0:00:00 > 0:00:01work to any of those including those who perhaps settled out of court
0:00:01 > 0:00:09would make it difficult for any work to be undertaken.Urgent questions,
0:00:09 > 0:00:16Kier Starmer.To ask the Secretary of State for exiting the European
0:00:16 > 0:00:20Union if you will make a statement on the government's policy on a
0:00:20 > 0:00:24meaningful vote in parliament to agree the final withdrawal agreement
0:00:24 > 0:00:33with the European Union?Secretary David Davis.Thank you. We have been
0:00:33 > 0:00:37very clear from the start of the process that there will be a vote...
0:00:37 > 0:00:42LAUGHTEROn the final deal that we agree with the European Union.
0:00:42 > 0:00:50I reiterate the commitment during the Article 50 Bill when he said I
0:00:50 > 0:00:53confirm the government will bring forward a motion on the final
0:00:53 > 0:00:57agreement to be approved by both houses of Parliament. We intend this
0:00:57 > 0:01:01will happen before the European Parliament debates and votes on the
0:01:01 > 0:01:09final agreement. Furthermore, we intend it will cover not only the
0:01:09 > 0:01:12withdrawal agreements but also the future relationship with the
0:01:12 > 0:01:15European Union. These remain our commitments. The terms of the vote
0:01:15 > 0:01:19were also clear. The Prime Minister at the time said the choice will be
0:01:19 > 0:01:23meaningful, whether we accept that deal or move ahead without one. This
0:01:23 > 0:01:27vote cannot happen until there is a deal to vote upon. But we are
0:01:27 > 0:01:31working to reach an agreement on the final deal in good time before we
0:01:31 > 0:01:37leave the European Union in March 2019. Clearly we cannot say for sure
0:01:37 > 0:01:41at this stage whether this would be agreed. As Michel Barnier said, he
0:01:41 > 0:01:47hopes to get a draft deal agreed by October 2018, and that is our aim is
0:01:47 > 0:01:52well. We expect there will be a vote in the UK Parliament before a vote
0:01:52 > 0:01:55on the European Parliament and before we leave the European Union.
0:01:55 > 0:02:01As we have said before, this vote will be over and above the
0:02:01 > 0:02:04requirements of the constitutional reform and governance act, 2010. We
0:02:04 > 0:02:09have also said many times we want to talk about future relationship as
0:02:09 > 0:02:14soon as possible. We have also said many times we want to talk about
0:02:14 > 0:02:18fisheries relationship as soon as possible. The EU has been clear that
0:02:18 > 0:02:24any future relationship cannot conclude until the UK becomes a
0:02:24 > 0:02:30third country as the Prime Minister herself said. Our aim is to have the
0:02:30 > 0:02:38terms of our relationship agreed by the time we leave but we recognise
0:02:38 > 0:02:40that the ratification of that agreement will take time and could
0:02:40 > 0:02:44run into the implementation period we are seeking. There can be no
0:02:44 > 0:02:57doubt Parliament will be involved throughout the process.What a mess.
0:02:57 > 0:03:01Shambles!One thing one day, one thing the next. Yesterday he was
0:03:01 > 0:03:09asked could devote the after March 2019. The answer was yes. Yesterday
0:03:09 > 0:03:16the Prime Minister had a go at correcting him, then his own
0:03:16 > 0:03:22spokesperson had to clarify the remarks. That is not good enough.
0:03:22 > 0:03:24Can I remind the Secretary of State that the commitment he has referred
0:03:24 > 0:03:29to which was made at this dispatch box that we would have a meaningful
0:03:29 > 0:03:34vote, was made when the government was on the verge of losing a vote,
0:03:34 > 0:03:39the Labour amendment to the Article 50 Bill, to give that vote. That
0:03:39 > 0:03:45commitment cannot now casually be dispensed with. The text of Article
0:03:45 > 0:03:4950 is clear. There can be no deal until European Parliament has
0:03:49 > 0:03:52approved it and voted on it. The nonsense yesterday about nanoseconds
0:03:52 > 0:03:57has to be put in that proper context. It will be completely
0:03:57 > 0:04:01unacceptable that time was found for the European Parliament to vote on
0:04:01 > 0:04:08the deal before it is completed, but time was not found for this House.
0:04:08 > 0:04:12The Prime Minister expects us to continue watching on our screens the
0:04:12 > 0:04:14European Parliament proceedings while we are told we do not have
0:04:14 > 0:04:20time. I do not think some. We need a guarantee that will not happen. The
0:04:20 > 0:04:23Secretary of State has repeatedly asked us to accept his word that the
0:04:23 > 0:04:27dispatch box. Given the events of the last 24 hours, will he now
0:04:27 > 0:04:31accept the amendments then to Withdrawal Bill that the Article 50
0:04:31 > 0:04:35meaningful vote should be put into law so we all know where to stand
0:04:35 > 0:04:40and we do not have to repeat this exercise?
0:04:40 > 0:04:43The honourable gentleman I'm afraid altered the quotation from
0:04:43 > 0:04:49yesterday. What he said was, and I refer to it the exactly, it is
0:04:49 > 0:04:55possible that Parliament might not vote on a deal until after 2019. I'm
0:04:55 > 0:04:58summarising what you said, I said in the event we don't do the deal
0:04:58 > 0:05:04before then. That is the point I was making. What I've also said and I
0:05:04 > 0:05:07will take up his point on the European Parliament. It is our
0:05:07 > 0:05:11intent and expectation, those are the words used, I crafted them, that
0:05:11 > 0:05:16we will vote on this in this House before the European Parliament. That
0:05:16 > 0:05:24stands. If it goes to the time table that Mr Barnier expects, which is
0:05:24 > 0:05:32October of 2018, it is likely the European Parliament will vote
0:05:32 > 0:05:36December, January, we will vote on that, we will have that before the
0:05:36 > 0:05:40House before then. There is no doubt about that. That undertaking is
0:05:40 > 0:05:44absolutely cast iron. The issue that I raised yesterday, because I take
0:05:44 > 0:05:52it as a responsibility always to be as forthright as open as I can, was
0:05:52 > 0:05:57to go through what has happened in the past in the treaty negotiations.
0:05:57 > 0:06:06There is an expectations by the commission, there is an enSentive on
0:06:06 > 0:06:10behalf of the countries to get this done. And this an expectation from
0:06:10 > 0:06:14ourselves. None of the undertakings have been undermined. The issue here
0:06:14 > 0:06:20is one of practicality and what we control. What we control we will run
0:06:20 > 0:06:28to give Parliament a prop erp and meaning vote at the right time.Mr
0:06:28 > 0:06:36Dominic Grieve.I understand my honourable friend's concern about a
0:06:36 > 0:06:39hypothetical situation that might arise at the end of the negotiation.
0:06:39 > 0:06:45Is not the reality if this negotiation leads to an an
0:06:45 > 0:06:51agreement, then it is necessary for the European Parliament and
0:06:51 > 0:07:03ourselves to act i accordance with our constitution to do so. So having
0:07:03 > 0:07:09reached a deal with the EU they would hold news some strange way to
0:07:09 > 0:07:13ransom, because we say we need time to enact the statute. This flies in
0:07:13 > 0:07:21the face of reality and it would tone down the debate and bring some
0:07:21 > 0:07:29rationality if we understood our European partners would expect us to
0:07:29 > 0:07:35reach our own conclusion.The reason, as I understand it, that Mr
0:07:35 > 0:07:41Barnier wants to conclude the negotiations, including that element
0:07:41 > 0:07:46of Article 50 which refer to the future arrangements, by October, is
0:07:46 > 0:07:50in order to enable that representation process to take
0:07:50 > 0:07:59place. In that respect I agree with him.Secretary of State could he
0:07:59 > 0:08:04face the House. I'm delighted to be faced by the honourable gentleman,
0:08:04 > 0:08:11but that should be enjoyed by the House as a whole. Mr Peter Grant.
0:08:11 > 0:08:18Thank you very much Mr Speaker. We have a withdrawal bill which has not
0:08:18 > 0:08:26been delayed, but hasn't come to the House when we expected it to. We
0:08:26 > 0:08:32have the former UK ambassador to the EU telling us, that the Prime
0:08:32 > 0:08:36Minister's approach to negotiations is in danger of leaving the UK
0:08:36 > 0:08:42screwed in the negotiations. The negotiations have been led by
0:08:42 > 0:08:47somebody who this Czechoslavakia is one of the countries we are
0:08:47 > 0:08:51negotiating with. But that country is split into two part and the two
0:08:51 > 0:08:56parts are still on speaking terms. The government refuses to publish
0:08:56 > 0:09:08the truth about the impact of Brexit, saying it is confidential.
0:09:08 > 0:09:11Despite publishing what will happen in the event of Scottish
0:09:11 > 0:09:15independence. And the Government tries to bailout the failing
0:09:15 > 0:09:22Secretary of State for Brexit. Will Secretary of State to confirm for
0:09:22 > 0:09:29any vote to be meaningful we must have the facts and can we have sight
0:09:29 > 0:09:34of an sis before that vote -- analysis before that vote. And the
0:09:34 > 0:09:40three devolved nations will be treated as equals and will have a
0:09:40 > 0:09:47timeous and meaning vote before we leave the EU?Before I answer his
0:09:47 > 0:09:51substantive question, may I correct him, the minister involved, when he
0:09:51 > 0:09:58talked about Czechoslavakia, he was correcting somebody else. I would
0:09:58 > 0:10:07prefer that to be on the record. With the full facts? Absolutely.
0:10:07 > 0:10:13That is why the vote must take place. At that point we will know
0:10:13 > 0:10:17what it is the withdrawal deal amounts to and the frame work of the
0:10:17 > 0:10:23future arrangement is.Given the way that the European Union have delayed
0:10:23 > 0:10:32and delayed, it is no unreasonable that my honourable friend should
0:10:32 > 0:10:39consider they're going to carry on delaying. Would he impress on Mr
0:10:39 > 0:10:44Barnier that in fact it would be much more preferable to conclude a
0:10:44 > 0:10:50deal as early as possible, otherwise any implementation period will be of
0:10:50 > 0:10:54far less value if business is not certain it is going to be available
0:10:54 > 0:10:59to them sooner rather than later.My honourable friend is right and that
0:10:59 > 0:11:03is one of the things I said to the committee yesterday, that we will
0:11:03 > 0:11:09try to get the commission to agree the implementation period as soon as
0:11:09 > 0:11:13possible.The Secretary of State said to the committee that the
0:11:13 > 0:11:20Government's aim is to conclude one agreement covering the divorce, the
0:11:20 > 0:11:25transitional arrangements and the new partnership with the EU. But he
0:11:25 > 0:11:29has accepted also that the last of those three has to be agreed by a
0:11:29 > 0:11:33different process, because that deal could not be finally concluded until
0:11:33 > 0:11:38we had left the EU. Given that it the is likely to be a mixed
0:11:38 > 0:11:42agreement, only one Parliament objecting to it would mean it
0:11:42 > 0:11:45couldn't be concluded. Would in those circumstances that bring down
0:11:45 > 0:11:50the whole of deal and if that is the case, is it not sensible to separate
0:11:50 > 0:11:55out the divorce and the transition which would not require the consent
0:11:55 > 0:12:01of every Parliament of 27 and the new partnership which ought to be
0:12:01 > 0:12:06negotiated during the transition?As I think I said yesterday,
0:12:06 > 0:12:11negotiating the transition would put us in a negotiating disadvantage.
0:12:11 > 0:12:17The point that the House was told or the promise given to the House on
0:12:17 > 0:12:21the approval of the negotiation was that both elements, or all three
0:12:21 > 0:12:26elements of it would be put to the House together toe divorce, the
0:12:26 > 0:12:29transition and the long-term arrangement. And that's the best way
0:12:29 > 0:12:37to assess this. The previous member from the Scottish National Party
0:12:37 > 0:12:40said the decision should be made with all the facts. All the
0:12:40 > 0:12:44decision, all the facts.There is a way for the Government to put this
0:12:44 > 0:12:48matter beyond doubt and that is to accept the amendment 7 to the
0:12:48 > 0:12:52withdrawal bill laid by my honourable friend the member for
0:12:52 > 0:13:00beckons field. Reports have reached members on this side that the
0:13:00 > 0:13:03Secretary of State doesn't think those Conservative members are
0:13:03 > 0:13:09serious about supporting it. Can I tell him we are deadly serious and
0:13:09 > 0:13:15it is better the Government adopt a concession sooner rather than later
0:13:15 > 0:13:22for all concerned.I won't pre-empt the discussions, but those reports
0:13:22 > 0:13:33are not true.With the minister of state saying one thing tr that
0:13:33 > 0:13:37dispatch on 7th February this year and the Secretary of State saying
0:13:37 > 0:13:44not one thing, but two things in the space of 24 hours yesterday, it is
0:13:44 > 0:13:50clear that ministerial assurances on this matter are not enough. Does the
0:13:50 > 0:13:55Secretary of State does agree that after the shambles of the last 24
0:13:55 > 0:14:01hours where he had to be rebutted by his spokesman, the only way to
0:14:01 > 0:14:06guarantee Parliament a meaningful say and input into these most vital
0:14:06 > 0:14:12of negotiations is to amend the EU withdrawal bill?No, I don't agree
0:14:12 > 0:14:19with him on that. And his description of events is also wrong.
0:14:19 > 0:14:22There is one thing to give an undertaking, which is binding and
0:14:22 > 0:14:26another to say these are the probabilities and difficulties we
0:14:26 > 0:14:33face. I treated
0:14:33 > 0:14:35absolute respect in outlining what had happened previously. Not what we
0:14:35 > 0:14:38expect or intend, not what the union intends, but what had happened, a
0:14:38 > 0:14:44risk we have to take on board and we intend to meet all our undertakings.
0:14:44 > 0:14:52I don't take it very well that he suggests we don't.How would we
0:14:52 > 0:14:56approve an agreement before we have an agreement?My honourable friend
0:14:56 > 0:15:01makes a very good point. We wouldn't. That is why the House will
0:15:01 > 0:15:10be given to approve at soon as possible at the draft -- draft
0:15:10 > 0:15:22stage.Hardly a days goes by without another example of the Government
0:15:22 > 0:15:30being in a mulledle -- muddle. It is not about leave or remain, but the
0:15:30 > 0:15:33nation standing together, could the Secretary of State confirm what he
0:15:33 > 0:15:38understands by the term meaningful, does it still mean a choice between
0:15:38 > 0:15:42leaving the EU with a negotiated deal or not? If Parliament votes
0:15:42 > 0:15:48against a deal, what happens next? In the case of no deal, would the
0:15:48 > 0:15:52Government expect to leave the EU without a vote of the UK Parliament
0:15:52 > 0:15:57or would the Prime Minister seek further time. Is the vote meaningful
0:15:57 > 0:16:02if there is nothing it can change and has he taken into account that
0:16:02 > 0:16:07next year the European Parliament will dissolving for elections if we
0:16:07 > 0:16:14are delayed beyond October, won't your deal be left in limbo.Since, I
0:16:14 > 0:16:18have lost count of questions, the lady is challenging the status of
0:16:18 > 0:16:22statements from the box. The choice will be meaningful, whether to
0:16:22 > 0:16:28accept the deal or move ahead without it. Full stop. That was the
0:16:28 > 0:16:35promise made before.I listened to the chairman of the select committee
0:16:35 > 0:16:39and I wanted the House to know that is his view and not everyone on the
0:16:39 > 0:16:48committee. Well... In the past, select committee chairman have come
0:16:48 > 0:16:54to the House to represent the committee and not their own personal
0:16:54 > 0:17:00view. I'm diverging and wasting the House's time. I will get to the
0:17:00 > 0:17:04point. I would like the Secretary of State to agree with the members on
0:17:04 > 0:17:09the other side that in fact if we don't have agreement by October
0:17:09 > 0:17:132018, it will be impossible to do a deal. Would the Secretary of State
0:17:13 > 0:17:19go back to Brussels and say, we haven't got a deal by 26th October,
0:17:19 > 0:17:25there won't be a deal and we will be coming out without one?The
0:17:25 > 0:17:30honourable gentleman is trying to tempt me. No, it is my job to get
0:17:30 > 0:17:35the best deal possible. If it means going to November, so be it. That is
0:17:35 > 0:17:50what we will do.There was a hubbub a moment ago, to the matter to rest,
0:17:50 > 0:17:55if the chair of a select committee comes to the House to make a
0:17:55 > 0:18:00statement, a relatively recent innovation, of course the chair is
0:18:00 > 0:18:06doing so on behalf of the committee. However, it is perfectly commonplace
0:18:06 > 0:18:10for sect committee chairs to come to the chamber and to ask questions and
0:18:10 > 0:18:15I think it is understood that they are doing so on their own account
0:18:15 > 0:18:21and taking responsibility for their own words. A proposition to which...
0:18:21 > 0:18:35To name but two at random, the members of member for Highgate and
0:18:35 > 0:18:44another can sign up.The Foreign Secretary went around this country
0:18:44 > 0:18:48saying £350 extra a week for the NHS if we voted to leave. That is not
0:18:48 > 0:18:53going to happen. The Environment Secretary said the 3 million EU
0:18:53 > 0:18:56citizens in this country would be granted the right to remain. That
0:18:56 > 0:19:00has not happened. This Secretary of State said this House will get a
0:19:00 > 0:19:04vote on withdrawal before we leave and that doesn't look like it is
0:19:04 > 0:19:08guaranteed to happen either. Why should we believe anything that is
0:19:08 > 0:19:13said at this dispatch box? We have to take what they say with a
0:19:13 > 0:19:22lorry-load of salt.As I understand it, I think he was referring to the
0:19:22 > 0:19:28leave campaigner, they weren't made at the dispatch box. So that is not
0:19:28 > 0:19:38correct. The undertaking I gave will stand and does stand. No further.I
0:19:38 > 0:19:44believe that no deal would be a very bad deal indeed for this country. If
0:19:44 > 0:19:50the House votes on the final deal and it rejects a final deal, is the
0:19:50 > 0:19:54Secretary of State implying those who vote against it are saying they
0:19:54 > 0:20:01would like to leave with no deal at all?
0:20:01 > 0:20:04All I was doing was repeating the statement made at the dispatch box
0:20:04 > 0:20:14at the time. Pat answer is not good enough. This is a critical question.
0:20:14 > 0:20:18He says of the House votes against the deal, it could be a bad deal,
0:20:18 > 0:20:21the government will move ahead without a deal. Does that mean the
0:20:21 > 0:20:29only choice is to crash out under WTO terms, or does it leave open the
0:20:29 > 0:20:36option to continue to negotiate or stay in concurrent terms?I said
0:20:36 > 0:20:42exactly the answer to the question, what was given by the Minister at
0:20:42 > 0:20:51the time to the Article 50 debate. Could he confirm it remains his
0:20:51 > 0:20:53intention and that of the Prime Minister to make regular reports to
0:20:53 > 0:20:59the House of the negotiations with the European Union, and does he
0:20:59 > 0:21:10agree with me that it is always open to have these negotiations under the
0:21:10 > 0:21:13utmost scrutiny?He knows the subject better than most, given I
0:21:13 > 0:21:19have been quoting him throughout much of it. During the Article 50
0:21:19 > 0:21:23Bill, I made the point number of times that the will be many votes on
0:21:23 > 0:21:34many aspects of the deal is coming up. Pienaar reports coming up, the
0:21:34 > 0:21:41Withdrawal Bill, the nuclear Rovers Oversight bill and other primary
0:21:41 > 0:21:47legislation. As well as what the undertakens have been given, they
0:21:47 > 0:21:51were given over and above the constitutional reform and governance
0:21:51 > 0:21:57act 2010. That means that any treaty, and there may well be a
0:21:57 > 0:22:06number, as the chairman said, any treaty is subject to being denied
0:22:06 > 0:22:10ratification by the vault of this House. A point that should not be
0:22:10 > 0:22:16forgotten in the process.Does the Secretary of State accept that a
0:22:16 > 0:22:20meaningful vote will be a vote who allows Parliament to send the
0:22:20 > 0:22:23government back to the negotiating table rather than the false choice
0:22:23 > 0:22:29between a deal and no deal, and if Parliament is offered a meaningful
0:22:29 > 0:22:36vote, so should the public, a vote on the facts.I know his party's
0:22:36 > 0:22:41policy has been for a second referendum, I do not think any other
0:22:41 > 0:22:49party believes that.It was a meaningful vote, in June 2016, and
0:22:49 > 0:22:55on a 70% turnout, 61% of voters in Kettering voted to leave. In
0:22:55 > 0:22:58Kettering, people are honest and plain speaking, can the Secretary of
0:22:58 > 0:23:02State reassure them that we are leaving the European Union in March
0:23:02 > 0:23:102019?The answer to my honourable friend is yes, and my task is to
0:23:10 > 0:23:15respect the vote because it is the biggest mandate given to a modern
0:23:15 > 0:23:19government, and to deliver the best deal possible which means a deal,
0:23:19 > 0:23:29not no deal, the best deal possible respecting their vote.The wording
0:23:29 > 0:23:34of amendment seven to the Withdrawal Bill is clear, it says the prior
0:23:34 > 0:23:37enactment of statute by parliament approving the final terms of
0:23:37 > 0:23:40withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, which
0:23:40 > 0:23:43should be of concern to all of us across this House, whatever form
0:23:43 > 0:23:49Brexit we want, whatever divorce Bill we think is acceptable. This is
0:23:49 > 0:23:54a simple matter, about Parliament having its say and been guaranteed
0:23:54 > 0:23:59about the bill, so will he accept amendment seven put forward a
0:23:59 > 0:24:06similar one to the government? Yes or no?I am not here to preview the
0:24:06 > 0:24:11committee stage. But I take very seriously the views of this House in
0:24:11 > 0:24:17the matter, and I expect there will be any number of votes, I have just
0:24:17 > 0:24:23referred to the governance act as one element of it, but it will not
0:24:23 > 0:24:37be the only one,...He said there will be a vote at the right time.
0:24:37 > 0:24:42Can he confirm that the right time is before a deal being signed and
0:24:42 > 0:24:47before we leave the European Union in March 2019?The right time has to
0:24:47 > 0:24:58be when we have a draft treaty in front of us. It will be prior to
0:24:58 > 0:25:02ratification by the European ratification process, starting with
0:25:02 > 0:25:05the European Parliament. We have made that undertaking. It has to be
0:25:05 > 0:25:10after that is done in order for the House to be involved. Otherwise it
0:25:10 > 0:25:15will be as soon as possible, and before the European Parliament has
0:25:15 > 0:25:29this opportunity, therefore before the process goes ahead.Surely the
0:25:29 > 0:25:36point is a fait accomplis is not right, but it is being presented as
0:25:36 > 0:25:39this. If he was not a government minister, he would be signing the
0:25:39 > 0:25:44honourable member's amendment, so between now and then, just in case
0:25:44 > 0:25:49he were to lose his job, would it not be a good idea now that he is
0:25:49 > 0:25:57going to sign up to that amendment? Will I be signing someone else's
0:25:57 > 0:26:05amendment? I'm not sure. LAUGHTERI think not.
0:26:05 > 0:26:12The processes we are going to designed to the House a great deal
0:26:12 > 0:26:18of this process, including the sequences of statements, appearances
0:26:18 > 0:26:24of the select committee, urgent questions and the like. He has
0:26:24 > 0:26:32ignored that it gives the House the great ability to reject it if she
0:26:32 > 0:26:40chooses to.The truth is that we return a £70 billion trade deficit
0:26:40 > 0:26:43with the European Union. Does he believe that will help to focus
0:26:43 > 0:26:50minds and keep these discussions and deliberations on timetable?He is
0:26:50 > 0:26:56right in that it drives the views of the member states to what they want
0:26:56 > 0:27:00out of the negotiation. One of the things that is happening between now
0:27:00 > 0:27:05and December is the council will lay down on the guidelines for the
0:27:05 > 0:27:07process. Those guidelines were particularly about the future trade
0:27:07 > 0:27:12arrangement. In those guidelines it may well be that the council says
0:27:12 > 0:27:22something about the issues in front of the House.Yesterday the
0:27:22 > 0:27:27Secretary of State exiting the EU select committee that he spoke with
0:27:27 > 0:27:29leaders of various European Parliament is because he knows that
0:27:29 > 0:27:37they will have a vote on the final deal, and he said he wanted to
0:27:37 > 0:27:41discuss trade issues with them. Will he involve the Scottish Parliament,
0:27:41 > 0:27:44Welsh Assembly and the Northern Irish assembly in relation to trade
0:27:44 > 0:27:49matters, and will he confirm that the Scottish Parliament, Welsh
0:27:49 > 0:27:52Assembly and the Northern Irish assembly will get a vote on the
0:27:52 > 0:28:00final deal, as other regional parliaments will?I think I told her
0:28:00 > 0:28:03yesterday that at the last joint ministerial committee on European
0:28:03 > 0:28:08committee I did talk about the economic impact within each of the
0:28:08 > 0:28:13devolved administrations and sports about information exchanges to
0:28:13 > 0:28:22influence that process.My right honourable friend will be aware of
0:28:22 > 0:28:26the 18 Labour MEPs who recently voted to hold up these key EU
0:28:26 > 0:28:32negotiations, showing a distinct lack of ambition about moving
0:28:32 > 0:28:36forward on the key issue, which is our trading agreements. We should be
0:28:36 > 0:28:40pulling together in the national interests to secure the best
0:28:40 > 0:28:48possible deal and outcome, that is what all the constituents want.
0:28:48 > 0:28:55She's right, but let me say this, I have never accused my opposite
0:28:55 > 0:28:58number of being anything other than interested in the national interest.
0:28:58 > 0:29:08I should also say that I took his views as his views, not the select
0:29:08 > 0:29:13committee as well. It is very important that we keep this on a
0:29:13 > 0:29:16proper, stable, rational and patriotically level, I think
0:29:16 > 0:29:23everybody does.Will he ignore the voices of manic optimism that seem
0:29:23 > 0:29:26to be compulsory on his side and agree that the choice that will be
0:29:26 > 0:29:33made on this final deal will be very, very different to the choice
0:29:33 > 0:29:40made on the 23rd of June, 2016, and doesn't he believe that
0:29:40 > 0:29:43well-informed second thoughts are always superior to ill informed her
0:29:43 > 0:29:51spots?I respect the views of 17.5 million people and intend to uphold
0:29:51 > 0:29:58them, unlike the honourable gentleman.Is it his view that since
0:29:58 > 0:30:03the Florence speech there has been a change of tone in UK capitals, and
0:30:03 > 0:30:10Michel Barnier is far from alone is wanting to secure as good a deal is
0:30:10 > 0:30:17possible?Yes, the speech had a massive impact on the European Union
0:30:17 > 0:30:27and commission. And certainly, Mr Barnier, Mr Juncker and Mr Tusk have
0:30:27 > 0:30:33said as much.People in this House think the promises he has given are
0:30:33 > 0:30:40merely empty words, given that the particle -- -- the problems
0:30:40 > 0:30:46yesterday. Can remove on to other issues, and can he give one good
0:30:46 > 0:30:51reason that he will not put it on the face of it?They are not empty
0:30:51 > 0:30:54words, they were said in the undertakings. They were given in
0:30:54 > 0:31:01those terms.I would like to thank the Secretary of State for the
0:31:01 > 0:31:05tremendous amount of work he and his team are doing to achieving the best
0:31:05 > 0:31:09possible outcome for the United Kingdom, and I know he is a true
0:31:09 > 0:31:12parliamentarian and would expect us to vote on the matter before we
0:31:12 > 0:31:22leave the EU and not after. Could I ask, there are three issues, the
0:31:22 > 0:31:27issue of the withdrawal, the issue of the transitional or
0:31:27 > 0:31:30implementation, and the issue of the final agreement. The first Welcome
0:31:30 > 0:31:41to BBC Parliament's live coverage of the House of Commons.
0:31:46 > 0:31:54-- we should talk about this before the details are sorted out.As the
0:31:54 > 0:31:57chairman of the select committee said, there are three components of
0:31:57 > 0:32:05this, but they are not unrelated. With Article 50 itself saying that
0:32:05 > 0:32:14taking into account the future of the relationship. We attend that
0:32:14 > 0:32:18they are conditional on one another. The reason for that as it would have
0:32:18 > 0:32:27a material impact on the negotiation to separate them completely. That is
0:32:27 > 0:32:34what was asked for during the passage of the Article 50 Bill. With
0:32:34 > 0:32:39respect to the future relationship, as the Prime Minister said in
0:32:39 > 0:32:45Florence, article 218 says it cannot be signed until shortly after we are
0:32:45 > 0:32:49third country in effect. It is also the case that it is likely to be
0:32:49 > 0:32:54more than one treaty for reasons of interest and benefit to ourselves,
0:32:54 > 0:32:59so the House will have multiple occasions to look at that separately
0:32:59 > 0:33:01to the overall decision, and I think that is in the interests of
0:33:01 > 0:33:13democracy.The issue we debating today goes to the heart of the trust
0:33:13 > 0:33:18and confidence that the British people should have in our
0:33:18 > 0:33:22parliamentary democracy, and the sad reality is that ministerial
0:33:22 > 0:33:25assurances are no longer good enough. The Secretary of State has
0:33:25 > 0:33:28said he will not sign somebody else's amendment, so why does he not
0:33:28 > 0:33:31table his own amendment to the Withdrawal Bill to give this House
0:33:31 > 0:33:37and the British people the clarity and coherence that is so desperately
0:33:37 > 0:33:44needed?He was there yesterday, he saw that I was answering questions
0:33:44 > 0:33:52as straightforwardly and factually as possible. I described facts, not
0:33:52 > 0:34:01promises. His own colleague said yesterday, I do not doubt assurances
0:34:01 > 0:34:07that the dispatch box. I think that is the proper approach.I wish the
0:34:07 > 0:34:11Secretary of State well with his negotiations with Mr Barnier, and I
0:34:11 > 0:34:15pledge I will do nothing that could ever be interpreted as trying to
0:34:15 > 0:34:21undermine these negotiations with him. We have had 11 referendums
0:34:21 > 0:34:26since 1975, can he think of one that we have gone against the wishes of
0:34:26 > 0:34:31the British people? And we also accept that as a Democrat, I am
0:34:31 > 0:34:35deadly serious that at the end of this process, we will be leaving the
0:34:35 > 0:34:42European Union.There have been references from the other side to my
0:34:42 > 0:34:45commitment to Parliament, by making commitment to Parliament is an
0:34:45 > 0:34:48indirect commitment to the democracy of the British people, and that is
0:34:48 > 0:34:54what matters. 17.5 million people voted for it. We have to deliver the
0:34:54 > 0:35:02best outcome on that decision.
0:35:02 > 0:35:08We mustn't allow this exchange to allied into a general discussion of
0:35:08 > 0:35:13the merits of EU membership or withdrawal. That is not the subject
0:35:13 > 0:35:20matter, the subject matter as I have been helpfully reminded by our
0:35:20 > 0:35:27procedural king the question of whether there is a meaningful vote.
0:35:27 > 0:35:33On a deal. That is the dmar narrow question and questions should focus
0:35:33 > 0:35:42on that matter.In the bill the Secretary o' of state is taking the
0:35:42 > 0:35:48power to set the exit date. So will he now acknowledge that he can allow
0:35:48 > 0:35:54Parliament as much time as it needs to take the primary legislation to
0:35:54 > 0:36:02approve the new arrangements?What we are doing is, we are taking our
0:36:02 > 0:36:07power, but the power doesn't give us the right to overrule Article 50,
0:36:07 > 0:36:17which takes us out of European Union in March 2019.Rob Blackman.Under
0:36:17 > 0:36:22the terms of the withdrawal, the Government has announced measures,
0:36:22 > 0:36:28some eight different bills that will be brought before Parliament and go
0:36:28 > 0:36:31through the Parliamentary procedures, one of those is the
0:36:31 > 0:36:35Immigration Bill. Is it the Government's intention to take that
0:36:35 > 0:36:39Immigration Bill through its Parliamentary stages before we vote
0:36:39 > 0:36:43on the final deal, or will that Immigration Bill be brought before
0:36:43 > 0:36:47Parliament after we have agreed a deal, because that could affect our
0:36:47 > 0:36:54negotiation strategy.It will be before. Before the... The deal I
0:36:54 > 0:36:59would expect any way, unless it goes much faster than I expect. That is
0:36:59 > 0:37:04true not just with that but with most of the eight bills he refers
0:37:04 > 0:37:10to.I think the general public will be bemused at the contrived
0:37:10 > 0:37:15controversy that has developed here, because even the most uninformed
0:37:15 > 0:37:23observer will know you vote have a vote on an a agreement until you
0:37:23 > 0:37:30have an agreement. A stand alone, unspecified transitional arrangement
0:37:30 > 0:37:34and the mixed messages about the willingness to respect the wishes of
0:37:34 > 0:37:40the people of the United Kingdom is likely to encourage EU negotiators
0:37:40 > 0:37:44to delay any agreement and the consequences for that could be we
0:37:44 > 0:37:50keep on paying money into the EU when we don't need to.I agree that
0:37:50 > 0:37:56there is a degree of contrivance in the fuss and noise from the other
0:37:56 > 0:38:04side. That is not new I guess. With respect to the ongoing transitional
0:38:04 > 0:38:08period, he is right, that is why I said if we let the negotiation go
0:38:08 > 0:38:13into that period we will be at a disadvantage, because the EU will be
0:38:13 > 0:38:17receiving money presumably if that was the arrange, over time and would
0:38:17 > 0:38:23want the spin it out. We have to be sensible if we intend to respect the
0:38:23 > 0:38:30will of the British people and deliver the best outcome for them.
0:38:30 > 0:38:36The Secretary of State will know more of my constituencies voted to
0:38:36 > 0:38:43get us out of EU, does he agree as more damaging is the idea we should
0:38:43 > 0:38:48have a second referendum or start talking about the idea that we may
0:38:48 > 0:38:55not leave at all?He is right, I think he has take an more
0:38:55 > 0:38:58outstanding stance, given his own views and the views of his
0:38:58 > 0:39:07constituents. We have to respect that vote and not undermine it.We
0:39:07 > 0:39:11want to be assured that Parliamentarians will have a
0:39:11 > 0:39:16meaningful vote. My constituents have understood all along that I
0:39:16 > 0:39:19would come here to vote to represent their best interests and that would
0:39:19 > 0:39:23make a difference. Can I say to the Secretary of State while I'm sure he
0:39:23 > 0:39:26means what he is saying to the House, the assurance can only be
0:39:26 > 0:39:36there for the future if it is on the face of the bill and ask him to
0:39:36 > 0:39:41accept either amendment 7 or bring forward his own amendment.I accept
0:39:41 > 0:39:45what the lady is meant. But the intention of the Government is to
0:39:45 > 0:39:50create a circumstance where this House has an appropriate influence
0:39:50 > 0:39:55without undermining the negotiation. That is what we are trying to do.Mr
0:39:55 > 0:39:59Speaker, I'm sure the Secretary of State will have reflected on the
0:39:59 > 0:40:01fact that unlike many other negotiations we start from a
0:40:01 > 0:40:06position where we have the same regulatory position and the same
0:40:06 > 0:40:10law, would this mean there is plenty of time to have a full and frank
0:40:10 > 0:40:13negotiation and come to a deal and to have a vote in the Parliament on
0:40:13 > 0:40:20it?Yes, exactly. This is a unique trade negotiation in which two
0:40:20 > 0:40:25things. One we are at the point of having open trade at the moment.
0:40:25 > 0:40:30Secondly there is a vast amount, something like 600 billion euros of
0:40:30 > 0:40:34trade going on at the moment. So there is a strong vested interest in
0:40:34 > 0:40:41protecting that.May I say this in friendly terms to the Secretary of
0:40:41 > 0:40:48State, that we stop fudging. This is a complex matter and the people of
0:40:48 > 0:40:52this country deserve clarity. We understand and sympathise why he
0:40:52 > 0:40:58fudged yesterday and that is why he is here today, because of the nest
0:40:58 > 0:41:03of vipers behind him and in the cabinet make him a fudger. Stop
0:41:03 > 0:41:05fudging, be honest with the British people.I have known the honourable
0:41:05 > 0:41:10gentleman a long time and I always get nervous when he starts a
0:41:10 > 0:41:14question, may I put in the friendliest of terms! And I think we
0:41:14 > 0:41:19are having this discussion because I didn't fudge yesterday. I told the
0:41:19 > 0:41:24committee what I saw the facts were and it is no way changed our intent
0:41:24 > 0:41:36or our commitment to the House. There was a certain amount of
0:41:36 > 0:41:50harumph-ing, and I observe that none of my Parliamentary colleagues is a
0:41:50 > 0:41:58viper. However I would say this is a matter of taste raer rather than
0:41:58 > 0:42:03order.Would the Secretary of State agree that if we are to have a
0:42:03 > 0:42:08meaningful vote on the final deal, it would be better if all members of
0:42:08 > 0:42:12the House engaged constructively in the proceedings, rather than seek to
0:42:12 > 0:42:17frustrate the will of the British people.I couldn't put it better
0:42:17 > 0:42:27myself.Given the confusion from yesterday, will the Secretary of
0:42:27 > 0:42:33State publish a written time table of what he expects the sequence of
0:42:33 > 0:42:37decision-making will be both here in the UK and in the European
0:42:37 > 0:42:47Parliament and just in case he is inclined to say no, why not.If I
0:42:47 > 0:42:50controlled the time table I would do so, but it is a negotiation, so I
0:42:50 > 0:43:05don't.It is a dangerous and sinister anti-intellectualism. Will
0:43:05 > 0:43:09the Secretary of State undertake before a meaningful vote he will
0:43:09 > 0:43:17publish his own Government's impacts assessment on the effects of Brexit?
0:43:17 > 0:43:22It is not anti-intellectual. I will abide by the instruction I guess of
0:43:22 > 0:43:27this House, which it passed by a large majority last year to provide
0:43:27 > 0:43:31as much information as possible without undermining the interests of
0:43:31 > 0:43:40the country.The UK Government has got itself into an unnecessary
0:43:40 > 0:43:46muddle, as has been set out, if there is a final deal it must be
0:43:46 > 0:43:52ratified by the EU 27, six months have been allocated to that. To
0:43:52 > 0:43:55ensure the future relationship works for every part of British state,
0:43:55 > 0:43:59does he not agree that formal endorsement of National Assembly of
0:43:59 > 0:44:05Wales and the Northern Irish Assembly should be sought before a
0:44:05 > 0:44:10deal is sought or is it a case of Westminster knows best?To the first
0:44:10 > 0:44:15half of his question, one of the reasons we said that it, we would
0:44:15 > 0:44:19put a draft deal to the House is because we want to give the House
0:44:19 > 0:44:22the first say before the European Parliament and other institutions
0:44:22 > 0:44:35came to it. And this is a treaty for the United Kingdom.In his
0:44:35 > 0:44:38discussions with Michel Barnier, what is the late date this
0:44:38 > 0:44:42Parliament can have a vote before the European Parliament has its
0:44:42 > 0:44:48ratification vote?As I said, what Mr Barnier is aiming for is October
0:44:48 > 0:44:54of next year as a draft, as outcome for the draft agreement. If we hit
0:44:54 > 0:45:00that, then the lightly time table, as I think I said to the honourable
0:45:00 > 0:45:03gentleman, is the European Parliament would address that in
0:45:03 > 0:45:08December or January or even later. And the undertaking I gave was we
0:45:08 > 0:45:14would come to this House before then.Mr Alan Brown.Thank you Mr
0:45:14 > 0:45:18Speaker, the Secretary of State's pledge that the meaningful will be
0:45:18 > 0:45:24taken and we will have full knowledge of all the facts, so when
0:45:24 > 0:45:28will he issue impact analysis the Government has taken that shows the
0:45:28 > 0:45:32possible detriment to Scotland so I can explain to my constituents the
0:45:32 > 0:45:41reasons for making the vote that I'm going to make?As I said yesterday,
0:45:41 > 0:45:45the last, we did discuss some of the matters with the devolved
0:45:45 > 0:45:49administrations at an official level before we do into the negotiation.
0:45:49 > 0:45:54So they can influence the negotiation. Take into account the
0:45:54 > 0:45:59impact of it by sector and by country.Karen Smith.I think we
0:45:59 > 0:46:03have learned that the Government will not accept amendment 7 in the
0:46:03 > 0:46:06name of the member and the Government will not table its own
0:46:06 > 0:46:11amendment. Can the Secretary of State guarantee at least we will
0:46:11 > 0:46:17have a vote on a deal-deal strategy? She starts by attributing to me a
0:46:17 > 0:46:20lot of things I have not said, because I have not gone into the
0:46:20 > 0:46:28questions of whoo what would be the House at committee stage. And the
0:46:28 > 0:46:32meaningful vote will be as laid out in the undertaking to the House by
0:46:32 > 0:46:38my honourable friend the minister at the time.Jeff Smith.The Secretary
0:46:38 > 0:46:43of State can keep parroting the words, the undertaken given to this
0:46:43 > 0:46:51House, be I but that is meaningless unless we know what happens after
0:46:51 > 0:46:57the a vote. What does he mean by we move ahead without a deal?Well, I
0:46:57 > 0:47:02would have thought that would have been self-evident. What we intent
0:47:02 > 0:47:08however is that the House will have put to bitty Government the deal we
0:47:08 > 0:47:13will negotiate, which will be the best deal we can get respecting the
0:47:13 > 0:47:18decision of 17 and a half million. So bring back control to this
0:47:18 > 0:47:23country and deal with the borders issue and money and the future
0:47:23 > 0:47:32relationship. And the House will decide whether it approves of that.
0:47:32 > 0:47:42Point.
0:47:42 > 0:47:53A new criteria that a point of order be made. I will give him the benefit
0:47:53 > 0:48:01of doubt.How can I get it on to the record that I'm in fact the
0:48:01 > 0:48:13Parliamentary species champion for the smooth snake and not the Viper?
0:48:13 > 0:48:16The honourable gentleman has achieved the early gratification
0:48:16 > 0:48:23that he sought. I'm sure his observations will be of consuming
0:48:23 > 0:48:34interest, not least to scribblers.