07/09/2017

:00:00. > :00:00.way and so on. There is always more to be done and the honourable

:00:00. > :00:08.gentleman may well want to arrange for an adjournment debate on that

:00:09. > :00:13.subject. Statement, the Minister of State for Europe and the Americas.

:00:14. > :00:17.Minister Sir Alan Duncan. I'm very grateful to you for this opportunity

:00:18. > :00:21.to make a statement on hurricane Irma, which is already affecting and

:00:22. > :00:25.is said to further Fed Caribbean islands and the south-east United

:00:26. > :00:31.States with devastating effect. Much as I appreciate the wish of a house

:00:32. > :00:34.to move on to the second reading of the EU Withdrawal Bill, I'm sure

:00:35. > :00:38.everyone appreciates the importance of informing the House about the

:00:39. > :00:46.latest position on this unfolding catastrophe. As with any Hurricane

:00:47. > :00:56.Fly -- hurricane, no one can be sure of the effect until it has become

:00:57. > :01:01.clear but it's force meant about planning was put into the high state

:01:02. > :01:05.of readiness to days ago. The crisis centre has two important functions,

:01:06. > :01:09.one is to organise the fullest possible con Schuler assistance to

:01:10. > :01:13.UK citizens abroad and the other is to monitor the part of a hurricane

:01:14. > :01:18.and coordinate every conceivable UK response, in particular to those

:01:19. > :01:21.British territories affected. Mr Speaker, Hurricane Irma, having

:01:22. > :01:25.reached category five, the highest possible category, hit three British

:01:26. > :01:31.overseas territories yesterday. Anguilla, Montserrat and the British

:01:32. > :01:35.Virgin Islands. Today, we expect the hurricane to affect the further UK

:01:36. > :01:40.territory, the Turks and Caicos Islands. The hurricane yesterday

:01:41. > :01:43.also caused damage in independent Commonwealth countries of Antigua

:01:44. > :01:46.and Barbuda and St Kitts and Nevis and we expect to affect the

:01:47. > :01:53.Dominican Republic, Haiti and the Bahamas today. It will most likely

:01:54. > :01:58.affect Cuba and south-eastern Florida tomorrow. The hurricane is

:01:59. > :02:02.heading westwards and Remain strong. We have an initial assessment of the

:02:03. > :02:05.severity of the damage it has caused and I will outline for the House

:02:06. > :02:13.what we know so far. Montserrat was swiped by the hurricane yesterday,

:02:14. > :02:16.but our initial assessment is relatively positive. Fortunately,

:02:17. > :02:23.the damage is not as severe as first thought. However, in contrast,

:02:24. > :02:27.Anguilla received the hurricane's full blast. The initial assessment

:02:28. > :02:31.is that the damage has been severe and in places critical. We expect

:02:32. > :02:35.further reports to make clear the full nature of the devastation and

:02:36. > :02:40.at the moment, Anguilla's port and airport remained close. The British

:02:41. > :02:46.Virgin Islands were also not spared the hurricane's full force when it

:02:47. > :02:51.passed through yesterday morning. Our initial assessment is all severe

:02:52. > :02:53.damage and we expect the islands will need extensive humanitarian

:02:54. > :02:59.assistance, which we will of course provide. The hurricane is expected

:03:00. > :03:03.to hit another British overseas Territory later today. The Turks and

:03:04. > :03:06.Caicos Islands lie in the hurricane's predicted path and

:03:07. > :03:08.officials in London and the territories are working intensively

:03:09. > :03:13.on disaster preparedness and response. They are also liaising

:03:14. > :03:18.with their counterparts in the Cayman Islands for assistance. The

:03:19. > :03:23.French and Dutch territories of Guadeloupe and St Martin have also

:03:24. > :03:29.been hit and the initial assessments ar of widespread damage. But the

:03:30. > :03:32.more detailed assessment continues. No British nationals have yet

:03:33. > :03:39.contacted us to ask for assistance from these islands. Two Commonwealth

:03:40. > :03:45.realms were affected by Hurricane Irma yesterday. Antigua and

:03:46. > :03:49.Barbuda's less populated island Barbuda was most severely affected.

:03:50. > :03:54.Antigua and St Kitts and Nevis were less badly affected than many had

:03:55. > :03:58.feared, with only minor damage. We expect the hurricane will affect the

:03:59. > :04:02.Dominican Republic and Haiti today. It will sweep on through the

:04:03. > :04:08.south-east of the Bahamas later and tomorrow is predicted to hit Cuba

:04:09. > :04:10.and southern Florida. Mr Speaker, Mr Deputy Speaker, officials in London

:04:11. > :04:15.and the territories have been working throughout the day and night

:04:16. > :04:20.to assess and quantify the needs of our territories and to coordinate

:04:21. > :04:24.across Government response. The officials in London are maintaining

:04:25. > :04:28.contact, although that is sometimes difficult, with governors' offices

:04:29. > :04:31.in the territories. The governors teams are themselves working closely

:04:32. > :04:37.with the territory's governments to respond to the crisis. The Royal

:04:38. > :04:40.Mail ship Royal Fleet auxiliary mounts Bay is already in the

:04:41. > :04:45.Caribbean and should reach the affected territories today. The ship

:04:46. > :04:48.carries Royal Marines and army engineers and her primary task is

:04:49. > :04:53.the protection of our overseas territories. She is loaded with a

:04:54. > :05:00.range of equipment, vehicles, tense, stores and hydraulics vehicles

:05:01. > :05:05.specifically intended to respond to disasters like this. We stand ready

:05:06. > :05:10.to charter flights to deliver additional supplies as appropriate.

:05:11. > :05:13.Mr Deputy Speaker, I spoke last night in London representatives of

:05:14. > :05:18.the British Virgin Islands and I was in our crisis centre yesterday

:05:19. > :05:24.afternoon and again last night and have been based there this morning.

:05:25. > :05:31.Add 8:45am last night, the Foreign Secretary spoke to Anguilla's cheap

:05:32. > :05:33.Victor Banks but were unable to contact the premiere of the British

:05:34. > :05:38.Virgin Islands last night but Lord Ahmed has been in touch with the

:05:39. > :05:42.governor this morning. We will work in support of the overseas

:05:43. > :05:47.territories to support the best possible assessment of their

:05:48. > :05:50.immediate and longer-term needs. To that end, my right honourable friend

:05:51. > :05:56.the Secretary of State for Defence will chair a meeting of COBRA at 2pm

:05:57. > :06:00.today. Our priority is to support the territories' governments in

:06:01. > :06:06.meeting their immediate humanitarian and security needs, including

:06:07. > :06:09.shelter, water and accommodation. We have for UK aid humanitarian experts

:06:10. > :06:15.in the region who are helping to coordinate the response. We will

:06:16. > :06:17.assess with the territories' governments their long-term

:06:18. > :06:21.reconstruction requirements, as we have done in the past. And as the

:06:22. > :06:23.House will appreciate, the relationship between overseas

:06:24. > :06:28.territories and their parent countries differs. Whilst French

:06:29. > :06:32.territories are directly governed, that is not the case with our

:06:33. > :06:36.overseas territories. While this means that our responses will of

:06:37. > :06:41.course be different, we will seek to achieve the same objectives and are

:06:42. > :06:44.taking immediate steps to do so. The Prime Minister called Erdogan on

:06:45. > :06:50.this morning to discuss our respective responses to Hurricane

:06:51. > :06:53.Irma. They agreed the devastation it had route was terrible, with

:06:54. > :06:59.unconfirmed reports emerging of a number of fatalities. Mr Deputy

:07:00. > :07:03.Speaker, the Prime Minister updated the French president on our

:07:04. > :07:09.response, noting that DFID humanitarian advisers had already

:07:10. > :07:12.deployed to the region to provide damage assessments and humanitarian

:07:13. > :07:19.support and that our FA mounts Bay was already nearly area. They agreed

:07:20. > :07:24.to co-operate closely, including with the Dutch, to understand the

:07:25. > :07:32.extent of the damage and coordinate relief efforts. Mr Deputy Speaker,

:07:33. > :07:33.we will all do our utmost to help those affected and I undertake to

:07:34. > :07:43.keep the House updated as required. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I

:07:44. > :07:49.thank the Minister for his statement and allowing me to see the statement

:07:50. > :07:53.prior. May I start by associating myself with the minister's remarks

:07:54. > :07:57.in sending the deepest sympathies of this House to the people whose lives

:07:58. > :08:01.and livelihoods have been lost due to the devastation caused by

:08:02. > :08:08.Hurricane Irma. Many thousands of British tourists visit the Caribbean

:08:09. > :08:11.every year for their holidays and I'd like to ask, what is the

:08:12. > :08:14.Government's estimate of the number of UK nationals currently in the

:08:15. > :08:21.countries that have been hit by Hurricane Irma or are likely to be

:08:22. > :08:26.affected? And what requests for consular assistance as the Foreign

:08:27. > :08:31.Office received from British National is in the countries

:08:32. > :08:37.affected? And also, what assistance is the Government ready to provide

:08:38. > :08:41.in response to such requests? What efforts are the Government making to

:08:42. > :08:46.communicate with British Nationals across the region to make sure they

:08:47. > :08:49.know what help is available to them? And, of course, holiday-makers are

:08:50. > :08:54.by no means the only people who will have been affected. The damage for

:08:55. > :08:57.those who live in the region will be both profound and lasting,

:08:58. > :09:03.particularly with the effect on the tourism industry. Many of these

:09:04. > :09:07.people may also be British, given the number of UK overseas

:09:08. > :09:11.territories in the Caribbean. The Minister has given us the

:09:12. > :09:16.Government's initial assessment of the impact of Hurricane Irma on

:09:17. > :09:19.overseas territories such as Anguilla, Montserrat, Turks and

:09:20. > :09:24.Caicos and the British Virgin Islands, but I would like to ask

:09:25. > :09:28.what discussions has the Minister had or intends to have with the

:09:29. > :09:34.governments of these territories about the effects of the Hurricane

:09:35. > :09:38.Fly -- the hurricane and the with the governments of Antigua and

:09:39. > :09:41.Barbuda, which have also been affected? And what efforts are the

:09:42. > :09:45.Government making to work with the authorities in these areas on their

:09:46. > :09:52.reconstruction plans? I would also like to ask what reassurances he can

:09:53. > :09:55.give that the UK stands ready to provide not only the immediate

:09:56. > :10:01.humanitarian and security relief that is needed so urgently, but also

:10:02. > :10:07.the sustained commitment to reconstruction which will be so

:10:08. > :10:10.important in the longer term? And, finally, I am sure that the Minister

:10:11. > :10:15.will commit to providing regular updates to the House on the progress

:10:16. > :10:18.of reconstruction efforts and particularly on what steps this

:10:19. > :10:22.Government is taking to assist with those efforts and also I am

:10:23. > :10:30.confident that they will update the House following the COBRA meeting to

:10:31. > :10:33.be held this afternoon. Very grateful for the honourable lady

:10:34. > :10:36.both for what she said and the tone in which she said it, because I

:10:37. > :10:40.think this House will want to send out a united message of concern and

:10:41. > :10:43.all want to do the very best for those who have been in many cases

:10:44. > :10:48.devastated by the ferocity of this hurricane. On the question of

:10:49. > :10:51.tourists, many of course will have left because there was some notice

:10:52. > :10:57.that this was likely to come and it's not actually peak season, so we

:10:58. > :11:02.have not yet had any direct individual requests for conscious

:11:03. > :11:05.assistance, but I think we all have concerned that beneath the rubble,

:11:06. > :11:12.in some cases, there will be cases which will require our urgent

:11:13. > :11:17.personal response. Our focus, I can tell the House, is of course not

:11:18. > :11:21.just on tourists, it's on everybody. We really have complete overall

:11:22. > :11:28.concern, particularly for our overseas territories, which are

:11:29. > :11:30.affected, and to that end, we have ?12 million immediately available

:11:31. > :11:35.through our rapid response mechanism for disaster relief fund recovery

:11:36. > :11:39.and with me in the House is the Secretary of State for International

:11:40. > :11:46.Development, who, like the Foreign Office, are on full alert and doing

:11:47. > :11:49.their utmost with a great wealth of expertise to deploy on this and I

:11:50. > :11:56.can speak not only as Foreign Minister, but someone who in past

:11:57. > :12:01.has also been a DFID Minister. So we of course will in the long term

:12:02. > :12:04.always meet our full legal obligations under the overseas

:12:05. > :12:07.development act to our overseas territories, but can I assure the

:12:08. > :12:13.House that we are pulling out all the stops to make sure that we can

:12:14. > :12:17.do our utmost to bring urgent assistance once we, with the

:12:18. > :12:23.professionalism DFID has, does the assessment to make sure we know who

:12:24. > :12:27.are in greatest need and then we can use our adeptness and flexibility

:12:28. > :12:30.urgently to address those who most need our help.

:12:31. > :12:37.Can I thank him for his statement, and the comprehensive nature of the

:12:38. > :12:42.response we appear to be preparing, and the undertaking that we will

:12:43. > :12:46.provide all necessary immediate humanitarian assistance. Can I

:12:47. > :12:51.welcome the fact he has spoken to the London representatives of the

:12:52. > :13:02.BVI, and would he confirmed he would be happy to act as representative

:13:03. > :13:05.for a London to the president of Anguilla, so she can be kept

:13:06. > :13:16.updated. The overseas territory of Anguilla does not receive direct aid

:13:17. > :13:19.from DFI D, only from the European Union, and can I assume the ?12

:13:20. > :13:24.million means we are equally committed to the long-term recovery

:13:25. > :13:30.and reconstruction of Anguilla as we are to the immediate humanitarian

:13:31. > :13:38.need. We are endeavouring to contact everyone, and contact in some cases

:13:39. > :13:43.is quite difficult. It is always a distinction between DFID funding,

:13:44. > :13:47.which is eligible and which is not, but we will reassure as much as we

:13:48. > :13:55.can to give the help we would like to give wherever we find the need is

:13:56. > :14:04.severe. So, as my honourable friend requests, we will focus on all help.

:14:05. > :14:09.We have dealt with many hurricanes and typhoons in the region. Indeed,

:14:10. > :14:14.four years ago, I give assistance as the Minister to Saint Lucia and

:14:15. > :14:18.Saint Vincent, who had all the bridges swept away, but it was

:14:19. > :14:24.because we had professionalism to assess the damage that we knew how

:14:25. > :14:32.best to respond to it. Our response is flexible, and again I think that

:14:33. > :14:38.reflects the competence of DFID. Thank you. I am grateful of today's

:14:39. > :14:43.statement. There is no doubt that the devastation across the Caribbean

:14:44. > :14:54.is grave and a tragedy. Our thoughts and wishes go out to those assessing

:14:55. > :15:03.the damage, and to those who have already been hit, Anguilla, and St

:15:04. > :15:08.Lucia, and Barbara, which the Prime Minister says is totally demolished

:15:09. > :15:15.and nearly uninhabitable. We would encourage the secretary to send as

:15:16. > :15:23.much urgent aid as possible to them. The prospect of it hitting locals

:15:24. > :15:30.who have already been hit amid the devastation is unthinkable. There is

:15:31. > :15:39.an increasing precedence of hurricanes. In some areas, there

:15:40. > :15:46.have been three, and I quote, these have been described as the new

:15:47. > :15:56.normal. We must put action on this as a priority. A representative from

:15:57. > :16:00.Anguilla told the BBC, climate change is real, in the Caribbean we

:16:01. > :16:04.are dealing with the consequences of climate change, but it is

:16:05. > :16:09.unfortunate there are some who see this differently. Will the

:16:10. > :16:13.government express the solidarity with those affected, particularly

:16:14. > :16:25.those on Barbuda, in association with the Prime Minister. As part of

:16:26. > :16:32.the UK's much vaunted relationship with the US, what pressure is being

:16:33. > :16:41.put on Donald Trump to be part of the solution and not the problem? --

:16:42. > :16:45.the problem, regarding the Paris climate agreement? There is no

:16:46. > :16:49.greater incidence of severe weather in many parts of the world. But I

:16:50. > :16:54.hope he will allow me to confine myself to the urgent nature of the

:16:55. > :17:02.response to people in desperate need than to engage today in a debate on

:17:03. > :17:05.the broader issues. Our priority is primarily to overseas territories,

:17:06. > :17:13.but not confined to them. Thus we will be focusing on the British

:17:14. > :17:18.Virgin Islands, Anguilla, and the Turks and cake silence, and that is

:17:19. > :17:28.why the crisis centre and the Foreign Office and DFID are joining

:17:29. > :17:39.to deal with this, to make sure help is rapid. Clearly this is a

:17:40. > :17:52.devastating situation, but it is unfolding. Gucci assure us that he

:17:53. > :18:01.will keep us updated on this? I can tell the House this comes in phases.

:18:02. > :18:04.You have to start with the urgent cases of injury, homelessness, the

:18:05. > :18:09.need for food and water, then there is the important process of the

:18:10. > :18:12.follow-up, to make sure that infrastructure and reconstruction

:18:13. > :18:23.are properly planned for and considered. I spoke to a student

:18:24. > :18:27.from Anguilla who has arrived today in Chesterfield. He has laid out the

:18:28. > :18:30.skill of the devastation in Anguilla, it is quite unlike

:18:31. > :18:33.anything they have seen before. The Minister was at pains to explain the

:18:34. > :18:38.difference between our relationship and that of the French government

:18:39. > :18:42.with the overseas territory. If he can make the same objectives they

:18:43. > :18:52.have set out, he will know that we need a great deal greater resource.

:18:53. > :19:04.Will he lay out what resources we will be able to Bashar will he lay

:19:05. > :19:06.out what we can do to help the schools, hospitals, prisons, the

:19:07. > :19:17.devastated infrastructure they need to get back on their feet? I

:19:18. > :19:20.understand what he's saying regarding Anguilla, because people

:19:21. > :19:27.in the media are comparing our response to that of the French. I

:19:28. > :19:30.hope I can give him genuine reassurance on this. We are well

:19:31. > :19:40.practised in emergency response, and we Place Royal auxiliary vessel in

:19:41. > :19:46.the area every year in anticipation of this. This one has been

:19:47. > :19:49.particularly severe, but the reason for having this auxiliary vessel is

:19:50. > :19:56.that you do not trap response resources on an island which might

:19:57. > :20:04.more importantly be needed in a neighbouring island. Sodhi auxiliary

:20:05. > :20:15.vessel has flexibility, the ability to make water. It crucially has a

:20:16. > :20:19.helicopter, which means people can be reached very quickly. The Royal

:20:20. > :20:24.auxiliary vessel is a fantastic resource which we should be very

:20:25. > :20:32.proud of. It has Marines, military engineers, supplies, and it can

:20:33. > :20:36.deploy flexibly relating to the devastating path of a hurricane. You

:20:37. > :20:44.never know until it has happened where the need is greatest. We can

:20:45. > :20:52.supplement this initial urgent response with other belief flights

:20:53. > :20:56.supported by DFID out of the disaster relief funding we have, and

:20:57. > :20:59.over time the House will see that our response will prove effective

:21:00. > :21:08.and good for the people we are there to look after. My thoughts go out to

:21:09. > :21:16.people I worked with quite closely, and have been trying to contact

:21:17. > :21:19.them. Does this not highlight a conundrum that 1's overseas

:21:20. > :21:30.territories have preferential treatment on the DFID budget, it is

:21:31. > :21:36.not recognised what real risks small island states have, and how can he

:21:37. > :21:47.use his time with the Foreign Office to make sure this conundrum is

:21:48. > :21:53.addressed? Can I acknowledge his service as a Foreign Office minister

:21:54. > :21:59.with his great knowledge of this field. He is asking me to explain or

:22:00. > :22:05.give a thesis on what one might call the border conundrum, we're overseas

:22:06. > :22:08.development assistance funding applies in some cases but not in

:22:09. > :22:12.others, but when it comes to hurricanes and typhoons, the

:22:13. > :22:17.argument may well be that we wish we had spent money in advance and that

:22:18. > :22:21.kind of thing. Thought will be given on this, but DFID will do the utmost

:22:22. > :22:30.it can to make sure we address meet work -- addressed the need wherever

:22:31. > :22:34.it is needed. If hurricane hardly happened 25 years ago, an MIT

:22:35. > :22:39.professor states it would have been an event which happens once in 2000

:22:40. > :22:42.years. Now we have had a Kenama, which has appalling loss of life and

:22:43. > :23:02.deadly floods. -- Hurricane Irma. What are we doing

:23:03. > :23:11.to get the help back on track? It is urgent and we are failing. The main

:23:12. > :23:14.focus is on emergency relief. As part of DFID programmes, that is

:23:15. > :23:23.assistance to make sure flooding can be reduced, and infrastructure can

:23:24. > :23:27.hold up, so I know that the advanced work to which she refers is deeply

:23:28. > :23:37.entrenched in many of the programmes across the world on which DFID

:23:38. > :23:39.spends money. The Foreign Office crisis centre and the Department for

:23:40. > :23:43.International Development have done us proud by springing into action,

:23:44. > :23:48.and I welcome the ?12 million fund he mentioned. However, the

:23:49. > :23:54.devastation caused by the hurricane will be exacerbated by another one,

:23:55. > :24:00.Hurricane Jose, and I wondered if they have taken into account what

:24:01. > :24:08.further damage Hurricane Jose could create. I have been concentrating

:24:09. > :24:14.very much on Hurricane Irma, but I will immediately go and see what I

:24:15. > :24:20.should know about Hurricane Jose. The serious point is that the

:24:21. > :24:24.government wanted to come to the House at the earliest opportunity to

:24:25. > :24:30.let the House know what we know, to share a very openly and

:24:31. > :24:34.transparently clear picture of what we had prepared and what we wish to

:24:35. > :24:42.do, and what I said earlier, I am sure we will update the House in due

:24:43. > :24:53.course to explain what we have done subsequently. As someone who was

:24:54. > :24:59.involved with aid to Montserrat, what damage has actually been done

:25:00. > :25:02.to it? I notice he says it was swiped by the hurricane, but I do

:25:03. > :25:13.not know what that means. Secondly, there was an interesting programme

:25:14. > :25:21.on BBC science last night, and preparing to go to Mars. Given that

:25:22. > :25:29.we are preparing to go, as, why is it we cannot predict hurricanes much

:25:30. > :25:34.sooner before the hit? You may not be able to answer that, but I think

:25:35. > :25:41.it is an interesting question. She will forgive me if I focus more on

:25:42. > :25:45.Montserrat than on Mars today. I am very familiar with Montserrat, which

:25:46. > :25:51.had its own problem when it had its volcanic eruption many years ago.

:25:52. > :25:57.The damage assessment we had was fortunately that Montserrat has not

:25:58. > :26:01.been severely hit. The hurricane passed over did not cause the

:26:02. > :26:12.widespread disruption or demolition that we feared. At the moment, our

:26:13. > :26:16.attention is on those countries affected by the hurricane, and quite

:26:17. > :26:22.rightly the government's focus should be on that. But back in 2015,

:26:23. > :26:26.storm Desmond which had an impact in America, subsequently had a huge

:26:27. > :26:30.impact on this country, particularly Carlisle and Cumbria, affecting many

:26:31. > :26:38.lives. While his priority is clearly the Caribbean and those countries

:26:39. > :26:43.that other parts of the government -- could he assure us that other

:26:44. > :26:47.parts of the government will be looking at this? As a sophisticated

:26:48. > :26:55.first world country we always have contingency plans, plans for civil

:26:56. > :27:00.response of that sort, so, I am sure that the answer to my honourable

:27:01. > :27:04.friend is yes. In terms of a specific backlash from this

:27:05. > :27:05.hurricane, I am sure the scientists are working on it very energetically

:27:06. > :27:13.already. Our hearts go out to those affected

:27:14. > :27:17.in particular because some of the very poorest will be those that have

:27:18. > :27:21.lost absolutely everything in this, as so often happens. The rich will

:27:22. > :27:26.rebuild their mansions but the poor will not. He is right to focus on

:27:27. > :27:32.the immediate issues, but if we are to build resilience, because there

:27:33. > :27:37.will be another incident like this, do, for instance, the BBI and Turks

:27:38. > :27:45.and Caicos, do they not have to have a broader tax base in the end? Well,

:27:46. > :27:48.I think, for instance on the Turks and Caicos Islands, which I focused

:27:49. > :27:52.on in great detail when I was a minister, which was pretty well

:27:53. > :27:57.bankrupt and its deficit was growing, yes, part of the set of

:27:58. > :28:02.conditions we set down to them for restoring their finances was to

:28:03. > :28:05.improve their tax base. So I can point to a very positive record of

:28:06. > :28:09.this Government answering exactly the question The Right Honourable

:28:10. > :28:12.gentleman has asked, but also, implicit in his question, is if you

:28:13. > :28:16.are going to reconstruct the devastated island, you got to make

:28:17. > :28:19.sure you build things in a way that are going to withstand hurricanes in

:28:20. > :28:24.the future, so when it comes to rivers that are not going to flood,

:28:25. > :28:30.river banks that can contain the water, houses that can withstand a

:28:31. > :28:34.greater ferocity of wind, then in a way, out of this disaster, can come

:28:35. > :28:42.an opportunity for better resilience in the future. I commend my right

:28:43. > :28:45.honourable friend for his statement, which in its comprehensiveness and

:28:46. > :28:51.succinct nurse was a model which other ministers would be well

:28:52. > :28:56.advised to follow. In relation to his last point, we have an absolute

:28:57. > :29:01.duty of course to protect our overseas realms and territories from

:29:02. > :29:05.environmental disasters. Is there a plan to hurricane proof as much as

:29:06. > :29:11.possible key infrastructure in these realms and territories? I like to

:29:12. > :29:22.think that being short and precise is why Hallmark. -- my Hallmark.

:29:23. > :29:25.Again, across many DFID programmes around the world, areas like

:29:26. > :29:29.Bangladesh, which suffer flooding and things like that, building in

:29:30. > :29:34.resilience is a crucial part of the entire philosophy of DFID. So in as

:29:35. > :29:39.much as that can also be incorporated into a country's

:29:40. > :29:42.planning, it must be both welcomed and encouraged, but I point out to

:29:43. > :29:47.the House, we do not govern these countries but we can encourage them

:29:48. > :29:49.to govern themselves in a way which introduces exactly the sort of

:29:50. > :29:58.standards my honourable friend has described. I personally have been

:29:59. > :30:01.shocked to see places I have personally visited absolutely

:30:02. > :30:05.devastated in the region and having been through a hurricane and a

:30:06. > :30:07.tornado myself, I know just how frightening and unpleasant it can

:30:08. > :30:11.be, it is shocking and our thoughts and prayers are with all those

:30:12. > :30:15.people. I welcome very much for the Minister has had to say,

:30:16. > :30:20.particularly about RFA Mounts Bay and the facilities it can provide.

:30:21. > :30:23.Would he look at a second RFA vessel going to the region one or two weeks

:30:24. > :30:27.later with the necessary infrastructure replies and relief

:30:28. > :30:32.efforts, particularly if there is further devastation in the Turks and

:30:33. > :30:35.Caicos? And are our search and rescue personnel on stand-by to

:30:36. > :30:40.provide assistance? They do an excellent job in these crises. On

:30:41. > :30:45.search and rescue, the answer is yes, they will be deployed, and I

:30:46. > :30:49.think the COBRA meeting at 2pm will discuss all of these options, but

:30:50. > :30:53.sitting in a crisis centre this morning and looking at the auxiliary

:30:54. > :30:56.vessel going, one of the great advantages of this vessel, it has a

:30:57. > :31:01.helicopter and one of the issues we are looking at very urgently is to

:31:02. > :31:05.try and get a second helicopter and with supplementary relief flights

:31:06. > :31:08.and possibly a second naval vessel, I am not committing it to it now but

:31:09. > :31:12.in the hope we can do that when we look at the disaster and assess it,

:31:13. > :31:16.then the answer to his questions I hope will be yes but I would just

:31:17. > :31:20.say to the House that we had to appreciate that this is a massive,

:31:21. > :31:23.perhaps unprecedented, natural disaster. We haven't seen a

:31:24. > :31:28.hurricane on the scale in our lifetime and so we are going to have

:31:29. > :31:31.to assess the damage and respond as best we possibly can, knowing that

:31:32. > :31:39.this is, as I would put it, a whopper. I thank my right honourable

:31:40. > :31:44.friend for his statement and the commitment made by the Government to

:31:45. > :31:47.help those suffering. Clearly, the United States of America, in advance

:31:48. > :31:53.of the hurricane, have ordered the evacuation of Key West completely.

:31:54. > :31:57.That wasn't practical on many of the islands that have been devastated.

:31:58. > :32:01.But has there been any request, for example for Barbuda, to be

:32:02. > :32:09.completely evacuated, given that reports suggest it is completely

:32:10. > :32:11.uninhabitable? We are not empowered, Mr Deputy Speaker, to demand the

:32:12. > :32:19.evacuation of countries which are self-governing. But we do our best

:32:20. > :32:24.to make sure that they are fully informed and modern science does

:32:25. > :32:29.help inform people and so compared with perhaps even two decades ago,

:32:30. > :32:37.people have had greater prior notice of the danger than they would have

:32:38. > :32:40.had them. I welcome the minister's commitment to immediate relief, but

:32:41. > :32:45.with respect, I think that today is precisely the day we need to be

:32:46. > :32:49.talking about those broader courses. As we just heard, Gaston Brown, the

:32:50. > :32:53.leader of Antigua and Barbuda is talking about climate change today.

:32:54. > :32:59.Can he reassure the House that we don't have to wait for a hurricane

:33:00. > :33:02.to hit the UK before we have the kind of analysis we need from this

:33:03. > :33:05.Government to tackle climate break down because without that, we will

:33:06. > :33:10.not see the climate leadership his Government likes to claim in theory

:33:11. > :33:15.being shown in practice. I apologise for promoting you, you have

:33:16. > :33:21.miraculously reappeared and I didn't see you out of the corner of my eye.

:33:22. > :33:26.May I just say that I think the honourable lady has deeply misjudged

:33:27. > :33:30.the tone of this House today. We are seeing people in deep and urgent

:33:31. > :33:35.immediate need and we are also leading the world on climate change

:33:36. > :33:42.and she ought to show a bit more urgent and immediate humanity than

:33:43. > :33:46.make the point she has made today. I very much welcomed the statement by

:33:47. > :33:52.the Minister with regards to rescue and relief. The Minister in the

:33:53. > :33:55.statement says that we are en route, the Royal Navy ships, later today.

:33:56. > :34:00.The United States already have carriers there at the moment and

:34:01. > :34:03.choppers and field hospitals. Are we in touch with them to have a joint

:34:04. > :34:10.operation and ensure all that can be done is done? I think one of the

:34:11. > :34:14.positive elements of great international phenomenon like this

:34:15. > :34:16.is that countries do their work together -- a grave international

:34:17. > :34:21.phenomenon. We are working with the French under Dutch and there will be

:34:22. > :34:24.coordination with the Americans that they will be primarily focused on

:34:25. > :34:27.Florida but I would hope that where one country will help another, they

:34:28. > :34:33.will all do so and I'm sure there will be such incidents in the days

:34:34. > :34:36.ahead. I appreciate the speed in which the Minister has come to the

:34:37. > :34:42.House to update us on what is happening. Can he talk briefly about

:34:43. > :34:45.Haiti? All reports say the storm will be travelling to Haiti, so can

:34:46. > :34:52.I ask him what the Foreign Office and DFID will be doing to improve

:34:53. > :34:56.the relief for Haiti when the storm hits because he will appreciate, as

:34:57. > :34:59.will the Secretary of State for DFID, that they have had multiple

:35:00. > :35:04.disasters over a number of years with difficult to rain. Can I ask

:35:05. > :35:08.what he is doing to address that? It is such an enormous hurricane,

:35:09. > :35:12.hitting so much land mass, that there will need to be a massive and

:35:13. > :35:16.comprehensive response. We have deep and extensive experience of going

:35:17. > :35:22.into Haiti following hurricanes in the past, but I say again, our first

:35:23. > :35:31.priority will be to protect and assist British overseas territories.

:35:32. > :35:34.I welcome the minister's statement and his commitment to keep this has

:35:35. > :35:38.updated. Could I invite him once again to publicly thank all of those

:35:39. > :35:43.working at the FCO crisis centre. He has seen their work first hand but

:35:44. > :35:46.so often it goes unseen and in particular, their important work for

:35:47. > :35:51.communication and ensuring British citizens are as safe as possible

:35:52. > :35:56.when they are abroad. I particularly appreciate what my honourable friend

:35:57. > :36:00.has just said and it refers equally to DFID, where officials have been

:36:01. > :36:06.working throughout the night. As I say, I was at the crisis centre

:36:07. > :36:10.yesterday afternoon out and at half past nine last night and again this

:36:11. > :36:13.morning. They have been manning this around the clock, constantly in

:36:14. > :36:17.touch with the overseas territories and other political groupings to

:36:18. > :36:21.make sure that we can be as co-ordinated as we possibly can and,

:36:22. > :36:30.yes, I publicly thank all of them as everyone in this House I am sure

:36:31. > :36:33.would share. I absolutely appreciate the importance of the immediate

:36:34. > :36:37.humanitarian effort and I would hope that at the COBRA meeting this

:36:38. > :36:41.afternoon, the Government does also look at the possible impact of

:36:42. > :36:52.hurricane Jose, which I think is quite alarming, the reports we are

:36:53. > :36:55.receiving but I also urge the issue of climate insurance, I think this

:36:56. > :36:59.is something that is to be on the political agenda. I can give a

:37:00. > :37:04.positive answer to that, within DFID, this is a positive and ongoing

:37:05. > :37:09.policy stream where, again, I think the UK and DFID are in the lead

:37:10. > :37:16.across the world and so I can reassure the honourable laid a very

:37:17. > :37:19.constantly -- lady very confidently. This has been a devastating

:37:20. > :37:22.hurricane, but the islands will recover and past experience tells us

:37:23. > :37:26.that they often recover well before they are perceived to have

:37:27. > :37:28.recovered. Will be therefore be helping to provide assistance and

:37:29. > :37:32.communicating that fact and promoting the islands once they are

:37:33. > :37:37.in a position to communicate that they are open to business again? Let

:37:38. > :37:41.me do my bit now by saying people I hope will still plan to go on

:37:42. > :37:43.holiday to these islands. They will be pieced back together and the

:37:44. > :37:47.worst thing that could happen to them is that they face long-term

:37:48. > :37:51.economic cost because people turn their back on them. I would urge

:37:52. > :37:54.everyone not to turn their back on these islands but to think

:37:55. > :38:00.positively of going there to get some sunshine and to make sure they

:38:01. > :38:05.can share in their recovery. First of all, Minister, I am greatly

:38:06. > :38:10.encouraged by your response, very comprehensive and very substantial

:38:11. > :38:13.and you have set an example for other offices and apartments to

:38:14. > :38:18.follow and I'm sure they will be trying to emulate your efforts. What

:38:19. > :38:22.support is available for the British National is on holiday in the path

:38:23. > :38:27.of Hurricane Irma at this moment, with more hurricanes on the way? I

:38:28. > :38:30.have some constituents who are in rented accommodation there now, so

:38:31. > :38:34.what discussions have taken place with the embassy to get the advice

:38:35. > :38:40.and safety across to those people in those places? I mean, the advice is

:38:41. > :38:45.very clear from public media and also on the Foreign Office website

:38:46. > :38:48.in terms of travel, but we have not yet had any direct requests the

:38:49. > :38:52.consular assistance. But one of the reasons are crisis centre is on full

:38:53. > :38:59.alert is to make sure that if we do so, we can respond to maximum

:39:00. > :39:06.effect. Sir Edward Leigh, point of order. I understand a huge number of

:39:07. > :39:10.people have put in to speak today and equally on Monday. Now,

:39:11. > :39:15.Hurricane Irma is a tragic and deadly event but it is not heading

:39:16. > :39:19.towards our shores but Brexit is and our efforts here will depend whether

:39:20. > :39:23.it is a gentle touch on the cheeks or a storm, so I do urge the

:39:24. > :39:26.Government on Monday to try and desist from bringing statements, so

:39:27. > :39:29.we get a record number of backbenchers and indeed on every

:39:30. > :39:33.occasion to be generous with the House of Commons both with

:39:34. > :39:37.information and time. I agree with that view and it is one I have

:39:38. > :39:42.articulated to the Government Chief Whip and which I understand. He is

:39:43. > :39:46.sympathetic. For my own part, trying to be helpful, I can say that

:39:47. > :39:49.notwithstanding my enthusiasm to serve the housing granting where

:39:50. > :39:52.appropriate urgent questions, colleagues will understand that the

:39:53. > :39:59.bar for urgent questions on Monday will be very high. Mr Kenneth

:40:00. > :40:03.Clarke. Has the chief whip explains you why there is any reason we don't

:40:04. > :40:07.suspend the five o'clock rule this evening? There is no chance of any

:40:08. > :40:12.division taking place on the first day of a two-day debate and it

:40:13. > :40:16.really is rather absurd when we discuss such enormous issues with

:40:17. > :40:19.such long-term significance that members are told they have got to

:40:20. > :40:25.confine their remarks to three minutes or some equivalent? An

:40:26. > :40:28.explanation has been offered to me on that point. I'm sympathetic to

:40:29. > :40:32.what The Right Honourable and learn a gentleman has said and hope

:40:33. > :40:36.account will be taken of it, not least in relation to Monday and

:40:37. > :40:39.although I know The Right Honourable gentleman speaks in support of the

:40:40. > :40:44.rights of all of his colleagues, I hope he is at least moderately

:40:45. > :40:47.mollified to know that there is no question of the Right Honourable and

:40:48. > :40:50.learner gentleman today will probably add any other time in a

:40:51. > :40:58.speech being confined by the chair to a mere three minutes. Check are

:40:59. > :41:01.Muna. Thank you Mr Speaker, I was wondering whether you could give

:41:02. > :41:07.your views and advice with regard to the matter of Big Ben. Many tears

:41:08. > :41:14.have been shared across both sides of this has at the silencing of the

:41:15. > :41:19.bong is Big Ben, but the issue I want to raise is much more serious

:41:20. > :41:22.than that. The company, the construction company that has been

:41:23. > :41:28.awarded the preconstruction and scaffolding contract for Big Ben,

:41:29. > :41:34.Sir Robert McAlpine, we understand has been awarded the main contract

:41:35. > :41:41.to fix those bongs and to do the refit of Big Ben. We had a debate

:41:42. > :41:46.earlier this week in Westminster Hall about blacklisting. Sir Robert

:41:47. > :41:53.McAlpine was one of the firms that founded the consulting Association

:41:54. > :41:56.which was responsible for the blacklisting of over 3,000

:41:57. > :42:03.construction workers, depriving them of a livelihood, facilitating the

:42:04. > :42:10.systematic discrimination and victimisation of those workers. Can

:42:11. > :42:15.I ask you, Mr Speaker, what message you think it sends to the victims of

:42:16. > :42:24.this gross injustice for this House to award a contract to a firm that

:42:25. > :42:29.not only funded the consulting Association, but provided its first

:42:30. > :42:33.chair and another chair of that organisation? I'd also be interested

:42:34. > :42:37.to learn to what extent this is a decision made by the House and to

:42:38. > :42:40.what extent it is a decision made by the Government. I note the Prime

:42:41. > :42:41.Minister is in her place, I think many people would want to hear from

:42:42. > :42:52.her on this as well. I thank him for his point of order.

:42:53. > :42:56.The House will not want a dilation on the matter, suffice it to say

:42:57. > :43:01.that an initial contract was awarded. The contract for the main

:43:02. > :43:10.works has yet, as I understand it, to be awarded. Nevertheless, I take

:43:11. > :43:19.on what he perfectly legitimately and reasonably puts to me. House of

:43:20. > :43:23.Commons commission considered this issue yesterday, and we are seeking

:43:24. > :43:31.reassurance from the company, not least in light of the facts that the

:43:32. > :43:36.honourable gentleman has just articulated, and in light of his

:43:37. > :43:44.remarks in the Westminster Hall debate yesterday, which colleagues

:43:45. > :43:49.and I have studied. As, I believe the honourable gentleman indicated,

:43:50. > :43:59.blacklisting is now illegal. This House will expect any contractor to

:44:00. > :44:08.observe the letter and spirit of the law, and secondly, to conform to the

:44:09. > :44:12.highest standards in such matters. I hope people understand that I cannot

:44:13. > :44:16.be expected to say more than that today, but I am not knocking what he

:44:17. > :44:24.said. It is important, and we are sensitive to it. And we will be

:44:25. > :44:30.conscious in the days ahead of the reputational importance of what he

:44:31. > :44:41.has raised. Perhaps I can leave it there for now. Order, presentation

:44:42. > :44:47.of Bill, Mr David Hanson. House of Lords exclusion of hereditary peers

:44:48. > :45:00.Bill. Second reading what they? Friday 27 April 2018. Thank you.

:45:01. > :45:10.Presentation of Bill? Pensions review of women's arrangements

:45:11. > :45:15.number two, Bill. 27th of April 2018. Thank you. De Klerk will now

:45:16. > :45:24.proceed to lead the orders of the day. European Union Withdrawal Bill,

:45:25. > :45:29.second reading. Thank you. I called to move the second reading that the

:45:30. > :45:39.Secretary of State exiting the European Union, secretary David

:45:40. > :45:47.Davis. I beg to move that the now read a second time. Mr Speaker, when

:45:48. > :45:51.I introduced the European Union Withdrawal Bill earlier this year, I

:45:52. > :45:56.said it was just the beginning of a process to ensure the decision made

:45:57. > :45:59.by the people in June last year is honoured. Today we begin the next

:46:00. > :46:04.step in the historic process of honouring that decision. Simply,

:46:05. > :46:08.this bill is an essential step. While it does not take us out of the

:46:09. > :46:12.European Union, that is a matter for the Article 50 process, it does

:46:13. > :46:19.ensure that on the day we leave, businesses nowhere they stand,

:46:20. > :46:22.workers' rights are upheld and consumers remain protected. This

:46:23. > :46:27.bill is vital to ensuring that as we leave, we do so in an orderly

:46:28. > :46:31.manner. Let me start with a brief summary of the bill before going on

:46:32. > :46:36.to set out key provisions in more depth. The bill is designed to

:46:37. > :46:38.provide maximum possible legal certainty and continuity while

:46:39. > :46:45.restoring control of the United Kingdom. It does this in three broad

:46:46. > :46:52.steps. First it removes from the statute book the key legislation

:46:53. > :46:56.passed by this Parliament in 1972, the European Communities Act. That

:46:57. > :47:00.gave European law supreme status over law made in this country. It is

:47:01. > :47:07.therefore right that it be removed from the statute book on the day the

:47:08. > :47:13.UK leads the European Union, bringing to end the European law

:47:14. > :47:16.over laws made here in the United Kingdom. Second, the bill takes a

:47:17. > :47:20.snapshot of the body of EU law, which currently forms part of the

:47:21. > :47:25.United Kingdom legal system, and ensures it will continue to apply in

:47:26. > :47:29.the United Kingdom after we leave. This is to ensure that wherever

:47:30. > :47:37.possible, the same rules and laws will apply the day after Exeter as

:47:38. > :47:40.they did before. Without this step, a large part falls away when the

:47:41. > :47:55.European Communities Act is repealed. Simply preserving the law

:47:56. > :47:59.is not enough. The ministers will be devolved powers to address the

:48:00. > :48:05.problems which would arise when we leave the European Union. These

:48:06. > :48:12.powers allow ministers to make those changes to ensure the statute book

:48:13. > :48:18.works on day one. This will be a major undertaking across the United

:48:19. > :48:21.Kingdom. I will give way in a moment. Following this, it will be

:48:22. > :48:28.for the United Kingdom legislators to pass laws and to adjudicate them.

:48:29. > :48:31.Mr Speaker, the bill enables us to leave the European Union in the

:48:32. > :48:35.smoothest and most orderly way possible. It is the most significant

:48:36. > :48:40.piece of legislation to be considered for some time and it will

:48:41. > :48:46.be rightly scrutinised line by line on the floor of this House. I stand

:48:47. > :48:51.ready to listen to those who offer improvements of the bill, in the

:48:52. > :48:56.spirit of preparing statute book for withdrawal from the European Union.

:48:57. > :49:04.The right honourable member for St Pancras likes to remind me that I

:49:05. > :49:07.have a dedication to holding the government for the account. I have

:49:08. > :49:14.not changed my views at all. LAUGHTER Let me be clear, this bill

:49:15. > :49:17.does only what is necessary for a smooth exit and to provide

:49:18. > :49:22.stability. Have ever, as I repeatedly said, I

:49:23. > :49:25.welcome and encourage contributions from those who approach the task in

:49:26. > :49:36.good faith and in the spirit of collaboration. We all have a

:49:37. > :49:41.commitment to doing this in the best interest of the United Kingdom. He

:49:42. > :49:46.is opening that she mentioned it gives ministers the power is to

:49:47. > :49:51.change laws, does that include changing laws to devolved

:49:52. > :49:57.administrations? I will come to the detail of that later, and how the

:49:58. > :50:04.process will work. If he will be patient. I thank him for giving way.

:50:05. > :50:08.Will he take this opportunity to confirm that the government will not

:50:09. > :50:17.use this bill to make policy changes? Again, I will detail this

:50:18. > :50:21.later, but there is one exception to this. The primary aim of the bill is

:50:22. > :50:26.to maintain policy as it is now. The only exception is under withdrawal

:50:27. > :50:32.arrangements, which will be time determined and limited, and I will

:50:33. > :50:38.detail that in a second. I give way. George Osborne, in his headline in

:50:39. > :50:43.the Evening Standard last night, referred to the Secretary of State

:50:44. > :50:46.approach as being ruled by decree. Why is this high-handed approach

:50:47. > :50:52.being taken to the practices of this Parliament? I do not read the

:50:53. > :50:58.Evening Standard, I have to tell you!

:50:59. > :51:01.LAUGHTER And it sounds like with good reason.

:51:02. > :51:05.I have to tell them, if I'm going to take lectures on rule by decree, it

:51:06. > :51:15.will not be by the editor of the Evening Standard. One more time. Can

:51:16. > :51:24.he confirmed that if the government wishes to make a change by statutory

:51:25. > :51:26.instrument, that is a process, so it is a synthetic nonsense to suggest

:51:27. > :51:32.this. LAUGHTER He is entirely right, and I

:51:33. > :51:34.will elaborate on that later. The editor of the Evening Standard

:51:35. > :51:40.should know that from his own experience. The key point of this

:51:41. > :51:50.bill is to avoid significant and serious gaps in the statute book.

:51:51. > :51:57.Employees can be clear about their rights, and businesses can be sure

:51:58. > :52:00.about their trade. Workers' rights, they will be enforceable to UK

:52:01. > :52:06.courts, which are remind the world over. The bill provides certainty as

:52:07. > :52:09.to how the law applies after we leave the European Union and ensures

:52:10. > :52:14.individuals and businesses can continue to find redress when

:52:15. > :52:21.problems arise. Without this bill, all of these things are put at risk.

:52:22. > :52:25.The bill must be on the statute book in the time ahead of withdrawal, so

:52:26. > :52:32.the statutory instruments he referred to, that will flow from the

:52:33. > :52:36.bill, can be made in time before Brexit date, we are in position to

:52:37. > :52:41.look at the laws from day one. The bill provides a clear basis for the

:52:42. > :52:45.negotiation of the European Union by ensuring continuity and clarity in

:52:46. > :52:50.the laws, without prejudice to the ongoing negotiations. Without this,

:52:51. > :53:03.a smooth and orderly exit is possible.

:53:04. > :53:13.We cannot negotiate more until we have decided what is happening at

:53:14. > :53:18.exit. Could he confirm that in choosing to not transpose the EU

:53:19. > :53:24.Charter of fundamental rights, that it will have no impact on the actual

:53:25. > :53:28.rights of the British people, they'd interpretation or enforcement in

:53:29. > :53:33.court? I'm going to come to this later, but if she remembers, when

:53:34. > :53:40.the White papers were presented to the House, I did say to my opposite

:53:41. > :53:44.number but if there were any power is missing, to come to the

:53:45. > :53:51.government, tell the House, and we will put that right. I have not had

:53:52. > :53:54.a single comment since on that. I will make some progress and give way

:53:55. > :54:01.later. I am conscious of the points made by the father of the House that

:54:02. > :54:11.we are going to have tight time on this, and I will give way as much as

:54:12. > :54:18.reasonable. Let me know talk through the main provisions. The first

:54:19. > :54:20.clause of the bill, repealed to the European Communities Act on the day

:54:21. > :54:31.we leave the European Union, ending supremacy of EU law on exit they.

:54:32. > :54:35.When Harold Wilson led the debate here in May 1967, on the question of

:54:36. > :54:39.the United Kingdom's entry of the European Community, he said it is

:54:40. > :54:43.important to realise that community law is mainly concerned with

:54:44. > :54:46.industrial and commercial activities with corporate bodies rather than

:54:47. > :54:50.private individuals. By far the greatest part of domestic law would

:54:51. > :54:54.remain unchanged after entry. I think the passage of time has shown

:54:55. > :55:01.he was mistaken. European Union law touches on all aspects of our lives

:55:02. > :55:04.in a far wider way than the draft of the European Communities Act could

:55:05. > :55:09.have envisaged. This means the bill before us today has a difficult

:55:10. > :55:14.task. It must rebuild United Kingdom law in a way that must make sense

:55:15. > :55:18.outside the European Union. To do this, the first step the bill takes

:55:19. > :55:22.is to preserve all domestic law we have made to implement EU

:55:23. > :55:25.obligations. This mainly means preserving thousands of statutory

:55:26. > :55:30.instruments to be made under the European Communities Act with

:55:31. > :55:39.subjects ranging from aeroplane noise to zoo licensing. It also

:55:40. > :55:52.extends to preserving what relates to the European Union. All 12,000

:55:53. > :56:05.regulations will move to UK law on exit they. I have no doubt there is

:56:06. > :56:08.much about EU law that can be improved, and I know that over time

:56:09. > :56:22.this Parliament will look to improve it, but that is not the purpose of

:56:23. > :56:33.this Bill. It simply brings European Union law into UK law to make sure

:56:34. > :56:50.the rules are the same after exit. The bill ensures that any question

:56:51. > :56:53.on the meaning of retained law... The approach maximises stability by

:56:54. > :56:56.ensuring the meaning of the law does not change overnight, and only the

:56:57. > :57:02.Supreme Court and the High Court of Justice should read -- the High

:57:03. > :57:11.Court of judiciary in Scotland should do this. Any other approach

:57:12. > :57:17.would actively cause uncertainty fossilise EU case law for ever.

:57:18. > :57:22.Future decisions of the Court of justice will not end our courts, but

:57:23. > :57:29.courts will have discretion to have regard to those decisions if they

:57:30. > :57:33.find it appropriate to do so, in the same way that our courts might refer

:57:34. > :57:50.to common jurisdiction such as Australia or Canada.

:57:51. > :57:56.Can he explain why we're only getting eight days to discuss this

:57:57. > :57:58.bill in committee, when the bill took us and had 22, and the

:57:59. > :58:00.Maastricht Treaty had 20? I thank him for giving way. Given

:58:01. > :58:18.the scale of the task that the first thing I would say to him

:58:19. > :58:23.is to reference the Lisbon Treaty. It recreated European law on a major

:58:24. > :58:32.basis. This does not do that. This does not aim to change law. This

:58:33. > :58:36.aims to maintain the laws that we currently have and if he sees that

:58:37. > :58:42.as any different, I will... I give way to the honourable gentleman. The

:58:43. > :58:46.trouble with relying on secondary legislation is that secondary

:58:47. > :58:52.legislation is uneventful and only gets 1.5 hours debate. Would it not,

:58:53. > :58:56.in particular in relation to any secondary legislation under section

:58:57. > :58:59.nine of this bill, be sensible to allow a new form of secondary

:59:00. > :59:06.legislation where you can amend and you have substantial debate? Well,

:59:07. > :59:11.in essence, the aim of the bill is to translate European law into UK

:59:12. > :59:16.law and to ensure there are no problems arising from that, which

:59:17. > :59:24.means references to you things we are no longer subordinate to, many

:59:25. > :59:27.of these things will be relatively straightforward and simple. But the

:59:28. > :59:33.point he should look at in the legislation is that it seeks to make

:59:34. > :59:35.the type of legislation, whether it is an affirmative or negative

:59:36. > :59:39.resolution, in proportion to that. If he wants to speak about this

:59:40. > :59:46.further, I will have to talk to him. I will not reinvent the constitution

:59:47. > :59:52.at the dispatch box. I give way. What conclusion should be electric

:59:53. > :59:58.door about respect to democracy about other parties refusing to give

:59:59. > :00:03.this well -- bill a second reading? I am not going to presume ill intent

:00:04. > :00:11.from the start. What I say to everybody in this House is that the

:00:12. > :00:14.electorate will draw their own conclusions on whether this is being

:00:15. > :00:22.addressed in a sensible way to maintain British law in a way which

:00:23. > :00:26.will enable that to happen in good time on our withdrawal from the

:00:27. > :00:31.European Union, which is happening on a date, or whether it is being

:00:32. > :00:36.used as a cynical exercise. It is not for us to decide on that, it is

:00:37. > :00:40.a decision for the electorate to make and make it they will. I want

:00:41. > :00:49.to make some way. Overall then, the Bill provides for a very significant

:00:50. > :00:53.continuity in law but there are some elements that simply... In a moment.

:00:54. > :00:59.In a moment. That would simply not make sense if they remain on the UK

:01:00. > :01:03.Statute book once we have left the EU and in the years and decades to

:01:04. > :01:07.come. It would not make sense, for example, for the bill to preserve

:01:08. > :01:10.the supremacy of EU law or to make EU law supreme over future

:01:11. > :01:13.legislation passed by this Parliament. Laws passed in these two

:01:14. > :01:18.houses after exit they will take precedence over retained EU law. Mr

:01:19. > :01:21.Speaker, we also do not believe it would make sense to retain the

:01:22. > :01:28.Charter of fundamental rights. The charter only applies to the member

:01:29. > :01:33.states was acting within the scope of EU law. We will not be a member

:01:34. > :01:39.state Noble will be acting within the scope of EU law once we leave

:01:40. > :01:46.the European Union. As I said to the House when I passed the bill, it is

:01:47. > :01:50.not and never was the source of those rights. Those rights have

:01:51. > :01:54.their origins elsewhere in domestic law or relate to international

:01:55. > :01:59.treaties are obligations which the UK remains party to, for example,

:02:00. > :02:05.the easy hate jar. Let me be clear, the absence to the charter will not

:02:06. > :02:12.affect the substantive rights and I have said before that if anyone in

:02:13. > :02:16.this House find the substantive right that is not carried forward

:02:17. > :02:22.into UK law they should say so and we will deal with it. Into several

:02:23. > :02:26.months since I said that, in the several months since I said that, no

:02:27. > :02:30.one has yet brought to my attention something we have missed. It may be

:02:31. > :02:35.that that will happen in the next two minutes but I will start with

:02:36. > :02:38.the honourable lady and then I will come to you. I thank the Secretary

:02:39. > :02:42.of State for giving way. He will know that the key issue is not what

:02:43. > :02:46.ministers say the aim of the bill is but what the actual powers are that

:02:47. > :02:51.are contained within it, so can he tell the House what safeguards they

:02:52. > :02:55.are anywhere in the bill, in statute, that would prevent

:02:56. > :03:01.ministers in future using Clause seven or claw nine or Clause 17 to

:03:02. > :03:05.completely rewrite extradition policy and the demise of the

:03:06. > :03:10.European arrest warrant without coming back to parliamentary primary

:03:11. > :03:16.legislation? I will come back to the details in a moment but there are a

:03:17. > :03:18.number of points including that we cannot impinge on the Human Rights

:03:19. > :03:24.Act, which goes straight to the point she raised. I understand his

:03:25. > :03:28.point about the charter because I agree with him that general

:03:29. > :03:34.principles in the charter should be identical, although that does

:03:35. > :03:39.suggest one does raise the question as to why the charter should go in

:03:40. > :03:42.those circumstances, but it says quite clearly in schedule one that

:03:43. > :03:47.after we have done this, there was no right of action in domestic law

:03:48. > :03:51.on or after exit day based on a failure to comply with any of the

:03:52. > :03:56.general principles of EU law. You must agree that that means that the

:03:57. > :04:03.right of the individual to challenge on the basis of the principle of EU

:04:04. > :04:09.law imported into our law by this act will no longer be possible. In

:04:10. > :04:12.our own courts, forget about the European Court of Justice, in our

:04:13. > :04:18.courts, and that seems to me to be the munition in the rights of the

:04:19. > :04:23.individual and corporate entities? Well, I am afraid we are going to

:04:24. > :04:27.have my old and their right honourable friend, a difference of

:04:28. > :04:31.opinion. We will put in the library a letter on this specific issue

:04:32. > :04:37.which we have already said but, but, before we go there, the simple truth

:04:38. > :04:42.is that today, these laws, these rights, I should say, and he should

:04:43. > :04:49.know as well as anybody, these rights originate from a whole series

:04:50. > :04:53.of origins. Some from the British Government, from the EU, from the

:04:54. > :04:57.Human Rights Act which we are continuing with. Why on earth we

:04:58. > :05:01.need an extra layer of declaratory law, I don't know. It was brought in

:05:02. > :05:10.under the Blair Government. Perhaps that explains why it was there. Now,

:05:11. > :05:15.Mr Speaker, no, in a moment. I will make some progress and I will come

:05:16. > :05:20.back to the lady. Mr Speaker, the conversion of EU law into UK law is

:05:21. > :05:22.essential to ensure the UK leaves the EU in the smoothest way

:05:23. > :05:28.possible. However, the action alone is not enough to ensure the statute

:05:29. > :05:35.book continues to function. Many laws will no longer make sense. Many

:05:36. > :05:40.laws oblige UK individuals, firms are public authorities to continue

:05:41. > :05:44.to engage with the European Union in a way that's both absurd and

:05:45. > :05:48.impossible for a country not within the European Union. Other laws will

:05:49. > :05:51.leave the European Union institutions at the public

:05:52. > :05:54.authorities in the United Kingdom, a role they would not be able to

:05:55. > :05:57.perform or fulfil. The problems that would arise without making these

:05:58. > :06:01.changes range from minor inconveniences to the disruption of

:06:02. > :06:04.vital services we all rely on every day will stop in practical terms,

:06:05. > :06:09.this ranges from a public authority being required to submit water

:06:10. > :06:15.quality reports to the European Union to causing disruption from the

:06:16. > :06:20.city by Rowe -- removing the supervision of credit agencies. It

:06:21. > :06:26.is essential these issues are dealt with before we leave or we will be

:06:27. > :06:34.in breach of our duties to produce clarity for our citizens. This is

:06:35. > :06:38.Clause seven of the bill, the so-called correcting power. Unlike

:06:39. > :06:43.section two, this goes straight to the point of the honourable lady

:06:44. > :06:49.raised, unlike section two of European communities which can be

:06:50. > :06:54.used to do pretty much anything in EU law, the correcting power is very

:06:55. > :07:00.limited. It can only be used to deal with things related directly to our

:07:01. > :07:06.withdrawal from the European Union. Ministers cannot use it simply to

:07:07. > :07:12.alter laws they do not like. It is to adopt laws in a domestic context.

:07:13. > :07:21.It is also restricted so it cannot be used to amend the Human Rights

:07:22. > :07:31.Act, impose increased taxation or altar -- or change... There is also

:07:32. > :07:38.a two-year limitation on this. Leaving the European Union presents

:07:39. > :07:41.challenges that need a pragmatic solution. Using secondary

:07:42. > :07:45.legislation to tackle challenges like these are not -- and not

:07:46. > :07:50.unusual. Secondary legislation is a process of long standing with clear

:07:51. > :07:53.and established roles in Parliament. The honourable lady. I am very

:07:54. > :08:00.grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way. Following on from

:08:01. > :08:02.the point made by the Honourable member from Beaconsfield, the

:08:03. > :08:05.Secretary of State has asked for concrete examples of rights which

:08:06. > :08:09.will be lost to UK citizens as an example of this act so I would like

:08:10. > :08:12.to give him one and ask what is undertaking to ensure this will not

:08:13. > :08:18.be lost. Earlier this summer, a man called John Wark relied on me EU

:08:19. > :08:25.equality law to bring a successful challenge to a loophole which meant

:08:26. > :08:32.employees could refuse to pay same-sex couples the same rights as

:08:33. > :08:37.heterosexual couples and the supreme court agreed there was a loophole in

:08:38. > :08:41.UK law which was a violation of the general principles of

:08:42. > :08:46.non-discrimination in EU law. So Mr Walker was able to use his right of

:08:47. > :08:50.action and a general principles of EU law to close that loophole so

:08:51. > :08:53.that he and his husband can enjoy the same rights as a heterosexual

:08:54. > :09:00.couple. That wouldn't be possible under this bill because, at the

:09:01. > :09:07.right honourable gentleman said... Order. Order. This is a very lawyer

:09:08. > :09:14.like intervention. I am looking for the?. This wouldn't be possible

:09:15. > :09:19.under this bill because there is no right to sue. Will he give an

:09:20. > :09:23.undertaking that he will close this loophole in the bill if we bring

:09:24. > :09:30.forward an appropriate amendment? I think that will be brought forward

:09:31. > :09:33.in the process of the bill's translation and if not... I am

:09:34. > :09:39.sounding exactly by my undertaking, if not, she should come to me and we

:09:40. > :09:44.will find a way of correcting the problem. No, no, with respect, we

:09:45. > :09:48.have had one lengthy intervention. I've got to make some progress. Our

:09:49. > :09:54.current estimate is that the UK Government will need to make between

:09:55. > :10:05.801,000 statutory instruments to make ex-dash-mac 800 and 1000

:10:06. > :10:15.statutory instruments to make this work. Let me contrast this to the

:10:16. > :10:17.12,000 European Union regulations and 8000 domestic regulations,

:10:18. > :10:20.20,000 pieces of law that have brought forward new policy is what

:10:21. > :10:25.we have been members of the European Union. This one-off task, this

:10:26. > :10:30.one-off task is very different to the kind of new law we have had from

:10:31. > :10:33.the European Union in the last four years and is ultimately about

:10:34. > :10:37.ensuring that power returns to this House. The people who complain about

:10:38. > :10:45.using secondary legislation should remember, of that 20,000 pieces of

:10:46. > :10:49.law, 8000 of them went through under secondary legislation, the remaining

:10:50. > :10:52.12,000 when three without any involvement from this House at all

:10:53. > :10:56.because they came as regulations, so they were changing the law rather

:10:57. > :11:02.than maintaining the law. All of these changes must happen quickly to

:11:03. > :11:09.maintain stability as we leave the European Union. Many of the changes

:11:10. > :11:11.will be minor and technical, replacing references to European

:11:12. > :11:15.Union law or to other member states. It would not make sense nor would it

:11:16. > :11:18.be possible to make these numerous changes in primary legislation. Some

:11:19. > :11:22.of the changes we bring forward would by their nature be more

:11:23. > :11:27.substantial and demand more scrutiny. An example would be the

:11:28. > :11:29.proposal to transfer a function currently organised by the

:11:30. > :11:33.commission to a new domestic body that needs to be set up from

:11:34. > :11:37.scratch. We hope to minimise the need for such bodies but where they

:11:38. > :11:40.are needed, I readily accept that these changes need fuller

:11:41. > :11:44.parliamentary scrutiny. That is why the bill sets clear criteria that

:11:45. > :11:48.would trigger the use of the affirmative procedure, ensuring

:11:49. > :11:52.debate and vote in both houses. Over the course of the two days we will

:11:53. > :12:00.spend debating this bill, I am sure we will hear calls for the secondary

:12:01. > :12:03.legislation to receive greater scrutiny, which the honourable

:12:04. > :12:07.gentleman has already made, along the lines given to primary

:12:08. > :12:12.legislation. I say to Honourable members that I'm clear that the way

:12:13. > :12:14.to make significant changes is to primary legislation, significant

:12:15. > :12:19.changes, and that is where the Queen 's speech set out plans for several

:12:20. > :12:23.further bills to follow this one including on immigration, trade and

:12:24. > :12:27.sanctions, bring in significant new policy changes is not the task at

:12:28. > :12:32.hand. With this power, we are making corrections to the statute book

:12:33. > :12:34.rather than bringing in new policies to take advantage of the

:12:35. > :12:38.opportunities that are provided by the withdrawal from the EU. These

:12:39. > :12:42.corrections need to be made to ensure we have a functioning statute

:12:43. > :12:46.book. As far as we can see, the power we have proposed is the only

:12:47. > :12:50.logical and feasible way to make these corrections. Our approach

:12:51. > :12:54.remains the only viable plan that forward in this House. While we have

:12:55. > :12:55.heard complaint on the benches opposite, we have not seen an

:12:56. > :13:02.alternative. The essential premise of what he

:13:03. > :13:06.argued this morning is an order to ensure a smooth ex-fit we need to

:13:07. > :13:14.maintain as much of the status quote as possible. But this Bill goes

:13:15. > :13:18.further. Looking at clauses five and six those changes would effectively

:13:19. > :13:22.rule out being within the customs union and the single market for a

:13:23. > :13:26.transitional period. That is the single biggest risk to our economy,

:13:27. > :13:33.and that is what is contained in this Bill. Well, he's quite right in

:13:34. > :13:37.one respect, that is clear Government policy. That is in fact

:13:38. > :13:41.the decision taken by the British people last year, that they wanted

:13:42. > :13:45.to leave the EU, which means leaving the single market and the customs

:13:46. > :13:49.union, that point is clear. I know it is confusing on that side of the

:13:50. > :13:52.House because the deputy lead Labour leader appears to have a different

:13:53. > :13:58.view to the rest of the party, but let me make further progress after

:13:59. > :14:03.that silly intervention. The Bill also contains a limited power to

:14:04. > :14:08.implement the withdrawal agreement by statutory instrument if

:14:09. > :14:11.necessary. In a moment. The Government's aspiration is to ensure

:14:12. > :14:17.a new deep and special partnership with the EU. Under the Article 50

:14:18. > :14:21.process, we are negotiating withdrawal of the EU. Provisions

:14:22. > :14:26.will need to be implemented in domestic law and some will need to

:14:27. > :14:29.be done by exit day. In a moment. Given the timetable set by Article

:14:30. > :14:34.50 it is prudent to take this power now so we are ready if necessary to

:14:35. > :14:39.move quickly to implement aspects of an agreement in domestic law. This

:14:40. > :14:42.will be particularly important if negotiations conclude late in a

:14:43. > :14:47.two-year period. This power will help to ensure the UK Government and

:14:48. > :15:00.devolved administrations can implement the outcome of

:15:01. > :15:03.negotiations. The power is limited and will only be available until

:15:04. > :15:06.extra day at which point it will expire. It is aimed at making the

:15:07. > :15:09.changes that need to be in place from day one of exit to ensure an

:15:10. > :15:11.orderly withdrawal from the EU. I have listened patiently to the

:15:12. > :15:13.Secretary of State on these regulations and delegated

:15:14. > :15:18.legislation. It is not just standard. I would like the Secretary

:15:19. > :15:22.of State to say something about the status of the legislation made under

:15:23. > :15:28.clause seven which gives it the status of an Act of Parliament. This

:15:29. > :15:35.is an attempt to oust review. I would like him to elaborate upon

:15:36. > :15:43.that very condition. I am afraid it is not correct, and this point was

:15:44. > :15:47.made by another Member, about the ability to change bits of primary

:15:48. > :15:56.legislation. The simple truth is that that is a standard set of words

:15:57. > :16:02.used by these, the 2002 enterprise Act has it, Labour Party acts have

:16:03. > :16:09.it, and it is making sure nothing in the Bill prevents the ability to go

:16:10. > :16:14.through a transition phase, for example, and into the next phase of

:16:15. > :16:18.negotiation. Forgive me, I will make progress. The use of the power will

:16:19. > :16:22.depend on the contents of the withdrawal agreement. For example

:16:23. > :16:30.the power could, depending on the agreement, be used to clarify the

:16:31. > :16:34.state of cases in the CJ JEE. It could also be used to enable

:16:35. > :16:37.ventilatory approval for UK products pending at the point of exit in line

:16:38. > :16:44.with the proposal in the UK's position paper this summer. These

:16:45. > :16:49.sorts of fairly technical but important issues need to be capable

:16:50. > :16:51.of being changed. I will give way in one second. We've had already

:16:52. > :16:56.committed to bringing forward a motion on the final agreement to be

:16:57. > :17:00.approved by both houses before it is concluded. That vote is in addition

:17:01. > :17:02.to Parliamentary scrutiny of any statutory instruments with promoters

:17:03. > :17:07.under this power and also in addition to the enormous debate and

:17:08. > :17:11.scrutiny applied to the primary legislation to cover all and every

:17:12. > :17:16.major policy change around our exit from the EU. So Parliament will be

:17:17. > :17:21.followed involved in taking this forward Andrew withdrawal agreement.

:17:22. > :17:25.I will give way. One of the most offensive kinds of provision --

:17:26. > :17:30.defensive provision that appear is the Henry VIII clause as we call it,

:17:31. > :17:36.not my words but the wise words of my Right Honourable Friend the

:17:37. > :17:40.Member for Stone in 2013. There have been long-standing real concerns

:17:41. > :17:45.about statutory instruments for many years and right across these

:17:46. > :17:50.pensions. So to allay those concerns would my Right Honourable Friend

:17:51. > :17:53.look at what is called triaging of these proposed statutory

:17:54. > :17:56.instruments. Many thousands will be completely uncontroversial and can

:17:57. > :18:01.be dealt with quickly and efficiently, but those which really

:18:02. > :18:07.be considered fully by this chamber in this place, that could then

:18:08. > :18:11.happen if we have this triaging. Would he please agree to look at

:18:12. > :18:20.that principle? It will solve many of the difficulties with this Bill

:18:21. > :18:25.across all these benches. It won't be many thousands, it is between 800

:18:26. > :18:30.and thousand as the estimate has come down because we have taken out

:18:31. > :18:34.much of the most serious legislation in primary legislation. I will

:18:35. > :18:41.happily talk to her about mechanisms for making sure this is a fully

:18:42. > :18:47.democratic and open process, and let's come back to it. I talked to

:18:48. > :18:52.her about it in the build process. Forgive me, I am trying to hold back

:18:53. > :19:02.on too many interventions but I will discuss it. Now... I will give way.

:19:03. > :19:05.On the powers in clause nine to implement the withdrawal agreement,

:19:06. > :19:09.is the Secretary of State able to give the House and assurance that

:19:10. > :19:13.those powers will not be exercised until Parliament has had an

:19:14. > :19:23.opportunity to vote on the agreement? Just thinking through the

:19:24. > :19:29.logic of that, it seems to me logical. If you will allow me a few

:19:30. > :19:33.moments to review the matter, it seems perfectly possible, but I

:19:34. > :19:39.won't do it on the fly in case I missed something. He is right. Let

:19:40. > :19:44.me say to the House, he is right about one thing in that there are

:19:45. > :19:51.two issues run together, the question of the overall judgment on

:19:52. > :19:56.the outcome and any withdrawal arrangements. The withdrawal

:19:57. > :20:01.arrangements are most likely scum Blissett arrives late. He will

:20:02. > :20:07.remember when we talked about how the House will be able to review the

:20:08. > :20:11.negotiated agreement, but we said we would make the best endeavours and

:20:12. > :20:14.expect to get it to the House before anybody else does that. That is what

:20:15. > :20:19.we intend but we had to use that form of words because we were unsure

:20:20. > :20:24.about timing. I will come back to him on that matter. I want to move

:20:25. > :20:28.onto another subject if I may, which is the question of devolution,

:20:29. > :20:32.relating directly to some of the things the opposition have been

:20:33. > :20:42.saying. Let me now deal with the Bill's approach to. The overall

:20:43. > :20:45.approach of this Bill is to provide continuity wherever possible at the

:20:46. > :20:46.point of exit, not seek to initiate reforms immediately. That is the

:20:47. > :20:52.approach that guides devolution provisions as well. Let me be clear,

:20:53. > :20:54.this Government has a strong track record on devolution. Our commitment

:20:55. > :20:59.to strengthen devolution settlement is clear in the statute book, most

:21:00. > :21:05.recently the Wales Act of 2017 and the Scotland Act 2016, which

:21:06. > :21:08.remember correctly gave ?12 billion of tax raising powers to the

:21:09. > :21:12.Scottish Parliament. So not such small things. Leaving the EU allows

:21:13. > :21:16.us to ensure decision-making sits closer to people than ever before.

:21:17. > :21:24.We expect a significant increase in the decision-making power of the

:21:25. > :21:28.devolved institutions. The current devolution settlements have always

:21:29. > :21:34.created common frameworks within the UK by reflecting the context of the

:21:35. > :21:39.UK's EU membership so in areas subject to EU law, all parts of the

:21:40. > :21:44.UK currently follow common laws and principles even when matters are

:21:45. > :21:46.otherwise devolved, for example, England, Wales, Scotland and

:21:47. > :21:50.Northern Ireland each pass their own laws relating to food policy but

:21:51. > :21:55.each nation has to ensure they comply with EU rules on food

:21:56. > :21:59.hygiene. When we leave the EU it is not in the interests of people and

:22:00. > :22:02.businesses living and working in the UK for all those arrangements to

:22:03. > :22:08.disappear or for there to be new barriers to living doing business in

:22:09. > :22:12.our country. The Bill provides certainty and continuity for people

:22:13. > :22:19.across the UK by recreating in UK law the common frameworks currently

:22:20. > :22:23.provided by EU law and providing that devolved institutions cannot

:22:24. > :22:25.modify them. It also ensures that every decision the devolved

:22:26. > :22:31.administrations could take before exit date, they can still take after

:22:32. > :22:35.exit day. This is a transitional arrangement which ensures certainty

:22:36. > :22:42.and continuity whilst the UK undertakes negotiations with the EU

:22:43. > :22:45.on its future relationship, and the UK Government administrations

:22:46. > :22:52.discuss precisely where we need to retain common frameworks within the

:22:53. > :22:55.UK. I give way. What he is therefore describing is not devolution but

:22:56. > :22:58.preserving powers back to this Parliament, a fundamental breach of

:22:59. > :23:05.the principles of the original Scotland Act. Can he confirm that

:23:06. > :23:09.any statutory instruments that go through this House is affecting the

:23:10. > :23:14.devolved administrations will be as a result of this Bill, subject to

:23:15. > :23:20.legislative consent in those administrations? I have said already

:23:21. > :23:26.we will be putting out a consent motion. Let's come back to the core

:23:27. > :23:30.of this argument. Everything that belongs to the EU now belongs to the

:23:31. > :23:33.devolved administrations so this clearly doesn't work, as we will

:23:34. > :23:37.come to in a minute. These common frameworks will be important as they

:23:38. > :23:43.enable us to manage shared resources such as the sea, rivers and air, and

:23:44. > :23:47.enable us to continue functioning in the UK's internal market. They will

:23:48. > :23:53.allow us to strike trade deals and provide access to justice in cases

:23:54. > :23:59.with a cross-border element. This includes our future relationship

:24:00. > :24:03.with the EU. For example, they will mean a business in Wales known as it

:24:04. > :24:07.only needs to comply with one set of food labelling and safety rules to

:24:08. > :24:11.sell to the rest of the UK, or a farmer in Scotland can sell

:24:12. > :24:15.livestock and other parts of the UK safe in the knowledge that the same

:24:16. > :24:21.animal health rules apply across that geographic area. Certainty on

:24:22. > :24:28.common approaches is critical for the day to day life of people in the

:24:29. > :24:32.UK on the day we exit the EU and into the future. The Honourable

:24:33. > :24:36.Gentleman is trying to get in. If this is a smooth transition I'm not

:24:37. > :24:43.sure how much worse it is going to get. But on the points he races, he

:24:44. > :24:47.makes a good case for the EU. I don't see any reference here to

:24:48. > :24:53.immigration powers Scotland was promised during the referendum

:24:54. > :24:58.process. Could he explain? I don't remember any such promise. What was

:24:59. > :25:02.interesting in this, when I was going through the list of practical

:25:03. > :25:07.things that apply to the citizens they are supposed to represent, what

:25:08. > :25:12.do we here? They don't care. What they are interested in is devolution

:25:13. > :25:15.and political power for themselves, not the interests of their own

:25:16. > :25:20.constituents. So just as important are those areas where we do not need

:25:21. > :25:24.common approaches in future. We do not expect to need to maintain a

:25:25. > :25:33.framework in every area of the EU is mandated. We can assure our common

:25:34. > :25:35.approach is better suited the UK and devolution settlements and therefore

:25:36. > :25:37.the Bill provides a mechanism to release policy areas where no

:25:38. > :25:40.frameworks are needed. This Bill gives time for us to work together

:25:41. > :25:45.with the devolved administrations to determine where we will continue to

:25:46. > :25:50.need common frameworks in future, and crucially, it will not create

:25:51. > :25:53.unnecessary short-term change that negatively affects people and

:25:54. > :25:56.businesses. Before the summer recess my Right Honourable Friend the first

:25:57. > :26:01.Secretary of State wrote to the Scottish and Welsh Government to

:26:02. > :26:05.begin intensive discussions over where frameworks are and are not

:26:06. > :26:08.needed. In the current absence of the Northern Ireland Executive

:26:09. > :26:11.equivalent to gauge Mint has taken place with the Northern Ireland

:26:12. > :26:14.civil service -- equivalent engagement. We will bring forward

:26:15. > :26:22.further detail on this process in due course for Parliament to decide.

:26:23. > :26:29.Certainly in devolved legislation affected by the EU X it it is also

:26:30. > :26:33.vital that certainty -- that there is certainty. The key powers in this

:26:34. > :26:35.Bill are conferred upon devolved administration so the task of

:26:36. > :26:39.preparing a devolved statute book for exit can rightly be led from

:26:40. > :26:44.Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Government is committed

:26:45. > :26:45.to ensuring the powers work for the administrations and legislatures.

:26:46. > :26:53.For instance I have already confirmed we were always consult on

:26:54. > :26:59.corrections to EU law. I firmly believe that the outcome of this

:27:00. > :27:01.process will be a significant increase in decision-making power of

:27:02. > :27:07.the devolved administrations. It will mean decisions and power sit in

:27:08. > :27:12.the right place and closer to people than ever before, and crucially,

:27:13. > :27:14.this Bill means UK businesses and citizens have confidence and

:27:15. > :27:21.certainty in the laws to allow them to live and operate across the UK as

:27:22. > :27:24.we exit the EU. As the Prime Minister said... I have given way to

:27:25. > :27:31.poor ones. As the Prime Minister said in January, the historic

:27:32. > :27:34.decision taken by the British people in June last year was not a

:27:35. > :27:40.rejection of the common values and history we share with the EU. But it

:27:41. > :27:44.was a reflection of the desire of British people to control our own

:27:45. > :27:49.laws and ensure these reflect the country and people we want to be.

:27:50. > :27:52.This Bill is an essential building block for this which lays the

:27:53. > :27:56.foundation for a functioning statute book which future policies and laws

:27:57. > :28:02.can be debated and altered. This Bill is itself not the place for

:28:03. > :28:04.those changes to the frameworks we inherit from the EU. We will have

:28:05. > :28:08.more opportunities to debate those before and after we leave. I hope

:28:09. > :28:12.the Honourable members on all sides will recognise we have acted

:28:13. > :28:17.responsibly by prioritising first and foremost a functioning statute

:28:18. > :28:21.book. In bringing forward this Bill we are ensuring the smooth as

:28:22. > :28:24.possible exit from the EU, which enables continued stability of the

:28:25. > :28:30.UK's legal system and maximises certainty for businesses, consumers

:28:31. > :28:35.and individuals across the UK, and as we exit and seek a new deep and

:28:36. > :28:38.special partnership with EU, the Bill ensures we will do so from a

:28:39. > :28:53.position with the same standards and rules.

:28:54. > :28:58.I hope everyone in this House recognises the bill's is the true

:28:59. > :29:02.nature. It is a foundation on which we will legislate for years. We have

:29:03. > :29:10.just had this morning the proposals from the opposition on their

:29:11. > :29:18.proposal to move a reasoned amendment. I have just emphasised

:29:19. > :29:22.the critical nature of this bill. A vote for the honourable member's

:29:23. > :29:27.amendment is a vote against this bill, a vote for a chaotic exit from

:29:28. > :29:34.the European Union. The amendment suggests... The amendment suggests

:29:35. > :29:40.that this bill provides some sort of blank cheque to ministers. That's a

:29:41. > :29:44.fundamental, that's a fundamental misrepresentation of Parliament and

:29:45. > :29:49.our democratic recess. Using the bill's powers does not mean avoiding

:29:50. > :29:53.Parliamentary scrutiny. Secondary legislation is still subject to

:29:54. > :29:55.parliamentary oversight using well-established procedures. In no

:29:56. > :30:01.way does it provide unilateral powers to the Government. On rights,

:30:02. > :30:08.the Government agrees that the exit cannot lead to weaker rights in the

:30:09. > :30:11.UK. We have been clear we want to ensure workers' rights are protected

:30:12. > :30:14.and enhanced as we leave the European Union. This bill provides

:30:15. > :30:19.for existing legislation of this area to be maintained and then after

:30:20. > :30:24.we leave European Union it will be right for Parliament to determine

:30:25. > :30:29.the proper levels of protection. We have also spoken about devolution.

:30:30. > :30:32.Finally, the argument that this undermines the implementation of our

:30:33. > :30:36.new arrangements with the European Union is completely wrong. The bill

:30:37. > :30:40.provides a clear basis for negotiation by ensuring continuity

:30:41. > :30:45.and clarity in our laws without prejudice to negotiations. Without

:30:46. > :30:51.legislation, a smooth and orderly exit is not possible. We cannot wait

:30:52. > :30:56.the completion of negotiations for -- before ensuring legal certainty.

:30:57. > :31:02.To do so or to delay and oppose the bill would be reckless in the

:31:03. > :31:06.extreme. Mr Speaker, I have, I have in the past witnessed the Labour

:31:07. > :31:10.Party on European business take the most cynical, unprincipled approach

:31:11. > :31:15.to legislation that I have ever seen. They are now attempting to do

:31:16. > :31:20.the same today and the British people will not forgive them if the

:31:21. > :31:25.end of their process is to delay or destroy the process by which we

:31:26. > :31:34.leave the European Union. Order. The question is that the bill be now

:31:35. > :31:37.read a second time. I must inform the House I have selected the

:31:38. > :31:40.amendment in the name of the Leader of the Opposition. I remained a

:31:41. > :31:45.house that of course front bench speakers can speak without a time

:31:46. > :31:51.limit and they have to be sensitive to the number of people who want to

:31:52. > :31:55.intervene on them. So I merely note, and colleagues can make their own

:31:56. > :32:00.assessment, that on current progress, probably somewhat fewer

:32:01. > :32:06.than half of those who wish to speak today will be able to do so.

:32:07. > :32:17.Colleagues obviously need to help each other. Circular Starmer. The

:32:18. > :32:22.Secretary of State is keen to portray this bill as a technical

:32:23. > :32:27.exercise converting EU law into our law without raising any serious

:32:28. > :32:32.constitutional issues about the role of Parliament. Nothing could be

:32:33. > :32:38.further from the truth. Mr Speaker, let me start with Clause nine. The

:32:39. > :32:41.article 15 negotiations that the Secretary of State and by Minister

:32:42. > :32:46.Noel are among the most difficult and significant in recent history.

:32:47. > :32:51.Under Article 50, the agreement will cover all of the withdrawal

:32:52. > :32:55.arrangements and take account of our future relationship between the UK

:32:56. > :33:01.and the EU. A backwards look and forwards look and something which

:33:02. > :33:06.may last for decades. We know from phase one it will have to cover EU

:33:07. > :33:13.citizens, Northern Ireland, UK citizens in Europe, and money. Phase

:33:14. > :33:15.two of course will cover security, cross-border crime, civil justice,

:33:16. > :33:22.fisheries, farming, Gibraltar, you name it. We hope it will be in the

:33:23. > :33:27.Article 50 agreement. We want that to succeed. We need an agreement.

:33:28. > :33:32.And of course it will include our future trading arrangements. Hugely

:33:33. > :33:36.important, including any transitional arrangements, if there

:33:37. > :33:43.are such arrangements, and much more. Arguably, the arrangements

:33:44. > :33:48.will, and these are not my words but I will come back to them, extend to

:33:49. > :33:53.every facet of national life. That Article 50 agreement will be voted

:33:54. > :34:03.on. But it will then have to be implemented. A colossal task likely

:34:04. > :34:07.to involve a whole host of policy choices and require very widespread

:34:08. > :34:11.changes to our law on any view. So how will that be done? Enter Clause

:34:12. > :34:32.nine. Amen De Schepper Minister well, it's very likely to have to be

:34:33. > :34:36.enforced before exit day because otherwise there will be a gap, so

:34:37. > :34:40.that means the whole of the agreement being implemented under

:34:41. > :34:45.Clause nine. The whole of the agreement, including transitional

:34:46. > :34:50.measures. It can't be implemented after exit day otherwise there will

:34:51. > :34:54.be a gap. Let's be clear about how wide Clause nine years. We've had

:34:55. > :34:58.some discussion about Henry VIII. Let's read subsection two.

:34:59. > :35:03.Regulations under this provision on the withdrawal bill may make any

:35:04. > :35:07.precision that could be made by an act of Parliament, it's true Henry

:35:08. > :35:17.VIII, it can modify Acts of Parliament, in brackets, including

:35:18. > :35:20.modifying this act. The delegated legislation can amend the primary

:35:21. > :35:30.act itself. That is as wide as I've seen in my experience. What are the

:35:31. > :35:38.limits? You might think, what are the limits, what other safeguards?

:35:39. > :35:41.Well, Clause 9.3. You can't impose taxation, retrospective provisions,

:35:42. > :35:47.while they are usually a very bad idea, create a criminal offence or

:35:48. > :35:52.affect the Human Rights Act. Everything else is on limits under

:35:53. > :35:55.Clause nine. Everything else is on limits under Clause nine. I will

:35:56. > :36:02.just make this point and then of course I'll give way. Surely then

:36:03. > :36:07.all Clause nine, and I'm using this as an example, you would expect

:36:08. > :36:11.somewhere in here and enhanced procedure, a safeguard, surely not

:36:12. > :36:16.just ordinary old delegated legislation? Surely something when

:36:17. > :36:21.it is as wide as this. I will make this point and then of course give

:36:22. > :36:26.way to a number of people when I have done it. What are the

:36:27. > :36:36.procedures? Are they enhanced? No. The opposite. Schedule seven, part

:36:37. > :36:44.two deals with Clause nine. It makes it clear that unless the delegated

:36:45. > :36:50.legislation creates a public authority or the function of a

:36:51. > :36:55.public authority, affect a criminal offence or the power to make

:36:56. > :36:59.legislation, it is to be dealt with by what? The negative procedure for

:37:00. > :37:07.statutory instruments, the least possible scrutiny. So the widest

:37:08. > :37:12.possible power, no safeguards, channelled in to the level of least

:37:13. > :37:18.scrutiny. That is absolutely extraordinary. And let's be clear

:37:19. > :37:23.what that means. Because I am sure the Secretary of State and others

:37:24. > :37:26.will say, well, notwithstanding the number of statutory instruments

:37:27. > :37:31.under this legislation, they could be called up and Donald, Parliament

:37:32. > :37:37.has its say. I looked up the last time a negative procedure statute

:37:38. > :37:41.was annulled in this House. 38 years ago. I don't know how many people

:37:42. > :37:53.have been in this House for 38 years, but many of us will have not

:37:54. > :38:01.had the opportunity... So much, so much for taking back control. And

:38:02. > :38:06.there's no point the Secretary of State or the Prime Minister saying,

:38:07. > :38:12.well, we wouldn't use these powers, take our assurance. If you wouldn't

:38:13. > :38:15.use them, they are unnecessary. And if they are unnecessary, they

:38:16. > :38:21.shouldn't be put before this House for approval today. I will give way.

:38:22. > :38:29.I thank the honourable gentleman for giving way. The case he is making is

:38:30. > :38:34.for an amendment to Clause nine. He is not making a case against the

:38:35. > :38:37.principle of this bill which is what second reading is about and yet he

:38:38. > :38:42.and his party are determined to vote against the principle of the bill.

:38:43. > :38:50.He used -- he ought to make that case. I have only just started. I

:38:51. > :38:54.give way. The Secretary of State made great play that this bill is

:38:55. > :38:58.necessary for certainty but given the legal situation that my right

:38:59. > :39:02.honourable friend has just excellently elucidated, would he

:39:03. > :39:06.agree with me that the powers that this gives Secretary of State Debra

:39:07. > :39:09.regulating every aspect of our lives means that this bill is a charter

:39:10. > :39:19.for uncertainty for ordinary British people? I wait and I'm going to

:39:20. > :39:24.attempt to demonstrate that. I will press on. I know people want to

:39:25. > :39:28.intervene. I hear what the Speaker says about the number of people who

:39:29. > :39:32.want to speak and I will try to take them at intervals of that is

:39:33. > :39:35.satisfactory to the House. The same approach to Clause nine is taken to

:39:36. > :39:38.Clause seven for dealing with deficiencies arising from withdrawal

:39:39. > :39:42.and under Clause eight complying with international legislation. All

:39:43. > :39:46.channelled into the negative procedure with the least possible

:39:47. > :39:51.scrutiny. The giant sidestepped a Parliamentary scrutiny on the most

:39:52. > :39:57.important issues of our day. But let me top it off, if you think that's

:39:58. > :40:08.bad, and I do, try Clause 17. Try Clause 17. A minister of the Crown

:40:09. > :40:12.may by regulations make such provisions as a Minister considers

:40:13. > :40:16.appropriate in consequence of this act. That's it. Anything in

:40:17. > :40:22.consequence of the act can be done under Clause 17. Again, making it

:40:23. > :40:27.absolutely clear, this is a proper robust Henry VIII. Look at the

:40:28. > :40:35.Clause two, the power to make laws and does one may be exercised by

:40:36. > :40:43.power and any other enactment. That means amending primary legislation.

:40:44. > :40:49.And this, subsection three, in case anybody is in doubt, in subsection

:40:50. > :40:52.two, enactment does not include primary legislation passed made

:40:53. > :40:57.after the end of the session in which this act is passed. So it can

:40:58. > :41:02.amend any legislation whatsoever, primary legislation, including

:41:03. > :41:06.legislation in this session. Everything in the Queen's speech

:41:07. > :41:12.that's coming down the track can be amended by delegated legislation

:41:13. > :41:16.under Clause 17. I've never come across such a wide power. I've seen

:41:17. > :41:20.consequential powers. The Secretary of State will no doubt point out

:41:21. > :41:25.other statutes which have similar powers. I have looked at them, I

:41:26. > :41:30.have never seen one as wide as this. Don't just take my word for it.

:41:31. > :41:32.Don't take my word for it. The Secretary of State a minute ago said

:41:33. > :41:38.nobody could suggest this was a blank legislative check for the

:41:39. > :41:45.Government. Nobody could. Let me read to you the Hansard Society, not

:41:46. > :41:51.a political body, not the opposition, the Hansard Society

:41:52. > :41:56.about Clause 17. I quote, such an extensive power is hedged in by the

:41:57. > :42:02.fact that any provision must somehow relate to the withdrawal from the

:42:03. > :42:07.EU, but given that this will arguably extend to every facet of

:42:08. > :42:12.national life, if it was granted, it would in effect, their words, hand

:42:13. > :42:21.the Government a legislative blank cheque. Hansard's words. I need to

:42:22. > :42:27.just complete this part of my presentation, if I may. A

:42:28. > :42:37.legislative blank cheque. So, what's the scope and extent of this?

:42:38. > :42:44.What is the scope and extent of this? How many pieces of legislation

:42:45. > :42:50.are we concerned with? The White Paper suggested 800-1000, the

:42:51. > :42:54.majority of which will go in the negative procedure route. I don't

:42:55. > :42:59.think the White Paper could or did take into account the further

:43:00. > :43:04.instruments necessary to implement the withdrawal agreement, which

:43:05. > :43:07.could be very many more, well over 1000 pieces of delegated

:43:08. > :43:13.legislation, with the least scrutiny possible. I will complete this point

:43:14. > :43:21.then give way. I was glad to see the Prime Minister was here earlier.

:43:22. > :43:26.Yesterday, during Prime Minister's Questions, the Prime Minister told

:43:27. > :43:33.the House, and I quote, "The Government's approach to this Bill

:43:34. > :43:35.has been endorsed by the House of Lords Constitution committee".

:43:36. > :43:41.That's what she said yesterday at the dispatch box. I went and read,

:43:42. > :43:51.again, that report last night. I have doubts about that endorsement.

:43:52. > :43:57.But... When I finish this point. But when I is she, and the Secretary of

:43:58. > :44:02.State will know, this morning, the House of Lords produced its further

:44:03. > :44:11.report on the Bill published this morning. It concludes, I quote,

:44:12. > :44:14.executive powers conferred by this Bill are unprecedented and

:44:15. > :44:17.extraordinary and raise constitutional issues about the

:44:18. > :44:24.separation of powers between Parliament and Government". It goes

:44:25. > :44:28.on to say, this is the committee the Prime Minister was yesterday citing,

:44:29. > :44:31."The number, range and overlapping nature of broad delegated powers

:44:32. > :44:35.would fundamentally challenge constitutional balances of power

:44:36. > :44:41.between Parliament and Government and represent a significant and

:44:42. > :44:45.unacceptable transfer of legal competence". Far from an endorsement

:44:46. > :44:50.it is an explicit and damning criticism of the Government 's

:44:51. > :44:54.approach. I will give Wade. Can I absolutely agree with my Right

:44:55. > :44:59.Honourable Friend for pointing out what a joke this Bill is, setting

:45:00. > :45:03.out all these supposed safeguards, and correctly he points out that the

:45:04. > :45:10.ministers can make regulations to modify this Act. We are disappearing

:45:11. > :45:14.down the Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole of legislation, and will he

:45:15. > :45:17.also agreed that it doesn't matter when ministers opposite, the Prime

:45:18. > :45:22.Minister, secretary of State of state say, trust us, we won't use

:45:23. > :45:26.the regulars, because they could be here today, gone tomorrow. The

:45:27. > :45:30.Honourable Member for the 18th century in Somerset could be Prime

:45:31. > :45:39.Minister, we could be in hand is totally with all these powers. I am

:45:40. > :45:47.grateful for that intervention. CHEERING. Order, I think we can

:45:48. > :45:50.short-circuit this, the Honourable Gentleman for North East Somerset

:45:51. > :46:01.has observed that the 18th-century is altogether too recent for him.

:46:02. > :46:05.There have been two interventions. Could he go back to clause nine? In

:46:06. > :46:10.relation to what is being called the divorce Bill, the amount of money we

:46:11. > :46:20.may have debated the EU on leaving the EU. Is it his view that under

:46:21. > :46:25.clause nine, that could be agreed by a minister, by Government, without

:46:26. > :46:31.this place having any say over the amount of money paid at all? If it

:46:32. > :46:36.doesn't come under clause nine it will certainly come under clause 17.

:46:37. > :46:48.I give Wade and apologise for taking the wrong order. Thank you very much

:46:49. > :46:52.for giving way. As a new Member, I also look for advice on how

:46:53. > :46:56.Parliament has looked at statutory instruments and I also saw that the

:46:57. > :47:01.last time the instruments were annulled by this House was back in

:47:02. > :47:06.1979. The issue was on the cost of paraffin, and I remember 1979 and

:47:07. > :47:11.the high cost of fuel. It was a significant issue. But given that

:47:12. > :47:16.the Secretary of State has said in response to the intervention from

:47:17. > :47:19.the Member for Brock Stowe that he is prepared to consider a sifting

:47:20. > :47:25.process which means that serious issues do come back to this House,

:47:26. > :47:34.what is your alternative? What are you proposing? What is your

:47:35. > :47:39.amendment? Being made for the first time today. These points have been

:47:40. > :47:43.made since the White Paper was published. That was in March. The

:47:44. > :47:47.Bill was published in July, there have been numerous reports since

:47:48. > :47:50.then, and I raised that the time the significant issues I am raising now,

:47:51. > :47:58.and there has been no move from the Government. I will give way then I

:47:59. > :48:03.will move on. The key point about section nine is that it allows the

:48:04. > :48:08.Government to have asked Parliament to allow it to alter the Bill itself

:48:09. > :48:14.by secondary legislation once it has been enacted. If you look through

:48:15. > :48:19.the history of the 20th century, you will see no Bill that has sought to

:48:20. > :48:24.do that, not in time of war or civil emergency, and in fact for every

:48:25. > :48:29.single emergency Powers Act, they have expressly said they shall not

:48:30. > :48:35.be a power for ministers to alter primary legislation. I am grateful

:48:36. > :48:40.for that intervention. I am on my feet answering the last

:48:41. > :48:46.intervention. It powerfully makes the point that this Act is

:48:47. > :48:49.unprecedented in its scope. It is significant because the Secretary of

:48:50. > :48:55.State will point to some of the safeguards under the Act for the

:48:56. > :49:02.exercise of some of these powers. But if the delegated legislation can

:49:03. > :49:05.amend the Act, then notions of exit day, how far the dead legation

:49:06. > :49:10.legislation goes and what procedures are used could be amended by the Act

:49:11. > :49:20.delegated legislation. I will press on. Let me turn from Parliamentary

:49:21. > :49:26.involvement to the protection of rights. Many rights and protections

:49:27. > :49:33.derived from the EU are protected in delegated legislation under the 1972

:49:34. > :49:37.European Communities Act. Because they are underpinned by EU

:49:38. > :49:43.provisions, they have enjoyed enhanced protection. 44 years worth.

:49:44. > :49:48.They include some very important rights. The working time rights of

:49:49. > :49:53.people at work, the rights of part-time and fixed term workers,

:49:54. > :49:57.the transfer of undertakings provision which affects everybody

:49:58. > :50:01.who is at work if their company is taken over, so their contracts are

:50:02. > :50:05.preserved, something we all believe him. All health and safety

:50:06. > :50:10.provisions have been by delegated legislation under the 1972 Act. It

:50:11. > :50:14.didn't matter that it was just delegated legislation because they

:50:15. > :50:21.had enhanced protection because of the 72 Act and our membership of the

:50:22. > :50:26.EU. The same is equally true of important environmental rights and

:50:27. > :50:29.protections for consumers. Under this Bill, the Secretary of State

:50:30. > :50:35.says they survive, and I accept that, and he does have a condiment

:50:36. > :50:42.to rights at work, but they don't survive with their enhanced status.

:50:43. > :50:47.They survive only in delegated form. From the date of this Bill, they are

:50:48. > :50:51.amendable by delegated legislation. All of those rights at work, those

:50:52. > :50:59.environmental provisions, consumer rights, they are protected only...

:51:00. > :51:04.They are not protected from delegated legislation. I will give

:51:05. > :51:08.way in that order. On the specific point of health and safety

:51:09. > :51:13.protections, he knows of course that there is in fact in 1974 statute,

:51:14. > :51:19.the health and safety at work Act which gives not just employees

:51:20. > :51:23.safety protections but also members of the public affected by conditions

:51:24. > :51:29.in the workplace. Surely that in itself acts as the primary

:51:30. > :51:32.protection to workers in this country under health and safety

:51:33. > :51:43.provisions. White I am afraid it doesn't. LAUGHTER.

:51:44. > :51:52.There are other revelations which postdate baton but doesn't deal with

:51:53. > :51:56.any other rights. -- the postdate that. He is making an excellent

:51:57. > :51:59.speech. On the issue of environmental standards would he

:52:00. > :52:03.agree with me that there is another problem which is the governance gap,

:52:04. > :52:06.in other words with the lack of the European Court of Justice and

:52:07. > :52:09.commission there is nothing to enforce environmental standards,

:52:10. > :52:13.therefore we need a new legal architecture. Judicial review is not

:52:14. > :52:18.enough. I am grateful for that intervention because one thing that

:52:19. > :52:22.is not on the face of the statue is any enforcement provision for rights

:52:23. > :52:27.currently enforced in one or other way through EU institutions or even

:52:28. > :52:33.reporting obligations. It is fair to say that there is the provision in

:52:34. > :52:39.the Act for the creation of public authorities by delegated

:52:40. > :52:43.legislation, and it may be that that could be used for remedies, but it

:52:44. > :52:47.is by no means clear on the face of the Bill and I think that is an

:52:48. > :52:51.important deficiency. Let me complete this point. Does it matter

:52:52. > :52:58.that these rights have lost their enhanced protection? Yes, it does.

:52:59. > :53:02.Taking back control, obviously, carries with it that Parliament can

:53:03. > :53:07.change those rights, as the Secretary of State rightly set out.

:53:08. > :53:09.This is to change them by delegated legislation, not primary

:53:10. > :53:14.legislation. That is an important distinction. Does it matter, would

:53:15. > :53:23.any anybody have a go, surely not on the 21st-century. Well... Foreign

:53:24. > :53:27.Secretary, June, 2014, calling for an end to backbreaking employment

:53:28. > :53:30.regulations, specifically collective reduction in Mac redundancies

:53:31. > :53:32.directive. The International Development Secretary during the

:53:33. > :53:36.referendum campaign calling for the Government to halve the amount of

:53:37. > :53:44.protection given to British workers after Brexit. The international

:53:45. > :53:47.trade Secretary, I am addressing the question, whether it is conceivable

:53:48. > :53:50.that a Conservative Government change this -- Government might

:53:51. > :53:58.change this. I reading out the statements of three Cabinet members.

:53:59. > :54:01.International trade secretary, Fabbri, 2012, and I know the

:54:02. > :54:06.Secretary of State heard the quote this morning, to restore Britain

:54:07. > :54:11.Cosma competitiveness we must begin by deregulating the Labour market,

:54:12. > :54:16.political objections must be overridden. It is too difficult to

:54:17. > :54:19.hire and fire and difficult to take on employees. It is unsustainable

:54:20. > :54:24.but to believe workplace rights should be untouchable while output

:54:25. > :54:28.and employment are cyclical. This Secretary of State has a proud

:54:29. > :54:32.record on human rights and protections of people at work, but

:54:33. > :54:39.these are Cabinet colleagues, and this power in this Bill allows these

:54:40. > :54:45.rights to be overridden by delegated legislation. I will give way. Isn't

:54:46. > :54:50.there a fundamental contradiction in what he has been saying? A moment

:54:51. > :54:56.ago he was worrying that power would be lost from this House. Now he is

:54:57. > :55:00.saying power should in fact be with the EU. Isn't this the fundamental

:55:01. > :55:04.point of this Bill, that it is better that laws should be made by

:55:05. > :55:13.our Government and our Parliament than an elected EU bureaucracy? Mr

:55:14. > :55:17.Speaker, I am obviously a very bad communicator. I thought I was

:55:18. > :55:20.suggesting that work praise and environmental and consumer rights

:55:21. > :55:25.should only be capable of being taken away by primary legislation.

:55:26. > :55:27.If there is any doubt, I can assure the Honourable Member when I say

:55:28. > :55:35.primer legislation I mean legislation in this House. I thought

:55:36. > :55:38.that was taken as read. Doesn't the last intervention point to the

:55:39. > :55:42.fundamental misunderstanding some people have about this Bill, and I

:55:43. > :55:45.am afraid the Secretary of State mentioned it in his intervention.

:55:46. > :55:51.The point is whether the UK is going to become a rule take up rather than

:55:52. > :55:55.a rule maker. Our membership of the EU has allowed us to influence the

:55:56. > :55:58.directors of regulations which have then been taken on board in this

:55:59. > :56:06.House and through our laws. What we are doing in this Bill is saying,

:56:07. > :56:09.not repealing, we are reintroducing European legislation into this

:56:10. > :56:15.country contrary to those who wanted to leave the EU taking back control.

:56:16. > :56:20.I am grateful for that intervention and agree with it. Can I move onto

:56:21. > :56:26.other rights, because they are dealt with more severely. Clause 54

:56:27. > :56:29.singles out the Charter of fundamental rights for extinction.

:56:30. > :56:34.There are thousands of provisions being converted into our law, and

:56:35. > :56:38.they will have to be modified in some cases to arrive in our law.

:56:39. > :56:43.Only one provision in the thousands and thousands have been singled out

:56:44. > :56:49.for extinction. The Charter of fundamental rights. As was argued an

:56:50. > :56:53.article published yesterday the principles of the Charter provide

:56:54. > :56:58.essential safeguard for individuals and businesses, and that has been

:56:59. > :57:04.particularly important in the field of LGBT rights, children's rights

:57:05. > :57:10.and the rights the elderly. Does it matter, says the Secretary of State,

:57:11. > :57:19.tell me why it matters? I've got here the High Court judgment in the

:57:20. > :57:25.case of David Davies MP, Tom Watson MP, and others, versus the Secretary

:57:26. > :57:29.of State for the Home Department, the then Home Secretary being now

:57:30. > :57:34.the Prime Minister. The backbencher David Davies bringing to court the

:57:35. > :57:40.now Prime Minister. He was challenging, he will recall, the

:57:41. > :57:45.provisions of the data retention investigatory Powers Act 2014, and

:57:46. > :57:51.he was very concerned that it would impinge on the ability of MPs to

:57:52. > :57:53.have confidential communications from their constituents, a pointy

:57:54. > :58:00.continued into the debate we had a year or two ago. In his argument, he

:58:01. > :58:19.cited the Charter. LAUGHTER. His lawyers said the charter was

:58:20. > :58:23.important... His lawyers made the argument that the charter was

:58:24. > :58:25.important because it went further than the European Convention of

:58:26. > :58:32.human rights and therefore was added protection. I won't read-out

:58:33. > :58:37.paragraph 80 of the judgment, which I'm sure the Secretary of State is

:58:38. > :58:41.familiar with, but as he knows, the court found in his favour that that

:58:42. > :58:45.was right, the charter did enhance his right side for that reason it

:58:46. > :58:52.distinguished -- it rejected the arguments of a distinguished QC who

:58:53. > :58:58.was the Prime Minister's QC. I am going to complete this point. So,

:58:59. > :59:05.when he says, will it make any difference? Yes, here it is. I

:59:06. > :59:10.suspect that the Secretary of State was still on the bench is further

:59:11. > :59:14.behind him, he would be talking to me over a cup of coffee, with

:59:15. > :59:20.others, about how we fiercely ensure that Clause 5.4 of this bill came

:59:21. > :59:23.out. I'm going to make progress, because I do know lots of people

:59:24. > :59:31.want to come in. I'm going to make progress. I give way. I'm most

:59:32. > :59:34.grateful to the right honourable gentleman, as he makes a very

:59:35. > :59:39.important point. I think, reading the mind of my right honourable

:59:40. > :59:42.friend, why he said, does it matter? That's because he would insist that

:59:43. > :59:49.the general principles of EU law being preserved wood repay it, but

:59:50. > :59:54.if they're not judge a suitable because they are not founded in our

:59:55. > :59:59.courts, that need would evaporate. Exactly the point that the right

:00:00. > :00:08.honourable friend -- member made earlier on. To remove the right to

:00:09. > :00:14.do something through remedy means you have achieved nothing. Will the

:00:15. > :00:19.honourable gentleman be good enough to explain why it is that other

:00:20. > :00:24.distinguished gentleman, namely Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, fought so

:00:25. > :00:26.resolutely to exclude the charter of fundamental rights from the Lisbon

:00:27. > :00:37.Treaty and furthermore failed because their protocol did not

:00:38. > :00:43.actually work. No. I spent 20 plus years as a human rights lawyer

:00:44. > :00:46.interpreting and applying acts from the charter where it made a real

:00:47. > :00:53.difference to people's lives, as the Secretary of State will know. Let me

:00:54. > :00:58.move on to devolved powers. At the moment, devolved powers are limited

:00:59. > :01:01.and upon withdrawal, it ought to be that the devolved institutions would

:01:02. > :01:04.have power over things falling within their devolved fields but

:01:05. > :01:07.Clause 11 prevents that and diverts powers which ought to go to

:01:08. > :01:11.Edinburgh, Cardiff or Belfast to London where they are to be hoarded.

:01:12. > :01:16.Fundamentally the wrong approach but totally consistent with the

:01:17. > :01:22.Government approach of grabbing power and avoiding scrutiny. On that

:01:23. > :01:26.topic, let me deal with exit date, a crucially important day under the

:01:27. > :01:31.bill. It's the day upon which the European Communities Act is

:01:32. > :01:34.repealed, it's the day upon which the role of the European Court of

:01:35. > :01:43.Justice is extinguished in our law. That matters hugely. Whatever your

:01:44. > :01:46.long-term view, that matters hugely. It matters particularly for

:01:47. > :01:50.transitional matters. I heard the Secretary of State say this morning

:01:51. > :01:55.that he did want an arrangement for transitions which was as close as

:01:56. > :01:58.possible to the current arrangement. I think he knows in his heart of

:01:59. > :02:02.hearts that will almost certainly involve a role for the European

:02:03. > :02:07.Court of Justice, he would say temporarily. He knows that. So the

:02:08. > :02:13.exit date, the date on which the role of the court is extinguished,

:02:14. > :02:17.is crucially important. Without it, you can't transition on the terms

:02:18. > :02:20.that the Secretary of State was suggesting this morning. Well, you

:02:21. > :02:27.might not be able to, and he knows it. Control over exit date is

:02:28. > :02:34.therefore hugely important, Mr Speaker. Control over exit date. Who

:02:35. > :02:41.has control? Bring back control. You might think Parliament on this very

:02:42. > :02:53.important issue. But, no, enter Clause 14.

:02:54. > :03:05.Exit day means such a day as the Minister of Crown may by regulations

:03:06. > :03:13.appoint. And the sole power of the Minister. Anybody simply passing

:03:14. > :03:16.this bill is prepared to be a spectator on the question of what

:03:17. > :03:27.the transitional measures should be and how they operate. That is a huge

:03:28. > :03:31.issue. The Secretary of State said it was silly for me to raise this

:03:32. > :03:35.issue earlier in relation to the transitional relations insofar as

:03:36. > :03:39.they may relate to us continuing to be in a customs union and single

:03:40. > :03:45.market. If this bill is enacted and we are outside of the ECJ and we are

:03:46. > :03:49.not subject to EU law, there we are effectively ruling out single market

:03:50. > :03:52.and Customs union for the transition. How does that give

:03:53. > :03:57.stability and certainty to British businesses? This is the conundrum

:03:58. > :04:06.the Secretary of State and this bill has got into. If exit date is March

:04:07. > :04:13.2019, and it's very difficult to see how you transition on terms similar

:04:14. > :04:18.to those that we are run. What do you do? You could push exit day two

:04:19. > :04:24.years down the line, because it can be chosen. Well, if you don't do

:04:25. > :04:30.that, but you recognise that the ECJ is necessary, you end up repealing

:04:31. > :04:35.what was once the repeal Bill to put it back in again. That is the extent

:04:36. > :04:40.of the absurd powers in this bill. I will give way. I am very grateful to

:04:41. > :04:46.the right honourable gentleman for giving way. He's making an

:04:47. > :04:49.outstandingly concise and forensic speech asserting the difficulties in

:04:50. > :04:55.this bill and he's drawn attention to the problem with the definition

:04:56. > :05:02.of exit day. Does that problem also feed into the delegated legislative

:05:03. > :05:07.powers, because Clause 77 says ministers can make regulations under

:05:08. > :05:12.this section after the end of period of two years beginning with exit

:05:13. > :05:16.day. Now, if exit day is going to disappear down the line as he has

:05:17. > :05:20.indicated, does that not mean the power to make delegated legislation

:05:21. > :05:23.will continue for even longer than the Government says? It certainly

:05:24. > :05:30.could. The only way out of that is to have multiple exit days. You

:05:31. > :05:36.might think I'm joking. But somebody who drafted this bill thought of

:05:37. > :05:40.that because that is conceivable. Multiple exit days, all chosen by a

:05:41. > :05:45.minister, not by Parliament. Mr Speaker, let me draw to a conclusion

:05:46. > :05:50.the combined effect of the provisions of this bill would reduce

:05:51. > :05:54.MPs to spectators as power pours into the hands of ministers and the

:05:55. > :05:59.executive. It's an unprecedented power grab. Rule by decree is not a

:06:00. > :06:03.misrepresentation. It's an affront to Parliament and to accountability.

:06:04. > :06:07.The name of this bill was changed from the Great Repeal Bill to the EU

:06:08. > :06:12.withdrawal bill. The word great should have been preserved but it

:06:13. > :06:18.should have been changed to the great power grab bill. Labour voted

:06:19. > :06:22.for the Article 50 act. That's because we accept the referendum

:06:23. > :06:29.result. As a result, the UK is leaving the EU. That we are leaving

:06:30. > :06:33.is settled. How we leave is not. This bill invites us to surrender

:06:34. > :06:36.all power and influence over that question to the Government and to

:06:37. > :06:42.ministers. That would betray everything that we are sent here to

:06:43. > :06:47.do. Unless the Government makes significant concessions before we

:06:48. > :06:52.vote on Monday, Labour has tabled a reasonable amendment to vote against

:06:53. > :06:58.the bill. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The original question was that the bill

:06:59. > :07:01.now be read a second time, since when an amendment has been proposed

:07:02. > :07:11.as on the order paper. The question is that the amendment be made. Mr

:07:12. > :07:15.Kenneth Clarke. Mr Speaker, the spokesman just reminded us that this

:07:16. > :07:19.bill was trailed for a very long time as the Great Repeal Bill, which

:07:20. > :07:26.was a very unlikely title. Fortunately, when it comes here, it

:07:27. > :07:31.repeals hardly anything at all, which is one blessing. But one thing

:07:32. > :07:38.it does repeal is the European Communities Act of 1972, which is a

:07:39. > :07:42.particular irony for myself and no doubt for the honourable member full

:07:43. > :07:49.ball so that as well, as we well remember that act and I then was a

:07:50. > :07:56.Government whip, engineering mainly by working with the Jenkins faction

:07:57. > :08:02.of the Labour Party how we were able to get that vote through against the

:08:03. > :08:06.Eurosceptics who were then on our backbenchers. So it's an irony that

:08:07. > :08:15.a complete mirror image debate presents itself to me rather many

:08:16. > :08:19.years later. But my starting point is again where the right honourable

:08:20. > :08:23.gentleman just finished. I have to accept that we are going to leave

:08:24. > :08:30.the European Union. I accept that because this House, passed by a

:08:31. > :08:35.large majority, the resolution to enact Article 50. I argued and voted

:08:36. > :08:39.against it, but it went through and it is idle to pretend that

:08:40. > :08:44.politically now it's going to be possible for that to be reversed.

:08:45. > :08:51.But the question now is how we do so. Now, I quite accept the basic

:08:52. > :08:58.premise of my right honourable's friend the Secretary of State, that

:08:59. > :09:01.technical legislation is going to be required to make sure it is

:09:02. > :09:05.practicable to get a smooth legal transition. I don't think that this

:09:06. > :09:13.piece of legislation confines itself to that aim, as has just been said.

:09:14. > :09:21.The result is that a bill of this kind is necessary and I think we're

:09:22. > :09:27.going to have devote for it. But the question is, is this particular form

:09:28. > :09:31.of the bill remotely acceptable? Now, I studied the amendments put

:09:32. > :09:35.down by the official opposition and indeed by large numbers of other

:09:36. > :09:41.members. And my conclusion was that I found myself agreeing with the

:09:42. > :09:47.overwhelming majority of the sentiments and opinions being put

:09:48. > :09:54.forward in all those amendments. The one thing that gave me a problem was

:09:55. > :09:59.they all begin with declines to give a second reading to the bill, which

:10:00. > :10:05.does give rise to the problem is that it would stop any possibility

:10:06. > :10:14.of making the changes required. But, I have to say this. Mind as I am at

:10:15. > :10:18.the moment to contemplate voting for second reading, I am going to need

:10:19. > :10:25.some assurances before we get there, in particular, that there is going

:10:26. > :10:31.to be sufficient movement to some of the unanswerable points that are

:10:32. > :10:37.being made about Parliamentary democracy and a smooth transition to

:10:38. > :10:40.whatever the alternative is for this bill to be anything other than a

:10:41. > :10:46.wrecking piece of legislation if it proceeds forward. I could consult

:10:47. > :10:51.myself with the thought, I haven't decided yet, I'm actually going to

:10:52. > :10:56.listen to the debate, which is a very rare feature in this House, but

:10:57. > :11:00.I am going to listen to the debate, because of course if we were to

:11:01. > :11:03.defeat the second reading, well, the Government would be obliged to bring

:11:04. > :11:08.back another bill to try to achieve the same purpose and if the

:11:09. > :11:13.Government isn't going to move in the next two days of debate, well I

:11:14. > :11:22.think we may have to force it to go back to the drawing board and try

:11:23. > :11:25.again as to how to produce a bill which is consistent with our

:11:26. > :11:30.parliamentary traditions and actually does give this House the

:11:31. > :11:34.control that leaders of the Leave Campaign during the referendum kept

:11:35. > :11:41.telling the British public they were anxious to see. Now, I'm not going

:11:42. > :11:46.to give way because there are large numbers of people wanting to speak

:11:47. > :11:48.and I just want to touch briefly on this time constraint. When we sat

:11:49. > :11:53.through the European Communities Act, I've no doubt the honourable

:11:54. > :12:02.member for Boll Sauber like me sat three weeks and weeks, days and days

:12:03. > :12:08.-- the honourable member for Bolsover that the days and days of

:12:09. > :12:13.debate. It was not constrained by this Blairite notion of family

:12:14. > :12:17.friendly hours and timetables and all this kind of thing. I don't want

:12:18. > :12:22.to go back to the all-night filibustering and some of the

:12:23. > :12:28.nonsense that led to those practices being discredited. That is not

:12:29. > :12:33.suitable in the 21st-century. But this Government began the process by

:12:34. > :12:38.trying to argue that the Royal prerogative enabled it not even to

:12:39. > :12:42.bring Article 50 before the House and its been trying to reduce

:12:43. > :12:47.Parliamentary scrutiny and votes ever since the whole thing started.

:12:48. > :12:51.So, let me give a first simple example. I raised it with the

:12:52. > :12:55.Speaker a few moments ago the question of the five o'clock rule.

:12:56. > :12:59.Apparently we've all got to stop at five o'clock this afternoon. Well,

:13:00. > :13:04.it would reassure me about the Government's intentions if the

:13:05. > :13:10.opportunity was taken to lift it now. The Leader of the House only

:13:11. > :13:15.have two rise at some time in the next hour or so and save the five

:13:16. > :13:19.o'clock rule is not going to be invoked to day and all these

:13:20. > :13:25.constraints on time which we are all facing will not be a problem. But, I

:13:26. > :13:32.hope the timetable motion for the bill also does not try to confine

:13:33. > :13:37.debate to a comic number of days, because the right honourable

:13:38. > :13:41.gentleman's speech a moment ago has shown how complex some of the

:13:42. > :13:46.debates are going to be. We don't want all to be told we've got to

:13:47. > :13:51.take apart in legal analysis in five minutes flat all be cut out by some

:13:52. > :13:55.quite unnecessary timetable. We've got at least until the end of 2019

:13:56. > :14:05.to get these procedures right. Now, briefly there are two broad

:14:06. > :14:11.issues. One of which I will leave alone. One of which is going to

:14:12. > :14:14.dominate today, the Henry VIII clause, the sweeping powers, the

:14:15. > :14:20.extraordinary nature of this legislation. I won't try to compete

:14:21. > :14:23.with what with respect was the brilliant speech of the Right

:14:24. > :14:27.Honourable friend leads for the opposition and I hope the next two

:14:28. > :14:32.days of debate will hear some reply. I'm sure my honourable friend the

:14:33. > :14:38.member for Beaconsfield will touch on that. My own information on

:14:39. > :14:43.clause seven and clause 17 is not up to the standards of what has just

:14:44. > :14:47.been demonstrated. I will then say one thing to my right honourable

:14:48. > :14:54.friend and he's colleagues who try to reassures what takes begged in

:14:55. > :14:57.response to that. I'm told that conversations will be held with my

:14:58. > :15:03.right honourable friend and right honourable friend before Broxton.

:15:04. > :15:06.Delighted about that. We are told that we will have reassurances about

:15:07. > :15:14.her ministers are going to use these powers. My right honourable friend

:15:15. > :15:22.defended the wording he got and didn't make the faintest concession.

:15:23. > :15:26.I was talking about the concessions on devolution or the bigger concerns

:15:27. > :15:33.about whether we are going to fritter away Parliamentary democracy

:15:34. > :15:38.in this house by Racing the -- passing the bill in its present

:15:39. > :15:42.form. My right honourable friend is one of the members I would trust to

:15:43. > :15:46.seek to deliver what he is offering to ours. The reality as someone has

:15:47. > :15:50.said is we are all transient in politics. He will come under

:15:51. > :15:54.pressure from some of his colleagues. We have no idea who will

:15:55. > :16:05.be in office in 18 months' time in any particular post. The letter of

:16:06. > :16:09.the law will determine to what scope there is for parliamentary scrutiny.

:16:10. > :16:22.I don't want more assurances, I don't want more charm, what I want

:16:23. > :16:28.is positive amendments. Changes. Its reputation on this point of view if

:16:29. > :16:30.it takes the lead and produces the amendments and answers the points

:16:31. > :16:37.already made by the Right honourable and learn it member who has just

:16:38. > :16:40.spoken for the opposition and reassured us that the drafting was a

:16:41. > :16:46.misunderstanding and that better drafting can make it the no policy

:16:47. > :16:52.change, technically necessary bill that I would quite happily support.

:16:53. > :16:57.The second issue very briefly is the condition of staying in the single

:16:58. > :17:02.market and staying in the customs union during the transitional

:17:03. > :17:06.period. Of course we're going to have a transitional period. Of

:17:07. > :17:14.course it's got to be a smooth transition. Of course by the end of

:17:15. > :17:18.2019 were not going to negotiate a basis for future trading

:17:19. > :17:23.arrangements. I do think that just as the government has got to move,

:17:24. > :17:27.just as the opposition has moved. I made a speech on the Queen's speech

:17:28. > :17:31.debate explaining why I was in favour of staying in the single

:17:32. > :17:36.market, staying in the customs union, at least for the transitional

:17:37. > :17:39.period, and I Benat and said the various arguments that are routinely

:17:40. > :17:46.thrown out. I won't repeat any of that. But it does seem to me that

:17:47. > :17:50.there is only whisker of difference now, I don't deceive myself that I

:17:51. > :17:53.converted the Labour Party who have now put down an amendment identical

:17:54. > :17:56.to the arguments I was putting forward which they didn't then agree

:17:57. > :18:04.with when we were debating the Queen's speech, but when I look at

:18:05. > :18:09.the government's proposals they are remarkably near. We all know,

:18:10. > :18:17.British business knows that we need this smooth transition. We don't

:18:18. > :18:20.need change that we -- until we are certain we have acceptable new

:18:21. > :18:23.arrangements. I have looked at the position paper on customs

:18:24. > :18:28.arrangements put out by the government. This says, I will read

:18:29. > :18:36.one sentence "This could involve a new and time-limited customs union

:18:37. > :18:42.between the UK and the EU customs union based for on a shared external

:18:43. > :18:46.tariff and without customs procedures." I won't go on. There is

:18:47. > :18:50.an Asp salute whisker of difference between the government's paper and

:18:51. > :18:55.what the opposition are now saying and what every at the slightest

:18:56. > :19:00.common-sense, in my opinion, is saying. That we should stay in the

:19:01. > :19:04.single market and customs union until we know that we can smoothly

:19:05. > :19:08.transferred to some new and equally beneficial arrangement. Again, I

:19:09. > :19:17.would like some reassurances on that. I detect in this wording and I

:19:18. > :19:21.conclude, I detect in this wording and the amendment from the

:19:22. > :19:24.opposition, we're crawling towards that cross-party approach which is

:19:25. > :19:31.obviously going to be required in the national interest to settle

:19:32. > :19:35.this. It is absurd for the Labour Party to say that they are all

:19:36. > :19:39.agreed on the new policy that they have adopted. It is absurd for the

:19:40. > :19:42.Conservative Party to say we are all agreed on whatever it is the

:19:43. > :19:51.secretary of state is trying to negotiate in Brussels. LAUGHTER

:19:52. > :19:55.The public are not idiots. They know that both parties are completely and

:19:56. > :20:01.fundamentally divided on many of these issues with extreme opinions

:20:02. > :20:06.on both sides represented in the Cabinet and the Shadow Cabinet let

:20:07. > :20:10.alone on the backbenches. Let's, therefore, resolve this matter and

:20:11. > :20:14.make sure this bill doesn't rule out and make it impossible to stay in

:20:15. > :20:17.the single market and the customs union. Let's have some grown-up

:20:18. > :20:21.debate on the whole practical problem that we face and produce a

:20:22. > :20:31.much better act of Parliament than this bill represents for us at the

:20:32. > :20:40.moment. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Can I commend the right

:20:41. > :20:41.honourable member for Rushcliffe and the secretary of state for

:20:42. > :20:48.outstanding contributions to this debate. This process requires us to

:20:49. > :20:52.think fundamentally about what we think Parliament is for and what

:20:53. > :20:59.democracy is about. The Scottish National Party support as a

:21:00. > :21:02.fundamental principle the idea that the land of Scotland is in

:21:03. > :21:07.neighbourly invested in the people of Scotland. That is not for sale at

:21:08. > :21:13.any time to anybody. This bill seeks to use up and undermine that

:21:14. > :21:19.sovereignty. That fact alone would compel me to vote against the bill

:21:20. > :21:23.when it comes before us for a vote on Monday night. It compels anybody

:21:24. > :21:26.who believes in the sovereignty of the people and anybody who purports

:21:27. > :21:30.to be here on behalf of the people of Scotland to oppose the bill on

:21:31. > :21:35.Monday night regardless of which party is trying to get them to do

:21:36. > :21:40.something different. Given that it will be a labour amendment. I want

:21:41. > :21:45.to make a few comments. We will be supporting the amendment on Monday

:21:46. > :21:49.night with some hesitations. Given that 62% of our citizens voted to

:21:50. > :21:53.remain in the European Union, I'm certainly not ready to give up on

:21:54. > :21:57.that for the people of Scotland. I understand and respect the fact that

:21:58. > :22:01.two nations of the United Kingdom voted to leave, I would ask the

:22:02. > :22:05.members of people from those two nations to respect the fact that two

:22:06. > :22:11.nations voted to remain and those votes cannot simply be cast aside.

:22:12. > :22:14.There is a reference in the amendment to Parliamentary

:22:15. > :22:18.sovereignty. I respect for some people that is an important

:22:19. > :22:26.principle but that does not apply universally across the nations of

:22:27. > :22:32.these islands. Is he not aware... Is he not aware of the question that

:22:33. > :22:38.was on the ballot that we went to. It was a United Kingdom question. It

:22:39. > :22:42.was a United Kingdom vote. We voted as a United Kingdom to leave the

:22:43. > :22:50.European Union. That's what we decided. Don't you understand that?

:22:51. > :22:56.I don't know which part of the people of Scotland are sovereign the

:22:57. > :23:03.right Honourable gentleman opposite doesn't understand. The people of

:23:04. > :23:06.Scotland are sovereign. I would urge all members of Parliament for

:23:07. > :23:10.Scotland to respect that when the time comes. The final concern I have

:23:11. > :23:17.is in reference to the transitional period. I need to make some protest.

:23:18. > :23:23.Thank you. I warmly welcome the fact that we now have a lot more clarity

:23:24. > :23:28.from Labour about the benefit of membership of the single market and

:23:29. > :23:32.customs union. I welcome that the amendment. I'm disappointed that

:23:33. > :23:36.given everybody now knows that there is absolutely no reason for being

:23:37. > :23:40.out of the European Union means that you have to be out of the single

:23:41. > :23:45.market. I'm disappointed that Labour have not yet come around to the

:23:46. > :23:47.position that we should stay in the single market permanently after

:23:48. > :23:53.leaving the European Union. Having said that, the amendment of labour

:23:54. > :23:57.is a vast improvement on allowing the bill to go ahead unchallenged so

:23:58. > :24:04.we will be supporting the amendment on Monday evening. It's interesting

:24:05. > :24:10.if you look at the recent amendments, a huge powerful number

:24:11. > :24:14.of reasons have been come up with for rejecting this bill at this

:24:15. > :24:17.stage. It tells us that there is a huge number of serious and

:24:18. > :24:22.fundamental flaws in the bill which mean it cannot be allowed to go

:24:23. > :24:27.forward in its present format. If that gives a problem for government

:24:28. > :24:31.timetable is, then tough. The views of my constituents are far more

:24:32. > :24:35.important than the interests of the government managers. Particular

:24:36. > :24:39.weaknesses in this bill, some of which have been ably covered

:24:40. > :24:44.already. First of all the act of constitutional betrayal that the

:24:45. > :24:50.bill proposes. Against a Tory government in London the right to

:24:51. > :24:54.claw back any powers it fancies from the four nations of the United

:24:55. > :25:01.Kingdom. That is not just a detail of those who campaign for so long to

:25:02. > :25:07.have those parliaments established. It is a betrayal of the great

:25:08. > :25:15.parliamentarians of all parties. I'll give way now. The honourable

:25:16. > :25:19.member talks about representing Scotland. 1 million Scots voted to

:25:20. > :25:26.leave and a third of SNP voted to leave. So, what you're actually

:25:27. > :25:31.saying is that if you truly want to represent your constituents, you

:25:32. > :25:35.should respect the democratic will of the United Kingdom which we are

:25:36. > :25:42.all here to do. If the members opposite want to be strong of

:25:43. > :25:46.Scotland, I suggest they engage in the detail of the bill and not try

:25:47. > :25:51.to create a wedge between them and the United Kingdom. I happily see

:25:52. > :26:08.his 1 million votes to leave and raise it to 1.6 million voters who

:26:09. > :26:11.voted against. I'll take no more interventions from people whose

:26:12. > :26:15.position on the European Union has changed so radically over the last

:26:16. > :26:19.couple of years. Let me get back to my comments about the attempt to

:26:20. > :26:25.grab power back from the devolved parliaments for which so many others

:26:26. > :26:30.worked so hard to establish. Many of those who take the greatest credit

:26:31. > :26:32.for it. For example, the great Donald Dewar. I shudder to think

:26:33. > :26:39.what they must be thinking now when they see attempts have been made to

:26:40. > :26:45.completely emasculate the powers of those parliaments. It's a betrayal

:26:46. > :26:50.of the promises that certain people made to the people of Scotland just

:26:51. > :26:54.three years ago. The most powerful devolved parliament in the world,

:26:55. > :27:00.they said. Scotland should lead the union, they said. The parity of

:27:01. > :27:07.esteem and equal partnership of nations, they said. Mr Speaker, what

:27:08. > :27:11.definition are they using if the Prime Minister who takes a authority

:27:12. > :27:17.from this Parliament and decides it's beneath her status to even meet

:27:18. > :27:20.with members from the respective national parliaments. What

:27:21. > :27:26.definition of parity of esteem are they using? If there is a parity of

:27:27. > :27:30.esteem, trumpeted by the Tories less than year ago as the epitome of

:27:31. > :27:38.relations between our government hasn't met for seven months. I know

:27:39. > :27:43.it is completely coincidental. For my friend from sky and Lochaber to

:27:44. > :27:46.have a debate on the matter. Since then, the government have decided

:27:47. > :27:49.they are going to reconvene the GMC sometime in the autumn and I hope

:27:50. > :27:53.they won't fall back on the claim that autumn finishes on the 30th of

:27:54. > :27:57.November. They have given way to some pressure and I are going to

:27:58. > :28:01.reconvene it but they have done nothing about ignoring the national

:28:02. > :28:06.governments of Wales and Scotland and promised to act within one

:28:07. > :28:10.month. They broke that promise as they have broken so many promises to

:28:11. > :28:14.the peoples and parliaments and governments of those devolved

:28:15. > :28:18.nations. I will happily give way. with me that it would be very simple

:28:19. > :28:27.and straightforward for the Government to accept the reality of

:28:28. > :28:29.devolution and where there is a parity of powers, those powers go

:28:30. > :28:35.directly to the devolved institutions? Absolutely, that's

:28:36. > :28:39.what devolution means. If the powers are currently devolved, they should

:28:40. > :28:43.remain devolved. If we can't trust the Tories to keep their word on

:28:44. > :28:47.something as simple as arranging a joint meeting of Government

:28:48. > :28:52.ministers, nobody in any of the devolved nations can trust

:28:53. > :28:56.assurances that the Draconian new powers in this bill will not be

:28:57. > :28:59.abused because our experience of promises from the party opposite

:29:00. > :29:02.suggest we cannot take them at their word unless the legislation is

:29:03. > :29:07.nailed down so tightly that they can't have any wiggle room at all to

:29:08. > :29:12.go back on their word. We have heard a lot of rhetoric about some issues

:29:13. > :29:18.needing a UK wide approach. I'm interested to wonder how the UK wide

:29:19. > :29:22.approach to agriculture and animal welfare and food standards is going

:29:23. > :29:25.to work in Northern Ireland, because regardless of what the legislative

:29:26. > :29:29.or constitutional position is going to be, a matter of business survival

:29:30. > :29:32.is that the food industry in Northern Ireland will follow the

:29:33. > :29:35.same standards that are followed in the Republic of Ireland. They will

:29:36. > :29:38.follow the same standards as applying the European Union, so we

:29:39. > :29:43.are talking about different animal welfare standards in Northern

:29:44. > :29:50.Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom. I can't really see that

:29:51. > :29:54.working. But a UK wide approach is being shown to mean in practice that

:29:55. > :29:58.a Prime Minister and a few hand-picked colleagues get the right

:29:59. > :30:01.to dictate to the peoples of the violence and two elected

:30:02. > :30:07.governments. For example, it was the need for a UK wide approach that led

:30:08. > :30:11.to the Scottish fishing industry being sold out when we first join

:30:12. > :30:15.the EU and there is a serious danger that a UK wide approach will lead to

:30:16. > :30:19.those fishermen being sold out again in the process of leaving. My second

:30:20. > :30:23.concern is about the all-encompassing powers set out in

:30:24. > :30:28.Clause nine, for example, which I think was superbly torn to shreds by

:30:29. > :30:37.the Shadow Secretary of State in the minutes ago. One of the backbenchers

:30:38. > :30:41.describe this on Wednesday as an unprecedented and there's no other

:30:42. > :30:45.way it can be described. 649 MPs will be expected to stand by and

:30:46. > :30:51.watch while a single minister with a single signature can make new

:30:52. > :30:54.legislation, including the right to make legislation that should require

:30:55. > :30:57.an act of Parliament and the only requirement on the Minister to be

:30:58. > :31:02.allowed to do that is that she or he thinks the legislation is a good

:31:03. > :31:07.idea. Mr Speaker, when we have ministers that pink welshing on the

:31:08. > :31:11.Dubs Amendment is a good idea, I'm looking for a slightly harder test

:31:12. > :31:16.than whether or not they think something is a good idea. These new

:31:17. > :31:21.powers have been referred to, Mr Speaker, as Henry VIII powers. Well,

:31:22. > :31:25.Henry VIII was a despot, no interest in democracy, he thought Scotland

:31:26. > :31:30.and Wales were just places to be conquered and trampled on, so

:31:31. > :31:35.perhaps Henry VIII is not such a bad name for what some of the Government

:31:36. > :31:41.are doing. But I think using that nickname hides the danger of these

:31:42. > :31:45.powers. Despite his murderous deeds, a lot of people see Henry VIII as a

:31:46. > :31:50.kind of pantomime villain that even got to star in his own carry on

:31:51. > :31:54.film, but the fact of the matter is that the powers in this bill are

:31:55. > :31:59.more 1984 than carry on Henry. The powers that bear his name are

:32:00. > :32:03.anything but funny. They represent a significant erosion Parliamentary

:32:04. > :32:06.democracy and those members present who believe in the doctrine of

:32:07. > :32:11.Parliamentary sovereignty, the powers in this bill are utterly

:32:12. > :32:19.incompatible with Parliamentary sovereignty. It's not taking power

:32:20. > :32:24.back to Parliament, this bill threatens to destroy Parliamentary

:32:25. > :32:28.sovereignty. The powers are designed to allow ministers to bypass all

:32:29. > :32:34.pretext Parliamentary scrutiny. It's even possible that we could see an

:32:35. > :32:37.act of Parliament received the Royal assent one day and then be repealed

:32:38. > :32:40.by a minister at the next day, simply because the Minister thinks

:32:41. > :32:44.that's a good idea. The Government will argue that delegated powers are

:32:45. > :32:49.an essential part of modern Government. I agree. We don't have

:32:50. > :32:53.an issue with using delegated legislation, we do have an issue

:32:54. > :32:56.with allowing delegated legislation to be abused to bypass proper

:32:57. > :33:00.scrutiny and the only way this House can be satisfied that the powers

:33:01. > :33:04.will not be abused is it the legislation is reworded to make it

:33:05. > :33:08.impossible for them to be abused in that way. The third significant

:33:09. > :33:11.weakness that has been touched on concerned our membership of the

:33:12. > :33:16.biggest trade agreement in the world and we're going to throw that away.

:33:17. > :33:20.In Scotland, we are talking about the loss of 80,000 jobs with the

:33:21. > :33:26.loss of ?11 billion a year coming into our economy as a result. The

:33:27. > :33:29.figures for the rest of the UK will be proportionate to that, simply to

:33:30. > :33:33.pacify the extreme right wing of the Conservative Party and their allies

:33:34. > :33:36.whose obsession with the number of immigrants has blinded them to the

:33:37. > :33:43.massive social and economic benefits that these EU migrants have built to

:33:44. > :33:47.my constituency and to every constituency in the United Kingdom.

:33:48. > :33:51.Be sure amorality of the isolationist, xenophobic approach

:33:52. > :33:57.that the incentives are trying to drag us down is there for everyone

:33:58. > :34:02.to see. It's not just immoral, it's daft. It threatens to destroy our

:34:03. > :34:06.economy. Already we are seeing key sectors in industry and public

:34:07. > :34:18.sector workers struggling to recruit the staff they need. There was a

:34:19. > :34:27.great of people being offered ?200 million just to recruit NHS staff.

:34:28. > :34:31.?200 million could build a hospital in my constituency and it's being

:34:32. > :34:41.paid to a private firm to try to repair some of the damage done by

:34:42. > :34:43.this. We still get anti-European hysteria and rhetoric from the

:34:44. > :34:47.Government benches and with the Government still refusing to give

:34:48. > :34:50.European National is the absolute and plumbing guarantees that they

:34:51. > :34:53.deserve if they choose to come and live here. Those agreement

:34:54. > :34:59.difficulties are going to become much, much worse before they get any

:35:00. > :35:02.better. The Secretary of State once our EU partners to be imaginative

:35:03. > :35:08.and flexible. I would ask him to apply those same flexibility to his

:35:09. > :35:12.Government's attitude to membership of the single market. I mentioned

:35:13. > :35:17.the plight of EU nationals and another major concern which has been

:35:18. > :35:20.raised in particular by the Secretary of State -- Shadow

:35:21. > :35:25.Secretary of State is that this bill threatens to and in the right is not

:35:26. > :35:29.just of EU nationals but regardless of nationality or citizenship, who

:35:30. > :35:32.lives on these islands. I hear the promises from the Government. We've

:35:33. > :35:38.had promises from the Government before. They are not worth the paper

:35:39. > :35:43.they are written on, even if they are not written on paper at all.

:35:44. > :35:46.Yesterday, we have the usual Sharad of a Tory backbencher asking a

:35:47. > :35:50.planned question so that the Prime Minister could confirm how

:35:51. > :35:54.successful she had been bringing down unemployment. She went so far

:35:55. > :35:58.as to say that and implement is at its lowest in four decades. Let's

:35:59. > :36:01.just think about that. The Prime Minister is telling that

:36:02. > :36:07.unemployment is lower now than it was when we went into the European

:36:08. > :36:09.Union and the single market. How can the Conservative Party boast about

:36:10. > :36:14.having almost done away with unemployment and then say that

:36:15. > :36:19.immigrants are to blame for the huge unemployment problem we have? Free

:36:20. > :36:22.movement of people, membership of the single market has not caused

:36:23. > :36:28.unemployment. It has caused implement that has benefited our

:36:29. > :36:34.economy, helped our businesses to bribe, it keeps our schools open.

:36:35. > :36:37.All evidence suggests that the most successful, wealthiest and happiest

:36:38. > :36:41.countries in the world, those with the highest standard of living

:36:42. > :36:44.further to the material of things that really matter are those which

:36:45. > :36:47.are open and inclusive. The Government are trying to move us

:36:48. > :36:51.away from that position to becoming one of the most isolationist and

:36:52. > :36:56.isolated economies in the world. There are only five economies in the

:36:57. > :37:01.world that are not part of a trade agreement and none of them are

:37:02. > :37:05.countries we would like to see as an example. To conclude, Mr Speaker,

:37:06. > :37:12.the Government's man trapped under Brexit has been taking back control.

:37:13. > :37:16.That's not going to happen, at least not in the way people hoped it would

:37:17. > :37:20.happen. Because it's not about taking back control to 650 people

:37:21. > :37:24.who collectively hold a democratic mandate from their constituents to

:37:25. > :37:29.represent them. It's about taking back control from this Parliament

:37:30. > :37:33.into the hands of a few ministers. It's about taking back control from

:37:34. > :37:36.the devolved and elected National assemblies of Scotland, Wales and

:37:37. > :37:40.Northern Ireland and putting it back into the hands of a few chosen

:37:41. > :37:48.members of a political party that can't get elected into Government in

:37:49. > :37:52.Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. It allows ministers to use up

:37:53. > :37:57.authority in Parliament, giving them overall power to over guide the will

:37:58. > :38:01.of Parliament. A lot has been said about the red lines in the Brexit

:38:02. > :38:04.negotiations, Mr Speaker. I will give him one headline from the

:38:05. > :38:09.sovereign people of Scotland. Our sovereignty is not for sale. It is

:38:10. > :38:15.not for sale today, it will not be for sale at any time in the future,

:38:16. > :38:19.not to anyone, at any price. This bill seeks to take that sovereignty

:38:20. > :38:24.promise more than any bill that has been presented to this Parliament

:38:25. > :38:32.over 300 years ago. I would urge any MP who claims to act on behalf of

:38:33. > :38:34.Scotland, every MP who believes in sovereignty of democratic

:38:35. > :38:44.institutions to vote with us and against the bill on Monday night.

:38:45. > :38:50.Order, a ten limit -- a ten minute limit on backbench speeches will now

:38:51. > :38:53.apply. Iain Duncan Smith. Can I first of all in rising to support

:38:54. > :38:57.the bill in principle and in many cases in fact, but I will come back

:38:58. > :39:04.to more details on that, can I also support my right honourable friend,

:39:05. > :39:07.and as my right honourable friend at the dispatch box will remember in

:39:08. > :39:12.the lead up to the Maastricht debate, we had quite a long second

:39:13. > :39:20.reading debate and if not possible today, I wonder if through his good

:39:21. > :39:25.offices, to the powers that be, it might be possible on Monday to make

:39:26. > :39:28.even further extension to give more backbenchers the opportunity to

:39:29. > :39:32.speak. I remember that because we went through the night on the first

:39:33. > :39:37.day and then ended the second day at 10pm and everybody got to speak and

:39:38. > :39:42.there were as many people then he wanted to speak without the time

:39:43. > :39:46.limit. I make no criticism of you imposing a time limit on me as I'm

:39:47. > :39:50.sure I can work within it. I urged gently that there could be some

:39:51. > :39:53.scope for that even by Monday. I ride really to support this because

:39:54. > :39:57.I believe that this is clearly a necessary piece of legislation. We

:39:58. > :40:04.start from the simple present decision -- the simple provision

:40:05. > :40:07.that it is necessary to get all of the law is transposed into UK law

:40:08. > :40:13.applicable and actionable in UK law properly so that it is just

:40:14. > :40:18.miserable at the end of the day. That requires huge amount of action

:40:19. > :40:23.and there are pages and pages of laws. I was looking at it the other

:40:24. > :40:28.day and I said if we were to vote on everything in there we would have to

:40:29. > :40:31.have something in the order of 20,000 different boats and there is

:40:32. > :40:34.no way on earth that could possibly happen. I listened with great care

:40:35. > :40:36.to the right honourable gentleman he speaks for the opposition and I

:40:37. > :40:39.listened very carefully to his arguments and I thought it was a

:40:40. > :40:43.very well-balanced speech and he made his case about the need for

:40:44. > :40:48.change within the bill rather well. But I would argue that the Labour

:40:49. > :40:56.Party's position on this therefore did not fit with his speech. I go

:40:57. > :40:59.back to Maastricht, when the then John Smith led the Labour Party, and

:41:00. > :41:09.they supported, because he was a strong believer in the European, the

:41:10. > :41:12.Labour Party voted to support the legislation but then opposed

:41:13. > :41:17.elements of it in the committee stage that they thought needed

:41:18. > :41:21.changing. That is the position I think the Labour Party should be in.

:41:22. > :41:26.In other words, the reasoned way the Labour Party should behave is to

:41:27. > :41:28.reserve their position on second reading, subject to whatever changes

:41:29. > :41:33.they think are necessary within the committee stage to the detail of the

:41:34. > :41:36.bill and then make a decision on what they do one third reading. To

:41:37. > :41:40.come out and vote against the principle of the bill is debate

:41:41. > :41:44.against the idea of having to make these changes to European law to

:41:45. > :41:50.transpose them into UK law and that is the absurdity that they had got

:41:51. > :41:53.into. I know what it's like. I've been in opposition, the temptation

:41:54. > :41:58.behind the scenes to say, I'll tell you what, we could cause mayhem in

:41:59. > :42:00.the Government ranks by trying to attract some of their colleagues

:42:01. > :42:04.over to vote against second reading for us. Fine, they felt that, but it

:42:05. > :42:08.shows that the British public will look at this in due course and

:42:09. > :42:11.recognise that this is not a party that is ultimately fit for

:42:12. > :42:20.Government because the detail in this is not the issue. That becomes

:42:21. > :42:23.the issue once we get through the second reading. I accept and

:42:24. > :42:25.recognise that there are major changes which the Government has

:42:26. > :42:27.talked about possibly making and looking at within the bill. I

:42:28. > :42:32.observe that we are therefore not disagreeing about the need for this

:42:33. > :42:35.bill. That is why the House should support the bill going through. But

:42:36. > :42:40.there may be elements in here which needs and change and I notice also

:42:41. > :42:43.that the report that the right honourable and Leonard gentleman

:42:44. > :42:47.made mention of which came out this morning from the select committee on

:42:48. > :42:52.the Constitution in itself regaining its recommendations makes it quite

:42:53. > :42:57.clear, and it says so here, we accept that the Government will

:42:58. > :43:01.require some Henry VIII powers in order to amend primary legislation

:43:02. > :43:06.to facilitate the UK's withdrawal from the European Union. However,

:43:07. > :43:09.they do go on to say but the commensurate safeguard their levels

:43:10. > :43:11.of scrutiny need also to be in there. So the debate about this is

:43:12. > :43:23.not the need... I would just like to mention that it

:43:24. > :43:27.would not be an useful to look at the names that are on the

:43:28. > :43:33.constitutional committee, and make a judgment about their enthusiasm for

:43:34. > :43:37.our leaving the EU. I am grateful for that intervention. I know she

:43:38. > :43:41.will make a powerful case in support of the Bill and she is quite right.

:43:42. > :43:46.I want to come back to that point, the base year is that there has

:43:47. > :43:48.never been any great sweep of power is coming through the Henry VIII

:43:49. > :43:55.procedures is completely and utterly wrong. The reason why I came so

:43:56. > :43:58.concerned about what is happening under the European Union treaty, is

:43:59. > :44:03.that when you look at section two of the EU act, I want to quote this, it

:44:04. > :44:08.says quite clearly that without enactment, they are to be given

:44:09. > :44:15.immediate legal effect, and it goes on to say, that by order in Council,

:44:16. > :44:22.that is not this procedure in the Bill. Any procedure, rules or

:44:23. > :44:27.regulations skin, make provision. We have sat for 40 years with this and

:44:28. > :44:36.we have been content to let those kind of rules and regulations be

:44:37. > :44:42.made. Yes, up until the Maastricht Treaty, when qualified majority

:44:43. > :44:47.voting came in, we became ruled takers under this provision, which

:44:48. > :44:50.is never been more powerful in history at all. I will say

:44:51. > :45:02.cautionary note in my colleagues on other side of the House, it is not

:45:03. > :45:08.so. The key element... I have great sympathy for because he has great

:45:09. > :45:11.critique of EU law. That can't be justification for two runs making a

:45:12. > :45:16.right. The fact is that we do not need to legislate in this fashion in

:45:17. > :45:20.order to carry out the technical task of leaving the EU. I remain

:45:21. > :45:26.after Lieb amused as to why the legislation has been drafted in this

:45:27. > :45:31.form. I am not asking the two runs to be made right. The principle of

:45:32. > :45:36.this Bill is what I support and the need for it. I also recognise during

:45:37. > :45:40.the course of this committee stage there will be need to review how

:45:41. > :45:46.this checks and balances are introduced. I hope that is done

:45:47. > :45:51.properly. I gave indication that there is scope to look at that. The

:45:52. > :45:57.argument is not the powers in the Bill, the debate is, how do we

:45:58. > :46:00.reassure ourselves as a parliamentary democracy, that those

:46:01. > :46:05.checks and balances exist, such the given a profound nature of what is

:46:06. > :46:11.happening, that we can manage to do both and balance, and not delay the

:46:12. > :46:15.necessary changes to be made. The opposition is in a peculiar

:46:16. > :46:19.position, that the Scottish Nationalists are in a ridiculous

:46:20. > :46:25.position. Three years and years, they have sat content to see all the

:46:26. > :46:29.powers exercised in Brussels without so much assay. The moment we talk

:46:30. > :46:34.about leaving the EU and bringing those powers back, that they feel a

:46:35. > :46:37.trade somehow and that they don't exercise those powers. Where were

:46:38. > :46:46.they in the last 40 years where those powers were given away's I

:46:47. > :46:50.won't give away, I don't want her to rip embarrass yourself any more

:46:51. > :46:58.after that ridiculous argument. My idea men in this is that they are

:46:59. > :47:01.not being stolen away, and the government that evolves down to the

:47:02. > :47:04.more be more than they've ever had before and that reinsurance has been

:47:05. > :47:08.granted on giving. I also make the point, I think it's a rather good

:47:09. > :47:12.paper that the select committee on the constitution makes this morning,

:47:13. > :47:16.the other that I think is important comes back to the three

:47:17. > :47:20.recommendations I want to make in closing. I think there are three

:47:21. > :47:22.areas I hope the government will look at. The first is on the

:47:23. > :47:29.application of statutory instruments. I know the government

:47:30. > :47:34.has given away to consultation on the idea that now you have an

:47:35. > :47:41.explanatory memorandum to that what will explain what happens before and

:47:42. > :47:49.afterwards. I did me to explain the point as to why the government sees

:47:50. > :47:51.this instrument as necessary. It is important for people to quickly

:47:52. > :47:54.recognised the purpose and the government for doing this. I hope

:47:55. > :48:01.they might think about that. I make another recommendation. When I was

:48:02. > :48:04.at the Department for Work and Pensions, there existed a statutory

:48:05. > :48:07.body called the social security advisory committee. Their role was

:48:08. > :48:12.to look at legislation as it was about to happen. Entente awkwardly

:48:13. > :48:15.as you are the Secretary of State. Nonetheless, they make

:48:16. > :48:20.recommendations. I would us just have a look again at that process.

:48:21. > :48:24.It may offer the government a way of just reassuring that these things

:48:25. > :48:28.they are about to do, may well be absolutely necessary. Here's the

:48:29. > :48:32.deal, we're asking that whatever is done under the purposes powers of

:48:33. > :48:38.this Bill I'd done with one simple point. That is, to transpose

:48:39. > :48:43.existing law with existing affect so that that affect does not change. If

:48:44. > :48:48.they single exam question is asked of a body like that. Is this

:48:49. > :48:52.instrument doing that in their opinion? That might help reassure

:48:53. > :48:57.Parliament that that was the case. I only urge that because it works in

:48:58. > :48:59.the one area of detail and consequential legislation, I wonder

:49:00. > :49:07.if that is an area to do. The last one want to make and conclude, is

:49:08. > :49:14.the final recommendation, is the point about the exit date. I am one

:49:15. > :49:20.of those that thinks we all really to have that in the Bill. There is a

:49:21. > :49:24.reason for that. I think, he's right, on its hinges just about

:49:25. > :49:33.everything for example the sunset clauses. The government has moved a

:49:34. > :49:38.long way on that. It is important to put an end to powers on that. The

:49:39. > :49:43.question is is it's two years. The real question is when does the two

:49:44. > :49:55.years start and when does it end. I would answer a Lord of questions

:49:56. > :49:59.about how far the. I'm big supporter of the Bill and leaving the EU, I

:50:00. > :50:07.would urge the government to think very clearly about what they do with

:50:08. > :50:10.that Bill. I would urge the government in the principle of this

:50:11. > :50:15.Bill, in the practicality and the way this is implemented. I recognise

:50:16. > :50:18.that the government, through the committee stage, will look again

:50:19. > :50:22.carefully at some of the necessity to give some of those checks and

:50:23. > :50:27.balances as assurances to this House. All others want that, because

:50:28. > :50:31.none of this want to defy the will of the British people. Which is to

:50:32. > :50:35.leave, leaving a small way, in a manner that does not bother business

:50:36. > :50:40.and upset individuals on their rights and accepted ways of

:50:41. > :50:48.accessing and working. I accept the government and congratulate them to

:50:49. > :50:54.getting this point. I would just say to the right on gentleman, this is

:50:55. > :50:57.not about to find the will of the British people, it is about how

:50:58. > :51:03.sensibly we will give effect to it. It seems a long time ago now, the

:51:04. > :51:06.referendum campaign, but we had endless assertions during that

:51:07. > :51:09.leaving the EU would be easy and straightforward. Anyone who looks at

:51:10. > :51:15.this Bill before us today can see with their own eyes, just how wrong

:51:16. > :51:20.they were. I would also say, that it must be dawning on ministers now,

:51:21. > :51:23.despite the brave face that the Secretary of State habitually put on

:51:24. > :51:28.things, that their association that they would be able to negotiate the

:51:29. > :51:31.whole thing, a comprehensive agreement, covering all the things

:51:32. > :51:38.we need and all the benefits we want by the end of the Article 50 process

:51:39. > :51:45.is not now going to be possible. The reason why both of these assertions

:51:46. > :51:50.have failed is not because of want of effort. But fundamental agreement

:51:51. > :51:53.about what the policy in the government should be. Which has

:51:54. > :52:00.resulted in delay. And secondly, because the task is Byzantine in its

:52:01. > :52:05.complexity. I do not envy civil servants who were working very hard.

:52:06. > :52:11.I don't envy the House the task that confronts us. But we do have a duty

:52:12. > :52:14.to be honest with each other and the British people about the choices we

:52:15. > :52:18.face, the consequences of those choices, and the fact that we have

:52:19. > :52:26.to do all of this against the ticking clock. Now, the Bill, this

:52:27. > :52:30.Bill, apart from repeal of the 1972 European Communities Act, is not

:52:31. > :52:34.about whether we are leaving the EU, appoint the Secretary of State made

:52:35. > :52:38.in his opening speech. That decision was taken in a referendum and given

:52:39. > :52:43.effect by the triggering of Article 50 and we will leave by the end of

:52:44. > :52:47.March 20 19. What the Bill is about is to ensure that our law is in

:52:48. > :52:51.shape when we leave. All others except that there is a need to do

:52:52. > :52:56.this. All others therefore except that a Bill is necessary. But that

:52:57. > :53:09.does not mean that Parliament should accept this Bill. Which is the 2017

:53:10. > :53:16.equivalent of the Statute of proclamations of 1539. The committee

:53:17. > :53:20.did urge him, I would politely remind him, to publish a draft, and

:53:21. > :53:25.I think she would be having fewer difficulties now if he had done so.

:53:26. > :53:34.Because its flaws and weaknesses are fundamental and if I may say-so,

:53:35. > :53:38.brilliantly exposed by my right honourable friends from the front

:53:39. > :53:42.bench. This Bill is not about taking back control. If ministers continue

:53:43. > :53:47.to fail to take Parliament's role seriously, we will have deep

:53:48. > :53:57.continued to prod and push and persuade, or in the case, to gently

:53:58. > :54:04.threaten, so that ministers understand that this Parliament, the

:54:05. > :54:06.backbenchers Parliament it has been christened, and rightly so, they

:54:07. > :54:12.will have no choice but to listen to what Parliament has to say. In the

:54:13. > :54:18.detail of the Bill, if they do remain unamended, seven, eight and

:54:19. > :54:22.nine would grant ministers new and unprecedented powers. Ministers are

:54:23. > :54:26.asking us to give them a legislative blank cheque and they are saying we

:54:27. > :54:32.should not do so. How could we accept a Bill where on the one hand,

:54:33. > :54:36.ministers say look at the safeguards. They are in the

:54:37. > :54:38.legislation, and then at the same time, proposing another part of the

:54:39. > :54:44.Bill to give themselves the power to remove every one of those safeguards

:54:45. > :54:47.if they are so inclined. How's that Bill a sense of confidence and

:54:48. > :54:52.reassurance? I accept there is a balance to be struck. Between giving

:54:53. > :54:56.the ministers the latitude and flexibility to do what needs to be

:54:57. > :55:01.done, and Parliament having control to scrutinise and decide. But the

:55:02. > :55:08.breadth and scope of the powers as they stand do not achieve that, that

:55:09. > :55:12.is why the Secretary of State will have a very long queue outside his

:55:13. > :55:18.office. If he wants to save himself some time, he should come forward

:55:19. > :55:25.with own amendments. Now, there is... I will give way once... Thank

:55:26. > :55:29.you forgiving way. This sounds that the honourable gentleman agrees with

:55:30. > :55:32.the thrust of what is being attempted, at the detail and

:55:33. > :55:36.mechanics. Will he not be voting for the Bill at second reading, and

:55:37. > :55:41.seeking to amend it to address some of his concerns in committee? Della

:55:42. > :55:48.mac no, I want. Unless the government moves, the floors are so

:55:49. > :55:51.fundamental, the government should go away and it's time homework

:55:52. > :55:56.again. There is not a single person in this chamber that does not except

:55:57. > :56:01.that legislation is required to undertake the task. We are saying,

:56:02. > :56:05.it is just not this legislation before it is. There is a huge

:56:06. > :56:08.difference between on the one hand, a statutory instrument that says

:56:09. > :56:13.some regulation, delete the words commission, and insert the words for

:56:14. > :56:19.the Secretary of State for rural affairs. A statutory instrument

:56:20. > :56:22.which, to take a specific example, will give responsibility for

:56:23. > :56:27.oversight and enforcement of air quality legislation which derives

:56:28. > :56:32.from the EU directive to an existing public body. What assurance can

:56:33. > :56:36.ministers give is that whatever body is given that responsibility, is

:56:37. > :56:40.going to have festival the same effective enforcement powers as the

:56:41. > :56:46.commission has had, through what it has been able to do, including

:56:47. > :56:51.ultimately taking cases to the European Court of Justice. And will

:56:52. > :56:54.give the public the same power to hold that body and the government to

:56:55. > :57:00.account if there is continuing lack of progress and making sure our air

:57:01. > :57:16.is pure enough to breed. If that is not abided for, -- enough to. Many

:57:17. > :57:21.people have said this Bill is going to have to produce a mechanism for

:57:22. > :57:26.sifting the proposals come forward so that we can distinguish between

:57:27. > :57:30.the absolute straightforward and frankly noncontroversial, and those

:57:31. > :57:32.that raise really quite important issues of policy so that we, as

:57:33. > :57:44.Parliament can do our job. Does he agree with the proposition

:57:45. > :57:47.put by my right honourable friend forging feared that the SSA 's Sea

:57:48. > :57:53.is a clear model of such a mechanism? It was an interesting

:57:54. > :57:58.proposal that the right honourable gentleman put forward but I think

:57:59. > :58:03.personally, others can give advice, but at the end of it,

:58:04. > :58:10.parliamentarians have to do this if doing or a body that together by

:58:11. > :58:15.parliamentarians. Very quickly. Would the right honourable gentleman

:58:16. > :58:19.agree that the existing joint committee on statutory instruments

:58:20. > :58:26.could be the very body to do this exact work of tree and sifting? That

:58:27. > :58:28.would be one possibility and I hope the Government would listen to all

:58:29. > :58:36.the suggestions coming forward and come forward with a proposal. I

:58:37. > :58:43.welcome what the Secretary of State said in relation to my point about

:58:44. > :58:48.Parliament voting on withdrawal and the exercise of powers under Clause

:58:49. > :58:53.nine and, if on reflection, he was kind enough to say it was a logical

:58:54. > :59:00.point, I also think it's necessary, perhaps he would put that on the

:59:01. > :59:05.face of the bill. I agree absolutely with the point made by my right

:59:06. > :59:08.honourable friend the Member for Holborn and St Pancras about the

:59:09. > :59:13.Charter for fundamental rights. It needs to be brought across into our

:59:14. > :59:19.law, not least because the Secretary of State relied upon it in the case

:59:20. > :59:22.that he brought. Can I also say that the same argument applies to the

:59:23. > :59:26.environmental principles that were set out in the Lisbon Treaty. Now,

:59:27. > :59:31.if members look at the explanatory memorandum, it has an illustrative

:59:32. > :59:35.list of directly affected rights that arrive from EU treaties that

:59:36. > :59:41.the Government says it intends to bring across under Clause four but

:59:42. > :59:44.it does not include the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty which cover

:59:45. > :59:49.environmental principles and protection and I stay to ministers

:59:50. > :59:54.that will need to be remedied. Finally, Mr Speaker, I want to turn

:59:55. > :59:58.to the state of the negotiations which will have a huge impact on the

:59:59. > :00:02.way this bill is used. The Secretary of State told Andrew Marl last

:00:03. > :00:07.Sunday that this is, and I quote, the most complex negotiation

:00:08. > :00:13.probably ever but certainly in modern times, and he is of course

:00:14. > :00:17.right. Which begs the question, why ministers, I'm sorry to say, pretend

:00:18. > :00:25.that a conference of relationship can now be negotiated in the ten and

:00:26. > :00:31.a half or so months that now remains because here we are 15 months after

:00:32. > :00:35.the referendum, six months on from triggering Article 50, and as we

:00:36. > :00:39.know from the Secretary of State's statement on Tuesday, we haven't yet

:00:40. > :00:43.sorted out the money, citizens rights in Northern Ireland. Michel

:00:44. > :00:48.Barnier has been absolutely clear that negotiations must be completed

:00:49. > :00:53.in ten and a bit months' time so that everyone involved can look at

:00:54. > :00:56.the deal. We have got to take a view. Other parliaments have got to

:00:57. > :01:00.take a view. The European Parliament must take a view and the Council of

:01:01. > :01:09.ministers. The Government must now have realised that it was never and

:01:10. > :01:12.is not now going to be possible to negotiate a special perspective that

:01:13. > :01:17.will cover all of the issues that need to be addressed. So, given, Mr

:01:18. > :01:23.Speaker, that there will inevitably be lots of outstanding issues come

:01:24. > :01:28.the end of the talks in 2018, given that leaving without a deal would

:01:29. > :01:31.mean falling off a cliff edge with absolutely disastrous consequences

:01:32. > :01:38.for the British economy, surely it is now playing that we will have to

:01:39. > :01:46.have transitional arrangements and that these will have to do --

:01:47. > :01:50.involve staying in the customs union and the single market for a time if

:01:51. > :01:54.we are to avoid the kind of disruption that businesses have

:01:55. > :01:58.repeatedly warned the Government about. Now I realise that this

:01:59. > :02:02.truth, this self-evident truth is going to come as a shock to some

:02:03. > :02:07.people, a bitter disappointment. And I don't know how ministers are going

:02:08. > :02:15.to break it to them, presumably gently, bit by bit. But it is going

:02:16. > :02:20.to have to happen because only by doing this will be as a nation have

:02:21. > :02:23.the chance at the time to negotiate the comprehensive free trade and

:02:24. > :02:32.market access agreement that businesses want and our economic

:02:33. > :02:36.future depends upon. In British constitutional history, there are

:02:37. > :02:41.few examples of bills of such historic significance as this. Since

:02:42. > :02:44.the mid-19 80s, I have been arguing for legislative sovereignty in

:02:45. > :02:53.respect of EU legislation, as indeed with my amendment on the 12th of

:02:54. > :02:59.June 1986, even under the pie minister ship of Margaret Thatcher,

:03:00. > :03:05.but I was not then allowed even to debate it let alone move it. Then we

:03:06. > :03:10.had Maastricht, Neath, Amsterdam, Lisbon, and together with other

:03:11. > :03:15.tributes and I pay tribute to the McGann -- and together with other

:03:16. > :03:24.colleagues, and I pay tribute to them again, here we are today. I

:03:25. > :03:29.circulated something even before the referendum that said we need to

:03:30. > :03:35.repeal the European Community that 1972 and we need to transpose EU law

:03:36. > :03:42.into UK law when treaties cease to apply under Article 50. However,

:03:43. > :03:47.contrary to the reasoned amendment by the opposition, this bill, the

:03:48. > :03:55.bill of the Government, will emphatically protect Parliament

:03:56. > :04:03.sovereignty precisely because it is an active sovereignty and it repeal

:04:04. > :04:11.the European Communities Act which has overridden Parliament. Indeed,

:04:12. > :04:15.the referendum bill itself was authorised by acts of parliament by

:04:16. > :04:26.no less than 6-1 in the House of parliament and the hard-core 50 --

:04:27. > :04:30.the Article 50 was again a act of sovereignty which was passed by

:04:31. > :04:42.almost all members of the opposition. This was reinforced when

:04:43. > :04:55.86% of votes in the general election went to those in favour of the

:04:56. > :05:00.referendum result. Not merely participated in. We should therefore

:05:01. > :05:04.be deeply disturbed at the official opposition should now seek to

:05:05. > :05:07.decline to give a second reading to this bill, cynically claiming that

:05:08. > :05:15.they respect the EU referendum result. In fact, there are amendment

:05:16. > :05:20.defies belief. As the snail asserts in Alice and Wonderland, so today

:05:21. > :05:25.the official opposition, if I may quote from Alice in Wonderland,

:05:26. > :05:30.would not, could not, would not, could not, would not join the dance.

:05:31. > :05:34.But this is a serious dance. This is not Alice in Wonderland. This is a

:05:35. > :05:37.real dance implementing the democratic decision of the British

:05:38. > :05:41.people and the United Kingdom as a whole. The reasoned amendment fails

:05:42. > :05:45.to convert and the simple fact which is that Parliamentary sovereignty of

:05:46. > :05:49.no less embedded in this bill banning the European Communities Act

:05:50. > :05:55.itself, which in the very pursuance of sovereignty repealed are then

:05:56. > :06:01.voluntary acceptance under sections two and three of the 1972 act.

:06:02. > :06:06.Indeed, Lord Bridge make the voluntary basis of that act crystal

:06:07. > :06:10.clear, even to the point of the House of Lords striking down even an

:06:11. > :06:14.act of Parliament, namely the merchant shipping act at that time,

:06:15. > :06:22.because of its inconsistency with the European Community act 1972.

:06:23. > :06:26.Now, in 1972, therefore, we also, by virtue of the historic invasion of

:06:27. > :06:34.our constitutional arrangements, acquiesced in the subversion to the

:06:35. > :06:38.European Union of this House and all this, even without a referendum,

:06:39. > :06:41.which we did have, of course, when we passed the referendum and got the

:06:42. > :06:47.endorsement of the British people under an act of Parliament passed in

:06:48. > :06:55.this House. Furthermore, the 1972 act absorbed not only a vast swathe

:06:56. > :07:02.of existing treaties and laws, but also the dogmatic assertions made by

:07:03. > :07:07.the European Court on the supremacy of EU law itself over our

:07:08. > :07:16.constitutional status. A whole list of cases can be listed asserted by

:07:17. > :07:22.the European Court over our Parliament and sovereignty. This was

:07:23. > :07:29.made even worse by the White Paper which preceded the 72 act itself,

:07:30. > :07:32.which pretended, I'd almost say by deceit, that it would not only be

:07:33. > :07:37.essential to our national interest to maintain the detail and we would

:07:38. > :07:42.never give it up, because to retain it, they said, it would be essential

:07:43. > :07:46.to our national interest and without it, it would even impair the very

:07:47. > :07:50.fabric of the European union itself. They understood what it was about.

:07:51. > :07:55.They knew it would destroy the European Union if they imposed a

:07:56. > :07:59.restriction on us being able to veto legislation. Since then, the EU's

:08:00. > :08:03.competences happen fastly extended. As for the Henry VIII procedures in

:08:04. > :08:09.the bill, and I hear what my honourable friend the Member for

:08:10. > :08:14.Broxton said about what I said in 2013, but I am talking about the EU

:08:15. > :08:18.specific legal jurisdiction and the context in which we are discussing

:08:19. > :08:23.this in relation to the 1972 act. Yes, we could have reservations

:08:24. > :08:28.about elements of Henry VIII procedures, but when you come to

:08:29. > :08:31.this, the biggest power grab of all time in British constitutional

:08:32. > :08:39.history has been the 72 act itself and is incorporated all EU law

:08:40. > :08:48.accumulated before, from 1956 right the way three to 1972, and my right

:08:49. > :08:51.honourable friend the Member for Rush Clift was cajoling people to

:08:52. > :08:59.move down the route of subverting our entire history into these new

:09:00. > :09:04.arrangements which subverted the constitutional history of this

:09:05. > :09:08.entire house. Can I briefly remind my honourable friend of the

:09:09. > :09:14.Maastricht Treaty and his constitution to the Maastricht

:09:15. > :09:18.Treaty being very similar to ones he making there. I don't remember him

:09:19. > :09:26.being so enthusiastic with the speed in which he went through the House

:09:27. > :09:30.leaving no detail. When did this conversion to the new prompt

:09:31. > :09:33.procedure take place? I am so glad my honourable friend made that point

:09:34. > :09:39.because I would like to endorse what he was saying earlier. I would like

:09:40. > :09:47.to see these proceedings being extended past 5pm tonight and I will

:09:48. > :09:53.not have the opportunity to make the speech as long as I did on the

:09:54. > :09:57.second reading of Maastricht, which was about two hours, but I do think

:09:58. > :10:00.this is quite different in character from the Maastricht bill because

:10:01. > :10:02.then we were dealing with extensions of competences, whereas now we are

:10:03. > :10:06.dealing with the repeal of sovereignty and competency. I simply

:10:07. > :10:10.make the point that within Maastricht, we were told time and

:10:11. > :10:13.time again whilst we have long procedures for debate, the outcome

:10:14. > :10:19.could not be in doubt, because to be a member of the European Union and

:10:20. > :10:23.all of what was agreed in the Maastricht Treaty would come

:10:24. > :10:26.straight into UK law, regardless of what this Parliament decided they

:10:27. > :10:31.were against. Absolutely, and that is the principle. The Henry VIII

:10:32. > :10:38.arrangement with respect to this bill is in fact a mirror in reverse

:10:39. > :10:42.of what was done in 1972 in absorbing all that legislation into

:10:43. > :10:50.our own law and applying it said that it can never be changed. You

:10:51. > :10:56.can't repeal it until you get to this bill. Indeed, I ought to add

:10:57. > :11:03.that it would be impossible for us to be able to translate all the

:11:04. > :11:09.legislation by primary legislation although, as it's already been said,

:11:10. > :11:12.we will have essentially important primary legislation on fisheries

:11:13. > :11:17.which has already been promised. Action 22 of the European Community

:11:18. > :11:24.'s act allows EU law to have legal effect in the UK domestic law by

:11:25. > :11:31.secondary are delegated legislation. Section 24 of the European

:11:32. > :11:35.Communities Act, this secondary legislation by sovereignty of

:11:36. > :11:39.Parliament is expressly given the power as may be made by the act of

:11:40. > :11:45.Parliament itself and their as signposts of examples including, if

:11:46. > :11:49.I may say, to the opposition and to the Shadow Secretary of State,

:11:50. > :11:51.including section 75 of the Freedom of Information Act, where the

:11:52. > :11:56.amendment was made within the act itself and was passed by the Labour

:11:57. > :11:59.Party itself, so let's not get hypocritical about this under any

:12:00. > :12:05.circumstances. This is not as unusual as it's made out to be and

:12:06. > :12:08.indeed I would go one further to say that the point was specifically made

:12:09. > :12:15.by the Minister Geoffrey Rippon during the passage of the 1972 act

:12:16. > :12:19.on the 15th of February, where he acknowledged the novelty, and it was

:12:20. > :12:26.novel in those days, and he added, as I conceive it, the power conceded

:12:27. > :12:29.by section 24 would only be used in exceptional circumstances. Well, we

:12:30. > :12:37.now know that at least according to the EU database 12,000 legislators

:12:38. > :12:41.brought in since 1973. At the wild assertion that the Henry VIII

:12:42. > :12:43.provisions in this bill are an infringement of sovereignty and for

:12:44. > :12:51.this reason the amendment should be completely disregarded.

:12:52. > :12:59.Furthermore I would add that Henry VIII powers have been used for

:13:00. > :13:03.enactment after enactment,... There is another important point to be

:13:04. > :13:11.made, and that is what the European scrutiny committee report with the

:13:12. > :13:16.transparent city of making in 2016 which goes to the heart and manner

:13:17. > :13:21.of the policy of laws that the UK has been increasingly invaded not in

:13:22. > :13:28.process, but in practice which we will revert under this Bill. That we

:13:29. > :13:35.will abolish under this Bill. What this establishes is that the

:13:36. > :13:39.majority of treaties is, that the majority of actor taken by

:13:40. > :13:43.consensus, behind closed doors, not with any proper record, not with

:13:44. > :13:47.proper speeches, not with transparency, not with voters they

:13:48. > :13:52.are recorded in Hansard, that is the fundamental difference, and it is a

:13:53. > :13:55.travesty of democratic decision-making process and is the

:13:56. > :14:00.reason why this Bill is so necessary. The people of this

:14:01. > :14:04.country have had inflicted up posed upon them, legislation that has been

:14:05. > :14:09.made behind closed doors, without knowing who has made them, for what

:14:10. > :14:14.reason and how. So, the fact is there are also political

:14:15. > :14:21.undercurrents which need to be brought out here. Because who makes

:14:22. > :14:33.those decisions behind closed doors is incredibly important. As the

:14:34. > :14:36.Professor of economics at the University, another report

:14:37. > :14:40.demonstrates the extent to which the UK has been on the losing side of an

:14:41. > :14:44.ever increasing proportion of time is up to 2015, and I'm bound to say

:14:45. > :14:49.that the UK has been on the losing side more than any other state over

:14:50. > :14:53.that period of time. Lastly on the charter, I've made my point that the

:14:54. > :14:58.opposition have no credibility on the question of the Charter

:14:59. > :15:02.whatsoever. I would simply finally say this. This is a historic moment

:15:03. > :15:13.and I'm glad to be part of it at last! It is a pleasure to follow the

:15:14. > :15:20.right honourable member, he, amongst all of this, spent more scrutinising

:15:21. > :15:24.EU legislation and EU directives, and EU scrutiny committee which I

:15:25. > :15:29.have been pleased to be a member of some years very often has felt very

:15:30. > :15:35.alone. We have been up there in the committee room going over document

:15:36. > :15:42.after document, realising that actually, very little of what we

:15:43. > :15:49.could do to change. I think that the public looking in today, may well be

:15:50. > :15:54.asking, some of them, if only this interest and intense scrutiny and

:15:55. > :15:59.worry about Henry VIII clauses and statutory instruments, if only a

:16:00. > :16:02.quarter of that time had been spent by Parliament in examining some of

:16:03. > :16:12.those thousands of EU directives and regulations that have been simply

:16:13. > :16:16.imposed on us as a country. As the honourable member has just said,

:16:17. > :16:23.very much what was happening in the EU was behind closed doors. We were

:16:24. > :16:31.one of 28 countries, we were always being outvoted. Many and many of

:16:32. > :16:36.those times we had to take those decisions and take it on board

:16:37. > :16:46.without being able to change. Now, I do know that there is genuine

:16:47. > :16:51.concern amongst men -- many of my colleagues about some of the ways

:16:52. > :16:55.that we might be scrutinising and using some of the Henry VIII clauses

:16:56. > :16:59.and statutory instruments. I agreed very much with the right honourable

:17:00. > :17:06.member that there are mechanisms that we can actually bring people

:17:07. > :17:11.together on this, one of the problems has been that there is

:17:12. > :17:15.genuinely amongst those of us who voted to leave, and were pleased at

:17:16. > :17:20.the result, do feel that while there are a lot of people that say we

:17:21. > :17:23.accept the result of the referendum. But actually behind-the-scenes they

:17:24. > :17:29.are doing every little bit of work they can do to try and, not

:17:30. > :17:35.necessarily prevent is leaving, but make it as difficult as possible, to

:17:36. > :17:44.make it as tedious as possible, to get the public saying, oh dear have

:17:45. > :17:47.we done the right thing? That is coming from the media and all the

:17:48. > :17:52.people who were strongly in the remaining camp. That is doing a

:17:53. > :17:56.disservice to our country. What we have to do in negotiating with the

:17:57. > :18:02.EU is show this country is united, that this parliament is united.

:18:03. > :18:07.Because we are leaving in March 2019, whatever happens, whatever

:18:08. > :18:12.people on my side of Parliament say, we will be leaving in March 20 19.

:18:13. > :18:18.We want to leave in a way that is going to maximise certainty and

:18:19. > :18:22.confidence in business, maximise the confidence of all those people, many

:18:23. > :18:27.of them who voted remain, but have decided now that they want to get on

:18:28. > :18:30.with it, let's do it and speak up for all the positive things that are

:18:31. > :18:35.happening. All the dire warnings of the things that were going to go

:18:36. > :18:38.wrong, we should now be recognising that they were wrong and we need to

:18:39. > :18:50.be being as positive as possible. I look back at my last, the last

:18:51. > :18:53.gunmen in a lot of members served, we actually doubled the number of

:18:54. > :18:57.statutory instruments the new law. We are being a little bit

:18:58. > :19:05.hypocritical on this side of the fence on this issue. I know there

:19:06. > :19:08.are people on my side that are genuinely so upset that we are going

:19:09. > :19:13.to be leaving the EU. But this is a time that we should be putting the

:19:14. > :19:19.interests of the country first and deciding that we want to work with

:19:20. > :19:22.the Government, and that means the Government want to work with us as

:19:23. > :19:27.well. That needs a positive attitude from our front bench, and I've been

:19:28. > :19:32.pleased to say that there has been positive attitudes. I do worry now,

:19:33. > :19:37.that this is going against the principle, and voting against second

:19:38. > :19:41.reading, is, no matter whether there are some people who genuinely feel

:19:42. > :19:46.this is the right thing to do. This will be seen, out there, in the

:19:47. > :19:55.public, by Labour voters, many Labour voters who came back to us

:19:56. > :20:00.having fraternised with you UK IP for some time. They will think that

:20:01. > :20:05.we're not really serious foot leaving the European. I am very

:20:06. > :20:11.disappointed that we will not be supporting the pill on Monday night.

:20:12. > :20:14.-- the Bill on Monday night. Some of my colleagues feel they should be

:20:15. > :20:19.supporting it, even if they are going to support the recent

:20:20. > :20:23.amendment, because this second reading is the principal. Then in

:20:24. > :20:29.our new clauses we can probe some of the problems that there are,

:20:30. > :20:38.undoubtedly, about the way this scrutiny process will happen. Michel

:20:39. > :20:42.Barnier has gone on, and many people have mentioned it today, that the

:20:43. > :20:46.clock is ticking. It is ticking, but it is actually taking the EU as much

:20:47. > :20:53.as it is ticking for us here in the UK. It seems now to me, that the EU

:20:54. > :20:56.negotiators, not necessarily individual countries, and we will

:20:57. > :21:00.see over the next few months changes in some of those EU countries that

:21:01. > :21:05.really want to get a good deal with us and now it's in their interest.

:21:06. > :21:09.What we are seeing is that the only thing that is at the top of the EU

:21:10. > :21:15.negotiators minds at this moment is money. They know how much they are

:21:16. > :21:20.going to miss our money. I think that tells us something about what

:21:21. > :21:27.the EU has been all about. They want to keep our money coming in for as

:21:28. > :21:32.long as possible. Any transition period, I will only accept any kind

:21:33. > :21:36.of transition period that on day one we are leaving the EU that we are

:21:37. > :21:40.stopping paying any more money. That's not to say there might be

:21:41. > :21:47.some things that legally, I'd like to see the detail, I like the EU to

:21:48. > :21:51.come up with every detail of why we should be paying something back,

:21:52. > :21:58.then we need to be clear that we're not going to pay anything more after

:21:59. > :22:02.we leave the EU. I give away. I entirely agree with the honourable

:22:03. > :22:05.lady. That she also agree that probably the EU doesn't want to talk

:22:06. > :22:10.about trade, because in practice they're going to want tariff barrier

:22:11. > :22:15.free trade if they are at sensible, and they think they can get money

:22:16. > :22:18.out of this if they want over themselves? Dilemma I think the

:22:19. > :22:25.unreliable member is right, money seems to be the crucial way they are

:22:26. > :22:30.trying to use and I hope that our negotiators will stand up to that

:22:31. > :22:33.and stop having this, allowing the media and those people who want to

:22:34. > :22:38.make every little bit of negotiation into some kind of conflict, it is

:22:39. > :22:41.always at the EU negotiators are doing the right thing, and somehow

:22:42. > :22:46.we're not doing the right thing. I wanted to be the other way round. I

:22:47. > :22:51.want is to be positive about our negotiations, because in the end we

:22:52. > :22:57.can get a good deal by proclaiming how strong the UK is, how well

:22:58. > :23:00.respected we are, how strong our City of London is, how we know that

:23:01. > :23:07.already despite the fact that we're leaving in 2019, companies are still

:23:08. > :23:11.coming to invest here. There is a very positive message, but it's not

:23:12. > :23:15.getting out. I know lots of people want to speak, so I will end by

:23:16. > :23:20.saying that I think the public today, and I'm not a lawyer, and I

:23:21. > :23:23.know there's a lot of lawyers in here who are loving every minute of

:23:24. > :23:31.this, because it's the kind of thing they love. I'm not a lawyer, the

:23:32. > :23:35.vast majority of the lawyer -- public are not lawyers. They will be

:23:36. > :23:40.judging all of this, whatever our party politics, they will be judging

:23:41. > :23:43.this on whether we are doing what is in the long-term best interests of

:23:44. > :23:47.our country. I do not believe that playing some kind of political game,

:23:48. > :23:53.about whether we can vote for this because it might look to some people

:23:54. > :23:59.in our party that we are standing up to the Government. This is about our

:24:00. > :24:02.future of our country. We, on the Labour side, should be voting for

:24:03. > :24:05.the second reading of this Bill on Monday night and then challenging

:24:06. > :24:13.and changing if we can during committee stage. Thank you. Mr

:24:14. > :24:17.Speaker, I entirely agree with the honourable lady, we do not have any

:24:18. > :24:23.legal obligation to pay more money, there is no moral obligation and

:24:24. > :24:27.there is no diplomatic advantage in offering money. If the EU gets the

:24:28. > :24:30.idea that we might pay them a bit of money, they will be even more

:24:31. > :24:37.unreasonable, because that would be a way of forcing more money out of

:24:38. > :24:43.this. What I wish to say on this very important debate, is that this

:24:44. > :24:47.Bill should satisfy most remain voters and mostly voters. I

:24:48. > :24:51.understand that it doesn't satisfy some MPs who have their political

:24:52. > :24:53.agendas in games to play. But they should listen to their constituents

:24:54. > :24:58.and think about the mood of the country and the mood of business and

:24:59. > :25:04.those that we represent. We have had crocodile tears shed for myself and

:25:05. > :25:08.my right honourable friend 's who want to leave and are very pleased

:25:09. > :25:12.with Leave. Surely we must understand that we're not getting

:25:13. > :25:15.the Parliamentary democracy that we wanted with this piece of

:25:16. > :25:19.legislation. I'd like to reassure all colleagues in this House that

:25:20. > :25:22.I'm getting exactly the piece of legislation I wanted which does

:25:23. > :25:26.restore Parliamentary democracy. What is in this Bill from the voters

:25:27. > :25:30.is that once this Bill has gone through and we have left the EU, the

:25:31. > :25:36.British people and their elected parliament would in future make all

:25:37. > :25:40.their laws for them. And we would be able to amend any law we don't like

:25:41. > :25:44.any more, we would be able to improve any law, and we are not able

:25:45. > :25:50.to do that. What we like about this Bill is that it gets rid of the 1972

:25:51. > :25:54.act, which was an outrage against Chrissy. Because as we heard it led

:25:55. > :25:59.to 20,000 different laws being visited upon our country, whether

:26:00. > :26:03.the people and parliament wanted them or not. Whether they had voted

:26:04. > :26:07.for or against them, or voted for them reluctantly, because they

:26:08. > :26:12.didn't want the embarrassment of voting against them and losing. This

:26:13. > :26:15.is a great day for United Kingdom democracy, that a piece of

:26:16. > :26:19.legislation is presented that will give the people and their parliament

:26:20. > :26:30.control over their laws. It is also a very good piece of legislation for

:26:31. > :26:37.remain voters because a lot of Remain voters during the campaign

:26:38. > :26:40.were not fully convinced, either for against the EU, but on balance

:26:41. > :26:45.thought they should stay in. They quite often like some elements of EU

:26:46. > :26:49.legislation or standards or requirements, particularly the

:26:50. > :26:53.Labour Party and their supporters like the employment guarantees that

:26:54. > :26:57.offered by employment law. There were other parties in interests that

:26:58. > :27:04.likely environmental standards. What this Bill does is that all those

:27:05. > :27:06.things that Remain voters liked about European legislation will

:27:07. > :27:09.continue and be good British law so they will still have the benefits of

:27:10. > :27:13.them. With the added advantage that we might want to improve them. We

:27:14. > :27:14.have full assurance from the Government that we don't want to

:27:15. > :27:24.repeal them. I am very surprised that the

:27:25. > :27:30.honourable member is saying how delighted he is that so many rights

:27:31. > :27:35.and responsibilities will now come under delegated legislation. I'm not

:27:36. > :27:39.sure if he recalls on the 1st of September 2012 as a member of the

:27:40. > :27:43.delegated Legislation committee on the criminal injuries compensation

:27:44. > :27:47.scheme that the honourable member himself called with all the other

:27:48. > :27:51.members of that committee from the Conservative benches for the then

:27:52. > :27:56.Minister to withdraw the motion that was coming towards them, and that

:27:57. > :28:02.did not happen. Simply a second committee was set up.

:28:03. > :28:06.The Speaker: Colleagues must have some regard to each other's

:28:07. > :28:13.interest. Interventions must be brief, they must not be many

:28:14. > :28:20.speeches. Let's come to this secondary point. I am happy that

:28:21. > :28:24.there is Parliamentary control. If Ministers seek to abuse the power

:28:25. > :28:28.under the legislation they are offering to this House. All they

:28:29. > :28:32.have to do is vote down the statutory instrument, and surely the

:28:33. > :28:38.opposition is up to being able to say, we intend to debate and vote on

:28:39. > :28:42.this issue. I remember doing that as a Shadow Cabinet Minister. We made

:28:43. > :28:46.sure there was a debate and a vote, and if it is the will of Parliament

:28:47. > :28:51.that Ministers have misbehaved, they will lose the vote and have to come

:28:52. > :28:55.forward with something else. I don't understand why my colleagues find it

:28:56. > :28:59.so difficult to understand Parliamentary democracy. What

:29:00. > :29:02.Ministers will be doing is bringing forward secondary legislation where

:29:03. > :29:05.they are fairly sure it is the will of the House that they go through,

:29:06. > :29:11.and they will all be in pursuit of this fundamental aim which is to

:29:12. > :29:15.guarantee all those rights and laws which are often more admired on the

:29:16. > :29:18.other side of the House than on this side of the House, but which we all

:29:19. > :29:30.agree should be transferred lock, stock and barrel, and are pledged to

:29:31. > :29:39.improve on, because that is something that we believe in and we

:29:40. > :29:43.offer that British people. Very kind of the right honourable gentleman to

:29:44. > :29:49.allow me to intervene. The right on gentleman has indicated to the House

:29:50. > :29:54.that those who voted for Remain as I did should be happy with this

:29:55. > :30:00.legislation because it brings over all EU legislation. Yes and no. On

:30:01. > :30:05.the stroke of midnight on exit day, we lose the general principles of EU

:30:06. > :30:12.law, principle such as proportionality, non-discrimination,

:30:13. > :30:15.respect the human rights. With respect, the general principles go.

:30:16. > :30:20.Does the right honourable gentleman agree that we should lose those very

:30:21. > :30:26.sound, good, valuable, general principles? I think those excellent

:30:27. > :30:30.principles are already reflected in both European law and British law

:30:31. > :30:36.and will therefore be built into our statutes and inherited from European

:30:37. > :30:41.law by this legislation, and they will inform the judgment of our

:30:42. > :30:45.judges. I am happy to judge our Supreme Court rather than the

:30:46. > :30:49.justices. I didn't like all of their judgments, but we accepted it and

:30:50. > :30:54.lived with it, and we are now in a stronger position as a result, as it

:30:55. > :30:58.happens, because we had a nine-month referendum debate in this House

:30:59. > :31:02.after the country had made its decision, and after an extensive

:31:03. > :31:05.rerun of the referendum, day after day we were doing the same subject

:31:06. > :31:10.and we were told we were never talking about it, Parliament wisely

:31:11. > :31:13.came to the decision that they did have to endorse the decision of the

:31:14. > :31:19.British people and get on at implement it. Time is now rather

:31:20. > :31:22.limited. So I am very much in favour of our Parliament making those

:31:23. > :31:28.decisions, those Admiral principles which will often be reflected in

:31:29. > :31:31.British law and already reflected in the legislation that are the subject

:31:32. > :31:36.of this bill today, and our judges will often be informed by them. If

:31:37. > :31:40.the judges start to use a principle we don't like a much, it is in the

:31:41. > :31:44.hands of ourselves in this Parliament issued new guidance to

:31:45. > :31:48.those judges and to say we are creating more primary legislation to

:31:49. > :31:52.make sure we have a bit more of this principle and less of that principle

:31:53. > :31:59.and maybe our disagreement with the judges, because it is important in

:32:00. > :32:02.the democracy that you have independent courts, and also that

:32:03. > :32:05.the sovereign people through their elected representatives can move the

:32:06. > :32:11.judges on by proper instruction, which in our case takes the form of

:32:12. > :32:15.primary legislation. There has been much made of how we implement

:32:16. > :32:22.whatever agreement we get if we have an agreement at the end of the now

:32:23. > :32:28.19 month process in the run-up to our exit on the 29th of March.

:32:29. > :32:34.Again, people are making heavy weather of this, because I think the

:32:35. > :32:37.main issue that is going to be eventually settled, I fear it will

:32:38. > :32:41.be settled much later than the present Parliament would like, is

:32:42. > :32:47.this issue of how we are going to trade with our former partners on

:32:48. > :32:52.the date that we depart. And there are two off-the-shelf models, either

:32:53. > :32:55.of which would work, one is that they do in the end decided that they

:32:56. > :32:59.don't want tariffs on all their food products coming into the UK market

:33:00. > :33:04.and all the cars coming into the UK market, and they don't want us

:33:05. > :33:07.creating new barriers against successful exports, so they agree

:33:08. > :33:10.with us that we should register existing arrangements as a free

:33:11. > :33:16.trade agreement at the World Trade Organisation, and it would be a

:33:17. > :33:19.ready-made free-trade agreement. I don't think there is time to do a

:33:20. > :33:23.special free-trade agreement that is as good as what we have the moment,

:33:24. > :33:27.you either have the current arrangements modified the WTO

:33:28. > :33:31.purposes when we are the union, or you don't. And if you don't, then we

:33:32. > :33:36.trade under World Trade Organisation terms where we are on the other side

:33:37. > :33:39.of the EU customs tariff arrangements, and we know exactly

:33:40. > :33:45.what that looks like because that is how we trade with the rest of the

:33:46. > :33:47.world as a EU member where they impose high tariff barriers on what

:33:48. > :33:51.would otherwise be cheaper food from the rest of the world, but if they

:33:52. > :33:54.decided on that option, then of course their food would be on the

:33:55. > :33:59.wrong side of that barrier as well and we would have to decide how much

:34:00. > :34:03.we wanted to negotiate tariffs down for food from other countries around

:34:04. > :34:07.the rest of the world, where they may offer us a better deal. But it

:34:08. > :34:12.would be quite manageable, food is the only sector that is really badly

:34:13. > :34:25.affected by the tariff proposals. Over half our trade would not be

:34:26. > :34:32.tarot fourball under -- tariff able under the terms. We will have to

:34:33. > :34:36.wait and see how that develops. I will give way. So is the gentleman

:34:37. > :34:39.saying that one of the basic and largest amounts that any household

:34:40. > :34:44.spends of its income, on food, could be affected by his proposals, but

:34:45. > :34:48.that's OK? I'm saying that either way we could get a good deal,

:34:49. > :34:52.because if they decide that they do want to impose tariffs on exports to

:34:53. > :34:57.ask a more we could take tariffs off food coming from other parts of the

:34:58. > :35:00.world. Under WTO rules, we can always take Tarasov, and we've get

:35:01. > :35:07.cheaper food from the rest of the world than we are currently getting

:35:08. > :35:11.from the EU. The other things is that we would of course have a

:35:12. > :35:15.massive, if we accepted the full tariff rules, we would have 12

:35:16. > :35:19.billion of tariffs, and I would recommend that all of that be given

:35:20. > :35:22.back to our consumers, so they wouldn't be any worse off at all

:35:23. > :35:26.because we would return the money to them and so they might even be

:35:27. > :35:30.better off if we then did free-trade deals that got food prices down from

:35:31. > :35:36.other parts of the world. My final point to the Government is that I do

:35:37. > :35:41.think that there is an issue over how you decide the date of our

:35:42. > :35:45.departure, and I think it is very clear that our date of departure

:35:46. > :35:48.will be the 29th of March 20 19. It will definitely be that if we don't

:35:49. > :35:54.have an agreement, which is still quite possible. I think should aim

:35:55. > :35:56.to still make that the date. We have 19 months left. That should be the

:35:57. > :36:02.transition from most of the things that need transition, that is surely

:36:03. > :36:06.what the time is there to achieve, and so I would recommend that that

:36:07. > :36:09.date be put in the Bill now, and we have the argument of substance over

:36:10. > :36:14.that date now, and I would recommend very strongly that we aim for that

:36:15. > :36:21.date, because on one scenario it will be that date anywhere, and on

:36:22. > :36:25.the other, it is highly desirable. People are always telling me we need

:36:26. > :36:29.to remove uncertainty, but if the laws remain in place, we also tell

:36:30. > :36:35.them it is definitely going to be the 29th of March 2019, that is

:36:36. > :36:37.taking a lot of uncertainty out of the system that would be very

:36:38. > :36:42.welcome. I find businesses now on the whole just want to get on with

:36:43. > :36:45.it, they want to know what they are planning for, they have got some of

:36:46. > :36:50.the details and they want as many details as possible, and if we put

:36:51. > :36:54.the firm date in, that would make it easier still.

:36:55. > :36:58.The Speaker: The time limit on backbench speeches will be reduced

:36:59. > :37:02.to five minutes after the next speaker. Yvette Cooper. Thank you,

:37:03. > :37:06.Mr Speaker. This has been a thoughtful debate, and I hope that

:37:07. > :37:09.the Government is in no doubt about the scale of Parliamentary concern

:37:10. > :37:15.about the way in which this bill concentrates power is in the hands

:37:16. > :37:21.of Ministers. The Secretary of State in his opening speech recognised

:37:22. > :37:25.that this bill is not what takes us out of the EU. Parliament has

:37:26. > :37:30.already voted for Article 50, which will take us out of the EU, and

:37:31. > :37:36.rightly voted for it as well. But Parliament also has a job to do to

:37:37. > :37:40.hold Ministers to account, and as drafted, this bill stops us doing

:37:41. > :37:43.that. It stops us standing up for democracy in this House, and it

:37:44. > :37:49.stops is making sure frankly that the Government doesn't screw up

:37:50. > :37:53.Brexit in the process and the decisions that it takes. Many of the

:37:54. > :37:59.purposes behind this bill are right, and Parliament will need to repeal

:38:00. > :38:04.the 1972 act, Parliament will also need to transfer the EU derived law

:38:05. > :38:08.into UK law. So as my right honourable friend has already said,

:38:09. > :38:13.we will have to have a bill, but not this bill, because there is a choice

:38:14. > :38:17.about the way that we do this, and we don't have to do this in a way

:38:18. > :38:22.that concentrate so much power in the hands of a small group of

:38:23. > :38:29.Ministers. And let me run through some of the concerns that we have.

:38:30. > :38:35.My right honourable friend the Shadow Minister said tighter

:38:36. > :38:40.forensic and powerful account of the Bill and the DCAL powers that it

:38:41. > :38:46.does give to Ministers, with no safeguards in place. Clauses seven,

:38:47. > :38:52.17, nine, would also the fact that it reduces British citizens' rights,

:38:53. > :38:56.and this bill weakens the protection for employment rights, equality

:38:57. > :39:00.protection, environmental standards, remedies and enforcement, crucially

:39:01. > :39:06.reducing right of redress, and it is both sad and telling that Ministers

:39:07. > :39:09.have chosen to exempt the Charter of fundamental rights. I hope that is

:39:10. > :39:13.something that will be reversed in something that they will change

:39:14. > :39:19.position on. But the greatest concern, the point I wanted to focus

:39:20. > :39:22.on, is this concentration of powers. Frankly it is not British, and

:39:23. > :39:26.Parliament will not be able to do its job to stand up for those

:39:27. > :39:32.citizens' rights against a powerful executive if this bill goes through

:39:33. > :39:36.in the way that it has been drafted. The unprecedented powers being given

:39:37. > :39:39.to Ministers in those clauses, in clause 17 in particular which trumps

:39:40. > :39:45.other clauses, powers to make a Tudor monarch proud, and everyone

:39:46. > :39:49.realises that the sheer extent of legislation does mean we will need

:39:50. > :39:54.both primary and secondary legislation as part of this process,

:39:55. > :39:58.but not to this scale, not with this lack of safeguards, not with this

:39:59. > :40:02.concentration of power in Ministers' hands. It will give them the power

:40:03. > :40:05.to change primary legislation for an incredibly broad range of reasons,

:40:06. > :40:12.on the test is simply whether Ministers think it is appropriate.

:40:13. > :40:14.Not whether it is needed, proportionate, essential, but only

:40:15. > :40:22.whether they consider it to be appropriate. The Bill also does

:40:23. > :40:24.include the power, slightly disingenuous remarks from the

:40:25. > :40:27.Secretary of State in the way that you presented this, because the Bill

:40:28. > :40:34.does include the power to create new criminal offences so long as the

:40:35. > :40:39.sentence is not more than two years. That is a serious power to give

:40:40. > :40:41.Ministers on some and it is so broad without Parliamentary scrutiny. And

:40:42. > :40:47.here are some examples of things that the Bill as it stands would do.

:40:48. > :40:51.I raised with the Secretary of State European Arrest Warrant earlier, and

:40:52. > :40:55.his response to my question about what the safeguards would be were

:40:56. > :40:58.simply to point to the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act which by

:40:59. > :41:02.the weather front bench opposite has pledged to get rid of, but the Human

:41:03. > :41:06.Rights Act is also not sufficient safeguards when we know that we

:41:07. > :41:09.should not be relying on the courts to have all of the safeguards when

:41:10. > :41:14.we in Parliament should be providing some of those safeguards as well.

:41:15. > :41:19.And when they know, too, that even within the scope of the Human Rights

:41:20. > :41:23.Act, that there is a huge range of potential policies on extradition,

:41:24. > :41:26.which Parliament should have a say on. I suspect that I am in fact

:41:27. > :41:30.probably closer to the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary on

:41:31. > :41:35.what extradition policy should be that many of her own backbenches.

:41:36. > :41:38.However, I still don't think that the Prime Minister and Home

:41:39. > :41:42.Secretary should have unlimited powers to decide what that

:41:43. > :41:46.extradition should be without being able to come back to Parliament and

:41:47. > :41:50.without Parliament having a say. Take again the investigatory Powers

:41:51. > :41:55.Bill, something that we debated forensically in this Parliament, it

:41:56. > :41:58.was an example of Parliament at its best. Detailed consideration the

:41:59. > :42:01.balanced security and liberty and changed the Bill as it went through,

:42:02. > :42:07.but in fact given that some of the genesis of that whole bill did

:42:08. > :42:13.depend on ECJ judgments and its relationship with EU legislation, in

:42:14. > :42:18.fact this bill before us now on the clauses before us could give

:42:19. > :42:21.Ministers the power to reopen the Investigatory Powers Act, to change

:42:22. > :42:27.the primary legislation that we chose to put forward with great care

:42:28. > :42:28.and to do so again, just through secondary legislation, without

:42:29. > :42:32.proper safeguards and checks in place.

:42:33. > :42:39.The ministers will have the power to rip up the working Time directive,

:42:40. > :42:43.if they so think it does not fit with what they think should happen

:42:44. > :42:50.as part of the appropriate arrangements after Brexit. And to

:42:51. > :42:56.say that I do not trust the Prime Minister and the Cabinet with these

:42:57. > :43:01.immense powers... You would expect me not to trust the Prime Minister

:43:02. > :43:05.and the Cabinet with these powers, but I think no parliamentarian

:43:06. > :43:11.should trust the Prime Minister and the Cabinet with these powers. We do

:43:12. > :43:15.not know who the next Prime Minister is going to be, when the next

:43:16. > :43:19.cabinet is going to be. This is about the powers in principle, not

:43:20. > :43:22.about who it is doing the job right now. For me, clause nine is

:43:23. > :43:28.particularly disturbing and should not even be in this bill. We should

:43:29. > :43:31.be legislating separately for the withdrawal agreement. We should have

:43:32. > :43:34.separate primary legislation, and yes, it will need to include

:43:35. > :43:42.secondary legislation. We shouldn't be doing it now when we don't know

:43:43. > :43:45.what it will be and we haven't had a vote to endorse the Government's

:43:46. > :43:49.negotiating strategy, to be honest we don't even know what it is in a

:43:50. > :43:53.whole series of areas and where there is not a statutory commitment

:43:54. > :43:56.for a vote on the withdrawal agreement either, we could start

:43:57. > :43:59.this legislation later, in the summer paps. When we have a bit more

:44:00. > :44:05.of a clue where this is going or in the autumn, when the withdrawal

:44:06. > :44:09.agreement is supposedly signed. Then we could put him primary

:44:10. > :44:13.legislation, the exit dates, we could put that into primary

:44:14. > :44:16.legislation, if the withdrawal agreement has been determined. It

:44:17. > :44:22.would allow us to do so in a way that gave ministers no more power

:44:23. > :44:25.than is strictly necessary, rather than to simply hand over

:44:26. > :44:29.unrestricted power to do the job. I will give way. Doesn't The right

:44:30. > :44:32.honourable lady accept this will be a negotiation conducted for us by

:44:33. > :44:36.the Government, so Parliament will be able to say we like the result or

:44:37. > :44:42.we don't like the result but we can't amend it, it's what the

:44:43. > :44:45.negotiation is? I think the honourable member's enthusiasm for

:44:46. > :44:48.blank cheques is not one I am comfortable with. I would also say

:44:49. > :44:57.to him, even if he is happy to simply support the Government and

:44:58. > :44:59.let them do whatever they want on the negotiations, he should be