in relation to ports and the traffic of

people across the Channel is very important to us. And we have been

working increasingly with the French authorities and reversing including

the Greek authorities in dealing with this issue of human trafficking

and successfully insuring criminal gangs involved in this are not just

identified but investigated and prosecuted.

Bambos Charalambous. As the Prime Minister spoken to the president of

Turkey about the Cyprus talks? Headed on by authors put to the

Secretary General of the UN who was president at the talks. About the

reasons why they broke down. It is a matter not only of disappointment

but great sadness that those talks did not come to fruition, they were

the closest we have come to finding a solution for the unification of

Cyprus. It was a matter of sadness that this could not be achieved. The

United Kingdom played a strong role in trying to achieve that but sadly

it did not happen. One quarter of G20 members are also members of the

Commonwealth, I welcome my honourable friend welcoming

preliminary discussions with Australia and India, can she also

say what discussions have been had with other Commonwealth countries

like New Zealand. And happy to let my honourable friend know that we

have also been discussing with New Zealand, this is an issue we can

progress with other members of the Commonwealth, not just New Zealand,

also Canada. Catherine West. Mr Speaker, what concrete steps will be

taken to get climate change back on the discussion with the US

administration. We raise the issue regularly with them but crucially

there was a clear message from everyone at the G 22 the US

administration about the importance we all placed on that climate change

agreement, the Paris agreement and the US being a member of it. Mr

Philip collarbone. Kettering is located at the economic beating

heart of the nation so a strong economy and new international trade

deals post Brexit are very important for all of us live there. The Prime

Minister has told the house that over the weekend she met the leaders

of America, China, Japan and India to talk about new trade deals. May I

say it sounds like a very good start and a very good week and's work. I

thank my honourable friend and can I also recognise the important role

Kettering plays in the economy of this country and the benefits when

we see new trade deals coming into place. Mr Speaker can the Prime

Minister guarantee that Brexit will not weaken the fight against

terrorism? Will we retain full membership of Eurapo and Eurajust? I

have defended our membership of that and various other things, we are

informal negotiations with the EU and these will be part of the

negotiations but I am sure, some of the arrangements with countries are

arrangements we have outside EU but we want to retain that co-operation

because it is important not only for us but the countries outside euro

FIA - EU. What does she see in that crisis and might not part of it be

restrictions against British banks, two of which had impositions against

them for inadvertently treading with North Korea. And happy to say I've

had discussions with other leaders about what is happening on the

Korean peninsula, especially with the president of China because I

think the role of China is a crucial one, they are the country that has

the greatest leveraged in relation to North Korea and I urge the

president of China as I believe others have done to exercise that

leveraged. We want to see the denuclearisation of North Korea.

The Prime Minister talks about boosting trade but could she tell is

what discussions he had with other leaders about the open skies

agreement with the USA which depends upon our relationship with the EU,

is a cause for concern to the aviation industry. Time is very

short. The open skies agreement was referenced in the conversation I had

with President ramp. Can I congratulate her on her comments

condemning President Trump's decision to abandon Paris? Can I

encourage her to keep the UK in the global Vanguard on climate change by

publishing so that those who are more reluctant can see the value of

a green economy? I think the UK has a good record on this. We can

PowerPoint are ready to the actions we have taken, but we can be looking

to do more on air quality in the future, but we can already show the

action we have taken and the benefit it has had. As I said earlier, there

is no contradiction between decarbonisation and a growing

economy. Is a bad trade deal with the United States better than no

deal? LAUGHTER

We will be working to negotiate a good trade deal with the US. She

will recall that the recently deceased teat it would have included

grotesque provisions for private corporations to prosecute legitimate

democratic governments. Would she resist any deal that includes such

proportions? I can assure him that as we look to negotiate a trade deal

with the US we will be looking for one in the best interest of the

United Kingdom. For all the progress against Dyche there are mine

hundreds of thousands of civilians in Syria who remain under siege from

the evil Al Assad Government. Will she look again at the issue of

getting aid with multilateral agreement into those besieged towns

and cities? He raised a very important issue which we do

regularly discuss with our coalition partners about the possibility of

getting that aid in. As he will know, there have been some attempts

to ensure aid can be getting through to those civilians who are besieged.

They have not always... He says try again. We do regularly raise this as

an issue. The best answer is to find a solution to the situation in Syria

which leads to a stable Syria meaning those civilians are no

longer besieged. In a summit of extraordinarily awkward moments,

perhaps the most bizarre was when President Trump's seat was taken by

his daughter. The Prime Minister did not seem to bat an eyelid, which I

assume is because she's exhuming somebody else will take her seat

soon. I wonder who she hopes that will be, the Home Secretary, the

Foreign Secretary, or the Chancellor? I have to say, in

relation to the fact that Iran could Trump took the present's seat at one

point, that was after a session we had had in the morning where we had

launched the rim and entrepreneurs financing initiative, which is an

initiative that has been developed by Yvonne could Trump and the World

Bank so I think it was entirely reasonable! It is welcome and that

the Prime Minister raised the issue of the jumping of Chinese steel but

quite frankly words are cheap. It is actions that matter. Can she please

tell the house what specific actions are going to be taken to ensure

China starts playing by the rules? The honourable gentleman will be

aware of the action we have taken here in the UK to support our steel

industry. We have urged at the last T20 took the decision that the

global Forum would be the basis on which work could be done

internationally to look at the issue of excess capacity in steel. That

has not worked as well as hoped. It was set up under the Chinese

presidency and it is that that we want to see with the ministerial

meeting to look at excess steel capacity this year. Will the Prime

Minister confirmed that the NHS will be excluded from any trade deal with

the United States? I am conscious that this was an issue that was

raised in relation to the T tip deal and concerned people had that

somehow that was about changing the NHS. We are not going to change the

NHS. The deal was never a deal that was going to impact on the NHS in

the way the opposition suggested. Not all G20 countries have made the

same sort of progress we have in this country in relation to racist

and discrimination are re-language. That was an issue she discussed and

does she agree that where it happens organisations should take decisive

and swift action? I have to say to him, I think it is beholden on a

salt to make sure we use appropriate language at all times. With the

President of German industries stating it would be negative from

Brexit, has she got any closer to carrying out an economic assessment

of the UK leaving the single market? What is very clear is that we want

to negotiate a comp Raza agreement with the European Union, which gives

us access to the single market. But anybody looking at the impact that

take place of leaving the single market should recognise that the

single market that is most important two nations within the ice kingdom

is the United Kingdom. Given her personal commitment to ending modern

slavery and her desire for other countries to follow the UK's please,

why did she think it takes her Home Office more than two years to

investigate the case of a woman in my constituency who is a victim of

rape, slavery and trafficking? What kind of example issue setting for

the G20 there? I am not aware of the individual case that you raise. He

talks about investigation of a case of rape. That is not a matter for

the Home Office, it is for the police. Following the questions by

Mike Right Honourable friend the member for Leeds Central and Exeter,

the Prime Minister said our membership of your atom is linked

with membership of the EU and yet we have been members of your atom for

longer than we have of the EU. So how can that be the case and world

Government rethink our arrangements and returns of your atom which is so

important? The fact is the treaty makes it clear that there is either

link between the membership. If you are a membership of the EU and

membership of the Euratom. Across the house we are all agreed that we

want to maintain the arrangements and relationships that currently

exist under Euratom. But they will be on a different basis in the

future. But we want to maintain them. There is no argument about

that. I thank her for her statement and note her effort to reform the

World Trade Organisation rules in order for them to keep up with the

services and digital sectors, crucial to the British economy. Does

she agree with me that any reform to the WTA rules will take longer than

we have left before we leave the EU? One of the point I was making at the

G20's we need to speed up the way the world trade organisation looks

at these issues. Looking a trade rules around the Digital economy is

not something they will be starting from scratch, they have been doing

ever some time, we need to ensure we get on with it and get get rules

set. I welcome her indication that she wants to coax the United States

back into the Paris agreement. Will she consider strengthening her

negotiating hand by suggesting to President Trump that there will be

no negotiations on a free-trade deal until they come back into the deal,

or is securing a free-trade deal with the US is more important than

securing the future the planet? What we want is to ensure we get a good

trade deal with the US because it will be to the benefit of people in

the UK with proper parity and economic growth and jobs across the

UK. But we will continue to press on climate change agreement as well.

And as I say, I am encouraging President Trump as are others to

find a way back into the Paris agreement. I think it is important

for us all. Meanwhile we will continue to do our bit in terms of

the application of the Paris agreement. Older. I think the right

honourable gentleman wanted to raise a point of order. No? OK. I was

going to say if he wanted to it would normally be after statements

but he could raise it now if he wanted to. But he does not wish to.

That is fine. Thank you. We move now to the second statement. The

statement the Secretary of State for International Development, Doctor

Liam Fox. With permission I would like to make a station on the High

Court judgment on export licensing. We welcome the divisional Court

judgment today dismissing the claim by the campaign against Arms trade

for judicial review of decisions revising exporter Saudi Arabia for

possible use of the conflict in Yemen. We are grateful to the court

for the careful and meticulous way the evidence from both sides has

been considered in reaching the judgment. The judgment recognises

the rigorous and robust processes we have in place across Government to

ensure UK defence exports are licensed consistence with the

Government consisted national arms licensing criteria. These criteria

give effect to an EU Common position setting out rules for assessing

Mapes Arias sports. They were introduced in October 2000 and last

updated in 2014. The Consolidated criteria used to assess each

exporter licence application cover our international obligations

including sanctions, human rights and international humanitarian law,

and confidence, national security and the security of our allies,

terrorism, risk of diversion and the technical and economic capacity of

the recipient country. The claim that challenge decisions not to

suspend extant licences for the sale of transfer of arms or military

equipment and to continue to grant is new lances for such transfers.

The judgment states these decisions were lawful and rational. It

describes the Government discussion about export licences as and I

quote, highly sophisticated, structured and multifaceted. We note

the application to appeal and will continue to defend the decision is

challenged. We remain confident that the UK operates one of the most

robust export control regimes in the world. The central issue in relation

to the defence exports to Saudi Arabia in the context of the

conflict in Yemen is criterion to see of the Consolidated EU and

national arms licensing criteria. That is that the Government will not

grant a licence if there is a clear risk that the items might be used in

the commission of a serious violation of international

humanitarian law. We have sufficient information to carry out proper

risk-based assessment is against criterion to see, the core situation

has been kept under close review, and to date we have not refused

licences on to see grounds because we have assessed on all the event

nation available including information not publicly available,

that the clear risk threshold has not been reached. The judgment says

that on the evidence we were rationally entitled to conclude this

threat has not been reached. The exercise taken to into form these

rest than is has in the words of the Government, all the hallmarks of a

rigorous and robust multilayered process of analysis, carried out by

numerous expert personnel upon which the secretary of state could rely.

In addition by considered analysis of humanitarian law, there has been

intensive engagement with the Saudis at the highest level, stressing the

need to comply with international humanitarian law, to investigate all

instances of concern and ensure lessons are learned. Through this

engagement and our long-standing relationship with the Saudis, we

have developed a higher degree of insight into Saudi military

processes and procedures adopted in Yemen and might be expected for a

country not party to the conflict. We have also considered public

commitments to comply with international humanitarian law made

by the Saudis and monitored and analysed development on the ground.

Each of these strands takes into account a wide range of sources and

analyses including those of a sensitive nature to which other

parties such as NGOs and the UN do not have access. Taken together,

these strands of information and analysis which are reviewed

regularly by the FCO in comprehensive reports to the Foreign

Secretary, have enabled ministers to take informed decisions about the

overall criterion to see position and individual export licence

applications. They provide a sound basis on which the Foreign Secretary

is able to advise me on these points. That the assessment has been

that the issue of military exports to Saudi Arabia is finally balanced,

is seen by the judgment as instructive and points two and again

I quote, anxious scrutiny given to the matter and the essential

rationality and rigour of the process in which the secretary of

state was engaged. And as the judgment states on the basis of this

information and analysis we were rationally entitled to conclude

Saudi Arabia has put processes in place to secure respect for

compliance with international humanitarian law and that Saudi

Arabia has been and remains committed to compliance with

international humanitarian law. The Saudis have engaged and continue to

engage constructively with the UK on these matters.

We do not receive this judgment as a signal to do anything other than to

take our exports responsibilities very seriously. Our policy is to

assess licence applications on a case-by-case basis against the

rigorous tests set out in the Consolidated EU and national arms

export licensing criteria. We will not grant a licence if to do so

would be inconsistent with these criteria. We will continue to keep

the situation in Yemen under close scrutiny and base our export

licensing assessments on the most up-to-date information and analysis

available. If we assess that the clear risk threshold under criterion

to see of the Consolidated EU and national licensing criteria has been

reached them you will not hesitate to refuse export licences and

suspend licences already in circulation. I commend the statement

to the House. Thank you. I thank the Secretary of State for his

statement. I know he and the whole House will agree that the war in

Yemen as each monetary tragedy. Thousands of people the --

humanitarian tragedy. Thousands of people have been at effect through

loss of hospitals and water supplies and all of us should do more on

that. The question for the High Court was whether we are entitled to

conclude that there was no risk British weapons would be used in

serious violations of international humanitarian law. Since the bombing

of Yemen began, the UK has licensed more than ?3.3 billion worth of arms

to the Saudi regime including 2.2 billion pounds worth of licences

dealing with aircraft and helicopters. 1.1 billion pounds

worth doing with grenades and bombs and countermeasures and ?430,000

worth dealing with armoured vehicles and tanks. The Secretary of State

knows that instrument use of air strikes, the destruction of the

countries means of food production and the targeting of civilians are

all classed as war crimes under international humanitarian law. Does

she recall that in January 2016 a United Nations panel of experts

reported that Saudi Arabian forces had engaged in widespread and

systematic targeting of civilians. Does she recall that in July last

year the Government corrected its previous declarations that they had

no evidence of any violations and that in September the Foreign

Secretary stated in the Government's new position was that they had been

unable to make an assessment and that the Saudi authorities are best

placed to make such an assessment? Does he accept that the Foreign

Secretary was wrong to franchise out our obligation in this way and that

we, not the Saudis, have the duty to assess whether there is a risk that

British arms sold to the Saudis might be used in contravention? Is

she recall that evidence revealed in the High Court in February showed

that the civil servant at the head of export control had provided

advice to the previous Secretary of State recommending that the UK

suspend arms sales to Saudi Arabia given in the gaps in knowledge about

Saudi operations? Can he explain to the housewife that recommendation

was overruled by the then Secretary of State and sits alongside him? But

the Secretary of State at the committee should be set up in this

Parliament without delay so that export licensing for arms sales and

commander of the necessary parliamentary scrutiny? Does he

agree that today's judgment did not seek to whether the Government were

correct and concluding that there was no clear risk of a serious

breach of international managerial role but rather whether Ensor

concluding they had reached a decision which could be considered

rational given in the procedures they had adopted and the evidence

they had considered? Does he further except that if such procedures

themselves were defective or the evidence they had considered

insufficient or misleading or not comprehensive, then it follows that

the decision, however rational within its own parameters, could be

deeply flawed and this country might be at grave risk of violating their

obligations in international humanitarian law? The Government

relied upon material which brought forward only and closed hearing,

evidence which was not able to be seen or heard by the campaign

against the Arms trade or their lawyers. The court ruling that the

Government 's decision was irrational one given in the

procedures and evidence at considered was based on secret

evidence which it was impossible to challenge. Does the Secretary of

State except that the court 's judgment makes specific reference to

the substantial body of evidence is presented in open session that in

fact suggests a clear risk does exist that British arms might be

used in violation of international monetary and more? Will he agree to

make evidence that was available on the enclosed session available to

members of this House on Privy Council terms or indeed make it

available to the intelligence and security select committee? Does he

agree that in mattress review would wish this country not only to adopt

the highest ethical standards and controls but also to be seen to

adopt them, it would be helpful if he could no reassure the House that

is his considered view that not only was the Government rational and

adopting the view instead given the procedures it followed and the

evidence at considered, but that he personally can give his assurance to

this House that there is too has a certain knowledge no risk whatsoever

that UK arms make use by Saudi Arabia and Yemen or in any way that

might constitute a violation of our obligations and international

humanitarian law? Can I say first of all that I agree with the honourable

gentleman and Yemen is indeed a humanitarian disaster that is

begging for a political social ocean to lead to enable us to carry out

without a dramatic efforts and Germanic taking efforts. I doubt

anyone would disagree with that. In terms of what he said, he wasn't

quite accurate in terms for the court case was about. There were

three grounds of challenge. Firstly there to ask the correct questions

to make enquiries. Failure to apply the suspension mechanism and a

rationally concluding there was no clear risk under criterion 2C. All

these grounds have been dismissed by the court. He makes the point about

targeting. Can I say to him that the efforts by the MOD have gone to the

smallest degree to improve the ability of the Saudis to target more

effectively including by training. By UK personnel. That is that one of

the biggest advantage is that we have helped the Saudis make on this.

He said the United Nations have set out their own reservations about

what had happened but as the judgment made very clear, it didn't

have all the information, that the judges were able to look at as part

of that and 20 said that there were gaps in the Government's knowledge,

he's the court made very clear that not only did the Government have the

ability to assess what the gaps in the knowledge might have been, they

had the appropriate means of addressing that and I remain timid

that the criteria that we operate a part of the EU Consolidated

criteria, not UK Government unilateral criteria. I take

exception with the final point that he made because this idea that

somehow if we have closed sessions that makes the judgment less valid,

I substitute except because I don't accept this idea that we simply

cannot have closed sessions. That particular national security for the

personnel involved in a national security, our sources need to be

protected. Ellis to the argument he makes but I cannot bring myself to

accept it. -- I listened to the argument. At the end of the

statement he referred to steps that could be taken if it were found that

Saudi Arabia were misusing the arms which we supply. Can I ask you to

expand on that, an issue that has come up before any committees for

arms export controls? Supposing we supply it consists in Saint of

sophisticated weapons for use in one way and it is used in a different

way or abused in defiance of the laws of war, what could be rendered

to rectify that? As he knows from his experience, there are a number

of criteria for refusal is and revocations. If he has not seen the

list I will ensure he is sent it and if we believe that we are not able

to convince ourselves that we were operating entirely within the

Consolidated criteria, we can suspend licences and refuse new ones

and as I made clear, if we believe that we are not fully in alignment

with those criteria, we would do so. Apologies for my horse voice. --

horse voice. Amnesty International believes UK and US weapons have been

used against Yemeni civilian is. 10,000 civilians have been killed

and 3 million displaced. Today's judgment raises questions and be

paid tribute to the campaign against Arms trade love taking the

Government to court and force them to explain themselves. We have

knowledge they plan to appeal but the UK Government should be coming

to this House with all the facts at all times, but having to be dragged

through the courts for the public to get a full explanation so does he

accept that it cannot be beneficial of the public loses confidence in

the Government over its solution ship with the supposed ally? One

which is infrequent breach of its international humanitarian law and

Yemen? Let's not forget that Saudi Arabia, UK's largest weapons client

has bought more than ?3 billion worth of British arms and the last

two years. UK and EU arms sales rules that state export licences

cannot be granted if there is not a clear risk that the equipment can be

used in breach of international humanitarian law. He says that he

takes it very seriously and he will know that our former colleague Angus

Robertson was strong advocate for the re-establish that of the

committee on arms export control. UK Government promised before the

election it would be reconvened. Can I ask the Secretary of State when

will that committee take place, when will its first meeting happen and

can he give us categorical assurances that the election does

not mean that such an important committee will be kicked into the

long grass? As the judgment itself set out, the case focused on the air

strikes conducted by a coalition led by Saudi Arabia and support of the

legitimate Government of Yemen against the rebellion so we need to

put on record that that is the origin of the conflict. Of course

the humanitarian issues and Yemen are deeply troubling to all of us,

we have all seen the pictures and the United Kingdom through our

various agencies and Government departments have been fulfilling as

much of our diplomatic and you manage union actions as we can and

the circumstances. It will only be brought to an end by a political

settlement, not a military one. She talks about the clear risk test, the

judgment could not have been clearer that the Government admitted the

clear risk test of criterion 2C in the way the Government has carried

this out. On her point about the committee on Arms exports, I have

absolutely no objections to such a committee being set up in fact I

think it is beneficial to us to ensure at all times the highest

reputation of our property in these matters and I would have absolutely

no objection to such a committee being in place. Does the Secretary

of State agree with me that the detail of this judgment actually

makes it clear just what a great job as civil servants and other civil

servants and officials in both MOD and the Foreign Office have done any

rigorous way they have gone about their responsibilities so that the

judgment can then say that they were highly sophisticated structures and

multifaceted and it deserves congratulations?

I don't think the judgment could have been more unequivocal, and I am

very grateful for his comments. We have been utterly rigorous in the

process. The work between the FCO and the MoD and the de-IT has been

extremely close. Our officials have done a wonderful job. I'm not sure

they appreciated the number of letters necessary that went between

is to ensure the process works as tightly as it has, but I am sure

they will all feel totally vindicated by the judgment and in

the way they have carried out their duties on behalf of this country's

international duties and law. Can I welcome the judgment and say it

demonstrates how robust the Arms export control act of 2002

introduced by the Labour Government is. It also supports hard-working

defence workers in our defence industry. In the judgment, it says

the coalition would not targeting civilians and Saudis have procedures

to abide by the principles of international humanitarian law. In

light of that can the union should make representations of the Saudis

to publish their own enquiries ins to the stars? I thank him for his

comments. We do as I said have I think the most robust system in

place on defence exports that exists. And we have been very clear

with the Saudis that they have to carry out investigations into some

of the incidents he mentioned and they had to make that clear to the

United Kingdom Government and that we had to be very clear if we were

to license further defence exports that those lessons had been learned

and that mechanisms have been put in place to ensure they would not

happen again. Given the High Court has today found the Government has

been meticulous in its export licensing processes, could he

perhaps inform the house how much the court case will cost the

taxpayer in legal fees? I hesitate a little because there may well be an

appeal and we may not yet be at the end of the legal process. But to

date the case has cost the UK taxpayers somewhat in excess of

?600,000. The secretary of state and the Government may have won the

legal skirmish but they have not won the moral case and there are still

many unanswered questions about the relationship here and the terrible

situation we see in Yemen. The Secretary of State says he was

confident but on the other hand the court judgment makes it clear he was

anxious. He knows he wrote to the Foreign Secretary saying he was

concerned that it continue to be finely balanced and he asked they

commissioned a further investigation and seek advice from lawyers. Why

was he anxious? Was it the civilian deaths,? The use of cluster bombs,

all the attacks on humanitarian supplies including water and

medication? I know he takes a close interest in this but I would not

describe today's landmark case as a skirmish and I think everyone in the

house would be advised to read the full judgment. It is my job to be

anxious about these things. It is my job to give the nth degree of

scrutiny because lives are potentially being lost if we give

the wrong judgments. It is the judgment of myself, the Foreign

Secretary and other senior ministers that gives us such anxiety. Were we

to be cavalier he would be absolutely right to criticise us.

When we take the nth degree of care about the judgments we make, as

previous governments have done, he ought to be grateful that we are

doing so. I welcome my friend's statement as it comes from an

independent judiciary and underscores the robustness of the

assessment of the export licence applications. He will be aware that

Saudi Arabia is going through self authored and hugely welcome

modernisation and change. Can he assure me that these changes within

the kingdom will be taken into account when considering future

export licence applications to our strong and reliable ally in the

Middle East? We take all of this information into account when coming

to a judgment. We look across what is happening from the information we

have from the FCO, the MOD, my department, we will put all this

picture together before we come to judgment. I think we can hardly be

accused of spending too much time and looking at too much evidence in

order to come to the right conclusion. Of course we accept the

guy judgment of the court because we accept the rule of law in this

country. However, how does this help the Yemeni people? So far 10,000

people have died, 14 million people have been displaced and 200,000

people are suffering from cholera. He is a former Foreign Minister,

former Defence Secretary, could he after this statement go back to the

Foreign Office and get everyone back at the negotiating table? Please?

This Government are leaving no stone unturned to try to get the peace

process driven forward. We have had so many attempts to try to do so.

And it is in all our interests to stop what is a dreadful humanitarian

disaster. He is absolutely right, the parties need to understand that

it cannot be solved by a purely military solution. It has to be a

political solution. Can I also welcome today's landmark ruling on

what was a very difficult case. Tens of thousands of defence workers,

many in my constituency, whose job depends on the deals that are done.

Can he assure me we will do is continue to work with the Saudis to

ensure accurate targeting and also robust and sales? Of course we will

continue to work with the Saudis to get an improvement in the position

to make sure any decisions we take our within the criteria. He is right

that a lot of jobs in this country depend on our defence industry. And

whether campaigns such as the campaigns against the Arms trade to

be successful it would mean there would be a rapid proliferation of

new defence companies trying to set up around the world. They would

actually be less control over proliferation rather than more.

Parliamentary scrutiny of arms exports is necessary. May I welcome

what he said in response to challenges on arms export controls,

it is vitally important they are established soon. Can I also asked

the Government to look again at the question of independent UN led

investigation into all alleged humanitarian law of the conflict? We

have never had any objection to an independent UN enquiry. Part of the

trouble was set out in the judgment itself, which is the availability of

evidence. Especially in open session, that I'd be available to

such an enquiry. That is why I think when members read the full judgment

they will see why there is such significance to this particularly

judgment, but I am open-minded about any future UN enquiry. Instances

have been refused. There are a number of different criteria and

they are assessed on a regular basis. There were 366 refusals or

revocations in 2016. They are set out in a number of eight different

categories. Of refusals and revocations. Additive is helpful I

shall make a copy available in the library if it is not there already.

Can the secretary of state confirmed that this judgment does not confirm

there was no risk of IHL breaches in the Yemen, that the judge

acknowledged significant evidence which submits just there was a risk

or is and it remains a risk the UK Government is heavily dependent on

Saudi guarantees that they are not targeting civilians? It is

impossible to sell anybody to anything, anything to anybody, that

has no risk attached. That is why we have a clear risk test in the

Consolidated criteria. And we are in close touch to a degree I have never

known before with a country that is party to a military dispute in terms

of seeing how they do their targeting, understanding their

methods, and their information, and we have been very close in helping

to instruct them in ways that will minimise visual and counselled

season future. I have had the opportunity of travelling to Saudi

Arabia and visiting the targeting Centre in Riyadh where targets in

Yemen are allocated. Would he agree with me that as well as exporting

hardware we also export a doctrine of responsible use that at the end

of the day saves lives? I would entirely agree. It is not just the

doctrine that we export it is the professional expertise and training

which can help turn that doctrine into effect. Medicine some frontier

say Yemenis are free to go to the cholera treatment centre. Jeered

declared this was an unintentional mistake along with facilities

elsewhere. All of these were hit by Saudi bombs. How many hospitals

protected by international humanitarian law will the secretary

of state allow to be hit by Saudi Arabia before he stopped selling

them bombs? The Honourable lady talks as though there is only one

party in this particular dispute in this part of the world, and

unfortunately it is not. We take the absolute the queer risk criteria

very seriously but I'm afraid making the sort of uninformed point she

does for propaganda purposes does not help the humanitarian situation.

Would he agree with me that amongst our many security objectives and

values, keeping faith with important allies and being a reliable security

partner should be among the most important and so our allies today

can see we take these important decisions rigorously, with due

process which they deserve, and under the rule of law? He is right.

Protection of our allies and working with them is extremely important.

But it is almost important that they had themselves understand we will

rigorously apply the criteria that we have set out and been party to

international agreement for. I think getting the balance right between

those things is exactly what the Government has sought to achieve.

Will the secretary of state please enlighten us as to why he does not

take more notice of the foreign and Commonwealth offices reports into

countries of concern for human and repression? Perhaps we are talking

about a different judgment, because the judgment makes very clear that

we did take very clear account of the advice given by the Foreign

Office and indeed sought further advice from the Foreign Office when

it was necessary. Does he agree that closed sessions are absolutely

standard in litigation of this nature and it is nature wrong to

seek to undermine a clear and impartial ruling of the High Court

which confirms the rigorous and detailed scrutiny. I think there is

a danger in making that sort of attack on the court system. Not

least because secret or classified evidence was open to challenge by

the special advocates representing the claimants in this case. The

Secretary of State will be aware of reports by the BBC and Danish

newspapers in relation to the sale of surveillance and decryption

technology to Saudi Arabia by British companies via Danish subsidy

Aries. This has been used to crush internal dissent and has a potential

impact on UK security. Will they be reviewing legislation and oversight

procedures governing sales of this data? If any individual or gaunt

organisation has evidence they believe quite clearly illustrates

wrongdoing they should bring it to the attention of the Government in

detail. Could this judgment we have heard today shows the UK is very

robust in its licensing criteria but in light of this decision could he

reassures the house that under decision decisions to grant such

licences are and occasion and indication humanitarian law? The

judgment makes clear it is the case. I think that those who criticise the

UK system should look to see how robust we are in comparison to other

countries. I think it would do everybody in this country good to

recognise how robust and clear we are in the decisions we make and how

transparent we are in their contact. The secretary of state rightly draws

attention to the robust nature of the wording in the document produced

by the courts. Does he agree that because this judgment relates to a

decision under the EU consolidation criteria that it will be extremely

important that in future we continue to maintain control of arms exports

at least as strong as under the existing EU Consolidated criteria?

It is slightly worrying to me how often I do agree with the honourable

gentleman, and I find myself doing so again today. It is not what the

criteria are called, it is what they contain that matters. And the

content has clearly stood the rigour of scrutiny by the court today and I

completely agree with him that it would be wayward to say the least

for any Government to consider criteria that were any less rigorous

than the ones we have today. He doesn't look worried at all. He

looks in a state of high contentment. Anyone would think that

Christmas had come early. But I suppose it is always good when

people agree with one. Could she tell you House that the

High Court had before it all the information needed in order to reach

the judgment? That was very much the view of the court. Could I ask if he

continues to promote the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia what regard

this Government has today factor for hundred and 57 people were executed

there last year including minors and four young men arrested as minus

remain at imminent risk of execution by crucifixion? By our engagement

with Saudi Arabia be able to raise any reservations that we have about

international humanitarian law or human rights which we do. At the

last Parliament urged to quit some period of time for the committee on

Arms export controls to be set up. Will my friend speak to the Leader

of the House speak to the two C of this committee can be set up as

quickly as possible? The usual channels will have heard the view, I

have no objection to be such a committee being in place, it is a

balanced judgment as to whether we have such a committee or not but as

I have said any committee looking into the property decision of

ministers should be welcomed by ministers as well as the House as a

whole. In 2013 in the Government launched its plan on business human

rights to great fanfare but subsequent questions revealed that

appears to be little more than a piece of paper. Not an action plan.

How does that suppose it action plan and former business Roshan ship with

Saudi Arabia and how will it going forward? It will not be affected by

this judgment because it said that the Government was carrying out a

rigorous and responsible and rational view of the decisions on

defence exports. I would have thought that the House might have

been pleased that our systems are working so clearly and transparently

well. I visited Saudi Arabia as part of a cross-party delegation in April

and have declared this in the register. It is quite right that

arms exports are subject to legal challenge and everyone agrees about

the material crisis and Yemen but I was surprised to learn that 65,000

shells and rockets have been fired from Yemen and Saudi Arabia, that

there have been civilian deaths and injuries and Saudi Arabia, civilians

have been evacuated and displaced and hospitals damaged all and Saudi

Arabia. Would you welcome more balanced coverage of this

distressing conflict? He makes a very important point that this was

not a conflict that Saudi Arabia or the coalition sought and they have a

legitimate right of self-defence and they have a legitimate right to

acquire the means of conducting that self defence. It is quite clear that

this is a bloody and brutal conflict and it requires a proper political

settlement and to continue with humanitarian and automatic efforts

and he is right that we could not do any harm to have a little more

objective than simply a one-sided blast that we have seen rather too

often in this House and elsewhere. Today's judgment was unequivocal.

Really Government has failed as an advancing the peace process and

Yemen and that includes Saudi Arabia. When will we see the

Government make progress on a peace settlement for that country? This

Government is doing all it can to help take that process forward.

Where it is so simple that we could simply unilaterally create a

solution in that walk on part of the world. We are doing what we can to

help our allies reached a settlement and we will continue to do so. It is

easy monetary disaster but we sadly don't have it unilaterally in our

power to bring it to an end. -- humanitarian disaster. I will take

the points of order no because there are many of them. The two honourable

gentleman can wait. On a point of order, during the most recent

business energy and industrial strategy questions, I raised the

case of local employers misleading workers about the rights to holiday

pay. I was assured that the Government have increased the power

is open to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs to enforce those rights. I

have received a written answer from the same minister stating that HM

Revenue and Customs has no powers to sanction companies from uploading

holiday pay. The Minister has given me to Asda is stating the complete

opposite and the space of a few days. Clearly one or other of those

answers must be wrong and double I am not out of the new to this place

I was given to understand that ministers were a particular

obligation not to mislead the House even if inadvertently. More

importantly this leaves us unable to say for certain what the Government

is actually going to do about the problem I raised. Can you advise me

whether there is any way to bring the minister back to the House to

tell us which of her answers as final? And grateful for the point of

order and courtesy in giving me advance notice of it. There was also