Live Exiting the European Union Questions House of Commons

round-up of the day in both Houses

of Parliament at 11pm. First,

questions to David Davis and his

mystical team. -- ministerial.

I will answer questions one and 18,

we focused on making the exit from

the EU and our new trading

relationship a success, we set out

proposals which minimises barriers

to goods and services. Partnerships

should be underpinned by high

standards, trusts in its juices and

a shared spirit of cooperation.

Does he agree with me regulatory

equivalence should be a red line in

our negotiations if we want to do

trade deals with other countries?

I would say that is about pursuing

the same objectives and this could

be achieving the same goals by the

same means or by different means, it

does not mean we have to harmonise

our rules. It is not a binary

choice, this is a bespoke choice.

Thank you. The Institute Of

Directors would prefer the UK to

maintain regulatory alignment with

the single market rules for goods

and service is rather than seek to

diverge after Brexit.

Is that the aim of the Government as

well?

The Government has been

talking to a wide range of industry

groups and we recognise there are

benefits in some areas of

maintaining alignment and ensuring

we have the most frictionless access

to European markets. We want to take

the best opportunity to trade with

Europe and the wider world.

Is it true me shall Barnier has

offered us the Canada model

agreement which could be reached

this year negating the need for a

transition period?

The policy of the Government is we

are pursuing a bespoke trade

agreement, and we do believe it will

be in the interests to secure and

interpretation period.

The EU has clearly and firmly set

out its views on the options for

these negotiations. Ministers so far

have failed to provide any coherent

response because they can't agree.

These answers underline this, we

just don't know. How long will it be

before the British Government has a

coherent position to set out?

The Prime Minister has set out a

coherent position -- And my

colleagues have been making speeches

setting out the objectives of the

UK. We look forward to achieving

those.

The Minister will no legal text is

being looked at in terms of the

progress report in December on the

issue of regulatory alignment dustup

can we be sure nothing will be put

into legal text prejudices our

interpretation in relation to

regulatory alignment?

I can give that assurance, it is

important we secure the agreement

based on the joint report and that

secures the position on the

territorial integrity of the UK.

Question number two.

The Government conducts a broad

range of work on EU exit issues and

will continue to do so. That means

all decisions including those on the

EU Customs Union are supported by

many analysis. Leaving the Customs

Union liberates the UK to establish

new and fruitful trade deals with

the rest of the world, and pursue a

new trading relationship with the EU

which remains as frictionless trade

in goods.

It is clear no assessment has been

made. We have had it confirmed this

week the north-east retail and

manufacturing sectors will be

hardest hit in all scenarios. It is

clear 200,000 workers in my region

who work in these sectors face a

grim future because of this

Government's inability to get its

act together.

One of the advantages although there

are many of leaving the Customs

Union is Britain can be a champion

for global free trade again for the

first time in 40 years. Free

trade... Through mutually beneficial

partnerships has historically

ushered in productivity, innovation,

consumer choice, growth and

prosperity, something I hope the

honourable lady would encourage.

I warmly welcome my friend to her

place, it is great to see a ray of

sunshine, and positivity, from the

front bench, what a shame we don't

see opposite. Is she surprised we

are still discussing the Customs

Union, the EU has ruled it out, the

Leader of the Opposition has ruled

it out, why are we still talking

about it?

He raises a good point, the British

people have voted in their historic

decision in 2016 to leave the EU and

in doing so have instructed this

Parliament to take us out of the

Customs Union which is what the

Prime Minister is doing.

Blaenau Gwent has been boosted by

the arrival of the TVR car company,

does the Minister agree with me we

need a Customs Union with the EU

ventures like this to survive and

thrive?

The UK is the second largest market

for cars in Europe and it is clearly

in both of our interests to continue

this partnership between our

industries. Isn't it encouraging

companies like Jaguar Land Rover,

Nissan, Toyota, McLaren have made

significant investments in the UK

since the referendum? I am committed

with this Government to ensuring as

frictionless trade as possible to

continue this fruitful arrangement

and support this vital sector.

It may be the Minister is not a work

in fact car production went down for

the first time since 2009 and

investment in the industry has gone

down by 500 million. When will the

Government confirm what its plans

are in relation to the Customs Union

so companies that manufacture here

know their components can get safely

into the UK and not get stuck in a

traffic jam at Calais?

We are seeing a rise in

manufacturing, a rise in exports, UK

foreign direct assessment at a

record high. The economy is doing

very well. We are seeing encouraging

signs in confidence in the UK since

Brexit. We want to ensure this

automotive sector benefits from any

arrangement and that will be a

priority for this Government.

We know all of the analysis the

Government has done shows Brexit is

bad news, we note the prime Mr Bush

showed that if you days ago and the

first thing she did was to jump on a

plane to China.

Can she confirmed reports yesterday

that the Government analysis also

shows their obsession of cutting EU

migration will be seriously bad for

the British economy?

We are in the middle of negotiations

but when it comes to migration it is

clear the UK will be committed to

designing its own immigration policy

which is determined by skills and

talent and brains, and that is what

will create jobs and growth.

The question on the report was

correct and I will take that

George... The Government analysis

shows leaving the EU is bad, and the

Customs Union, and the single

market, and now we know cutting

immigration from the EU is bad news.

Does the Government have plans

before exit to adopt a strategy

based on facts and evidence rather

than ideology?

The document to which the honourable

member is referring to is not

Government policy, it comes with

significant caveats and is limited.

It is clear there are significant

benefits from our departure, first,

the chance for the first time in 40

years to pursue our independent

global trade policy. Secondly, free

from the common external tariff. And

lastly, the opportunity to build a

new customs arrangements with the EU

that is world leading and enables

prosperity, jobs and growth.

Number three, Mr Speaker.

Across Government we are planning

for all outcomes including the

unlikely scenario where no agreement

can be reached. Given the success in

agreeing in the first phase, we are

constant we will reach a swift

agreement on an implementation

period and future partnership with

the EU. We anticipate success and a

good deal for the UK and EU.

Given the propensity to rubbished

the Government's own research, will

they commission the independent

Office for Budget Responsibility to

model the budgetary and economic

impacts of before departure options

and a Canada style deal, and joining

the FDA, and when he released this

modelling to Parliament?

The responsibility is set out in

legislation, we have no plans to

change that. A number of colleagues

have raised EFTA. It would be

important to have a debate. I would

like to hear what problems

colleagues believe this would solve,

in particular in relation to our

relations with the EU because Swiss

bilaterals have been pulled out. We

don't propose to join the EEA.

I know the Secretary of State is an

early riser, but did any of them

listen to the former Chancellor

George Osborne this morning on Radio

4? What are they going to say about

what he says about the fact that

this country, especially the

manufacturing sector, is doomed

outside of the European Union.

I

don't accept the premise of his

question and unfortunately, I didn't

have the opportunity this morning to

listen to the former Chancellor on

Radio 4. The Secretary of State says

he has done so. I am grateful to him

for reminding me fondly of the time

I did listen to the former

Chancellor on Radio 4 before I went

on after him in the height of the

campaign.

Does he agree that it's

important that we keep our skies as

open as possible post-Brexit. Can he

provide me reassurance that he is

engaging with the aviation sector to

make sure this industry can continue

to thrive under any post-Brexit

scenario?

I can give them that

assurance and it is an all our

mutual interest to make sure that

aviation continues to be open and

liberal. The Secretary of State for

Transport as well appraised of the

issues and pursuing them.

The papers

tell us the region is most damaged

by Brexit would be the West Midlands

Northern Ireland and the north-east.

The people of these regions deserve

better, so will the Minister take

the opportunity to make it clear to

certain colleagues sitting behind

him that they are wrong and

irresponsible to be talking up or

wishing for a no deal outcome?

To

answer her very directly on that

last point, as I've said earlier in

the sands, it is our policy to seek

a mutually beneficial deep and

special partnership with the

European Union, embracing an

economic partnership among other

things and we are optimistic about

achieving that outcome.

They are

wrong and there is responsible to be

doing so. As well as certain regions

being hit hardest, certain sectors

are threatened severely by a no deal

Brexit. Take the food and drink

industry, which exported £9.8

billion worth of goods to the EU

last year. Once and for all, can the

Minister roll out a no deal outcome,

commit to ease transition on current

terms and give industry the

certainty it needs?

I find her

question peculiar. She seems to be

suggesting I would adopt something

other than government policy. It is

government policy to security and

information -- implementation

period. It is policy to be

responsible and exit the European

Union under any circumstances it may

prove necessary.

As the Prime

Minister made clear in her open

letter to EU citizens, we highly

value the contributions they make to

the cultural and social fabric of

the UK. Safeguarding the rights of

residents was a first priority for

negotiations. This is a commitment

we have delivered. The agreement

reached in December not only gives

those covered certainty of residency

but also health care and pensions

and benefits.

The 2011 census data

that 20% of Kensington and Chelsea's

population by EU nationals. In

Kensington, we have three schools

for Spanish and French students.

Families are living in fear of the

uncertainty. But the discussions on

EU citizens rights opening next

week, will he reassure my existing

EU constituents that they will

retain all their rights once we live

the EU?

I think she should welcome

the fact that we reached agreement

on that wide range of rights. That

does provide certainty. What we want

to do is work with colleagues at the

Home Office to make sure there is a

streamlined process for the new

settled status to secure those

rights in the long-term.

Is he not

concerned that the Prime Minister's

reported comments that the more

limited access to rates for those

arriving during transition, make

create a chilling effect on drawing

the skills and talents such as

colleagues book of a minute ago,

coming to the UK and meeting the

Labour market gaps that we urgently

need to fill in many sectors?

During

the implementation period, EU

citizens will continue to be able to

visit, live and work in the UK as

they do now. We will use a speedy to

prepare for the Newmarket. There

will be a new registration scheme in

preparation for the new system. The

citizens rights agreement reached in

December does go certainty about the

rights of EU citizens already here,

but it does not cover those arriving

after we leave the EU.

Can my

honourable friend confirmed that

during the implementation period,

all foreigners, including those from

the European Union will be treated

equally in having access to our

country?

We will remain an open and

tolerant country, one that

recognises a valuable contribution

to make our society better, but we

will also control the overall number

of migrants coming to the UK. As we

leave the EU, we seek to form

ambitious new trade deals around the

world. We will have control of our

borders, and free movement will end

when they leave the EU.

In Florence

five months ago, the Prime Minister

set out the proposal for the

implementation period under current

terms and utilising the existing

structure of European Union rules

and regulations, including the

European Court for that time limited

period. This is necessarily bit

close of only one set of changes and

minimum disruption. We are also

clear that our priority in the

long-term, getting out of the single

market and out of the customs union

without a direct uses diction.

The

European Court will be deciding on

issues in this country, and of

British businesses want to continue

doing business with the rest of

Europe, they will have to abide by

the rules of the single market.

British citizens will have fewer

rights than the rest of Europe than

they do now. Will he propose that we

hand them over our money as well?

I

must admit, that is the first ever

seen him in alliance with my right

honourable friend, the member for

the 19th-century over there.

If the

government were regrettably to

accept EU negotiating guidelines, so

that the UK remain subject to the

Judas diction of the European Court

of Justice during the implementation

period, what arrangements would be

put in place to safeguard the

interests of Britain, given that

there would be no British judges?

During that period, the primary

concern I have is of any new laws

coming into effect, of which we had

had no say and we will be aiming to

set up arrangements to make sure

they do not do harm to the United

Kingdom.

After the foreign speech,

the honourable member from Fareham

coordinated a letter to the research

group describing the government

policy on the transitional period

as, staying in the EU by stealth.

She has not yet replied to my letter

of the 14th of January offering her

the opportunity to retract that. But

the Secretary of State agree that

these divisions at the heart of

government jeopardise our own

negotiations? And would you confirm

that all the ministers about

government policy on transition?

All

my ministers support government

policy, which is more than I can say

for the opposition front bench.

Ministers from across government

have carried out extensive

engagement on EU exit, both in the

UK and the EU, with business heads

and representatives from all parts

of the economy. The Prime Minister

surety quarterly business advisory

Council to hear directly from senior

business leaders on the key issues

across EU exit and the wider

economy.

Coming from Coventry, which

is the home of the UK water

industry, have been delighted by its

resurgence in recent years, but it

did see a fall in output of 3% last

year, attributed to the need for

clarity and Brexit transition. Given

the importance of car manufacturer

in the West Midlands economy, what

reassurance can you give the

industry about the future trading

relationship with our European

partners?

I 2am delighted by the

resurgence to which he refers. It's

precisely because of the request and

the results of the engagement and

government proposals for a

implementation period, have been

welcomed by various sectors of our

economy, promising the clarity

needed to plan ahead. We in the EU

want to agree the detail of the

implementation by the end of March,

making good as swiftly as possible

on our promise of certainty. We are

seeking a bold and ambitious

economic partnership, with the

greatest possible tariff and barrier

free trade arrangement with our

European neighbours.

Businesses in

the north-east that I speak to tell

me of international investments put

on hold while companies try to work

out what kind of Brexit this

government is actually going for.

They don't want to make that public,

so can the Minister tell me how she

is engaging with International

business to make an assessment of

that impact on our economy and

whether indeed there is an

assessment going on, because I

forget which story it is today?

I

hope she was listening to the

Secretary of State's very detailed

presentation of speech on Friday, in

which he set out the terms of an

implementation period, which address

exactly the issues she raises now.

It will provide a bridge and a

platform for businesses to enable

them to plan for the future, to give

them the time that they need and to

plan on that basis for the

prosperous future outside.

The

services sector is the largest part

of the British economy and while the

single market may not be complete,

it is the deepest marketing services

anywhere on the globe. Can the

Minister confirm that it is our

contention that the full services

sector will be included in our deep

and special partnership?

She brings

her experience from the European

Parliament, which we all value. As

80% of the UK economy is services

based, it is vital that we

incorporate provisions relating to

services in any new arrangement with

the EU.

I was astonished yesterday,

reading the National Audit Office

report that the inability to hedge

against sterling fluctuations could

cost up to £5 billion for the

equipment plan. Good the Minister

advise as to what the department is

doing to support other departments

struggling with Brexit through the

engagement with the international

community?

There is considerable

engagement with the international

business community. The Prime

Minister herself there is a business

advisory Council to hear directly

from senior business leaders on key

issues. In terms of cross

departmental engagement, there is

considerable work and engagement

across all departments in Whitehall

to prepare for all outcomes of these

negotiations.

We have been working

closely with the Secretary of State

for environment food and rural

affairs on support for farmers. The

government will provide the same

cash total in funds for farm support

until the end of the parliament. We

continue to work closely with a

range of stakeholders across the

farming industry and beyond as well

as the devolved administrations.

EU

rules on farming happy one size fits

all. Would he agree that we can

create farming policy and frameworks

that work better for all the parts

of the United Kingdom after Brexit?

Yes, once we have left the EU, we

will be able to redesign our

agricultural policy so that farmers

are competitive, productive and

profitable and saw that our

environment is protected for future

generations. The Secretary of State

for the environment elegantly set

out flaws in the common agricultural

policy and how we can do much better

outside the EU.

Can he outlined how

he intends to secure subsidies for

the average UK farm, which is

classified as a small farm and how

does he believe small farmers will

be able to survive post-Brexit?

We

do believe in the contribution of

small farms to the mural economy and

he will bring forward his policy in

due course.

Is he able to clarify

whether farmers will no longer be

subject to the common agricultural

policy or will our fishery industry

no longer be subject to the common

fisheries policy?

He raises a very

important point and I know from

meeting fisher men and women that

they are sometimes very sometimes

very impatient to leave the common

fisheries policy and rightly so. As

a matter for negotiation and we hope

to achieve clarity very soon.

Securing favourable fishing terms

will be important, what role will be

devolved administrations play?

An important role and will continue

to engage with him. I am conscious

of agricultural tariffs. It is in on

all our interests to ensure tariff

free access as we reach our special

ship.

Number eight.

Remaining in the

Customs Union would prevent the UK

from striking new free trade deals

and setting new tariffs. By leaving

the Customs Union and building a new

arrangement with the EU we can forge

new trade arrangements with our

partners around the world while

maintaining as frictionless trade as

possible in goods between the UK and

EU.

An exciting opportunity which will

become available would be to

establish a free port at Eastport.

Can she confirm the Government will

give serious consideration to this

excellent idea?

I would like to thank the honourable

gentleman for welcoming the

Secretary state -- the Secretary of

State there. This it was a pleasure

to meet some of the business

representatives present at the

speech last Friday. Teesport is an

opportunity for global Britain and a

gateway to the world, an example of

forward thinking independent trade

policy. When we leave we will have

the opportunity to create our own

policy to benefit Teesport. I hope

the Freeport proposal will be one

option explored.

In Harrow we have a thriving Indian

Gasper are desperate to encourage

trade between the UK and India. Will

she ensure they will not be held

back from improving trade between

India and the UK?

I would like to pay tribute to him

for his lifelong advocacy for the

British Asian community, not least

since the 1990s when he encouraged

my mother to stand as a local

councillor. He is to blame for me

being here today!

Leaving the EU offers us the

opportunity to forge a new role for

ourselves. The first bilateral visit

outside of Europe was to India which

is telling. It is encouraging the

Indian Finance Minister visited the

UK for the year of culture launch

last year. I am optimistic about the

opportunities leaving the Customs

Union and EU presents for UK - India

relations.

HMRC wants a new declaration service

due to go live in 2019, has it been

decided to go for the fourfold

increase in customs declarations

post Brexit?

The customs infrastructure is going

through the upgrade which the

honourable member states and it is

right this is on track and on target

and I am looking forward to the

opportunity to build on our customs

regimes where we have a world

standard, setting the standard for

the world.

It is not for the UK to accept or

reject the EU directives, this is

their mandate for negotiations. We

have our own objectives. In my

speech I set out our position on

what we would like in the

implementation period and we look

forward to continuing this

discussion. That work has not

stopped, following the declaration

of its progress, officials have

continued technical discussions. I

will be meeting Michel Barnier to

continue the process.

For workers who arrived during the

transitional period under existing

rules what arrangement will there be

to ensure workers crucial to our

industries who don't read Tier two

Visa requirements are not sent home

at the end of the transition period?

We will be discussing in detail the

treatment of people after the

departure from the union. He must

take it as red as I have said they

will be treated properly, we will

not do anything which will undermine

our economy and do everything to

ensure the industries are supported.

The secretary of state and his

junior ministers keep saying we want

a bespoke deal. When are they going

to set out what that means? Tell us

what the elements of that deal will

be? And when are they going to cost

it with its implications for the

economy of these islands?

There can be few policies that have

been taught about more than this

one, two major speeches at Lancaster

House and Florence, two white

papers, something like 15 bills

going through this House this

Parliament. This House is not

unaware of all aspects of the

bespoke deal.

We made playing what we see as

different in what we are seeking

from other deals, the free trade

agreement, we are aiming for a

competitive and tariff free. On the

customs agreement, the most

frictionless, with a variety of

proposals on that.

The House will be clearly informed.

In terms of costing, as my

Parliamentary Secretary said on

Monday, we will release all the

information necessary once it is no

longer sensitive to negotiations but

before the House makes a decision.

Number ten, Mr Speaker.

I have seen

this report and note the Secretary

of State for Scotland discussed

priorities regularly at the GMC.

There is common ground between us

such as making sure Scottish

universities and businesses have

access to the best of talent. It is

disappointing this report does not

take the threat of a second

independence referendum of the

table.

The Minister will be aware... The

difference in Scotland is the SNP

Government does proper analysis and

publishes.

How many jobs have to be lost or

under threat before this Government

will realise it must back the single

market and Customs Union?

The aim is to six -- the aim is to

seek a successful deal. The worst

thing for Scottish jobs and

businesses would be to split up our

UK.

Last week the Scotch whisky

Association expressed concerns at

the SNP policy to keep Scotland in

the single market, what assurances

can he give to my companies and

constituents to make sure we tried

to get access to the single market

but also have the right do deals

elsewhere in the world?

He makes an excellent point,

speaking up for his constituents. I

met with the Association on

occasions to discuss global

opportunities and we must ensure we

have the flexibility to take those.

The Government has been conducting a

broad programme of work on EU exit

issues and will continue, all

decisions including those relating

to the Customs Union and automotive

sector are supported by a range of

analytical work. Do we want our

partnership to include the

automotive industry, ensuring trade

is as free and frictionless as

possible. The UK remains the second

largest market for cars in Europe

and it is in our interests to

continue this partnership. The

Vauxhall car plant in your

constituency is extremely important

and I look forward to visiting it

soon.

The plant in my constituency is

fighting for survival, the parent

company has said it is not prepared

to make long-term investment until

there is clarity on the final

trading arrangements. Having heard

this morning, I am not sure we are

going to get that soon. Can he

guarantee trading arrangements for

the automotive sector will be no

less favourable than they are now?

The understanding is the Vauxhall

decision is a commercial one taken

due to challenging European market

conditions. Vauxhall has said this

decision is to safeguard the

competitiveness of the plant.

Government maintains ongoing

dialogue with the company. Ministers

have met regularly with senior

management throughout this process

and will continue to do so. As we

move through these negotiations,

moving on to economic partnership, I

expect the honourable gentleman will

find an accelerating degree of

certainty emerges.

Further to the reply about Teesport,

would ministers be prepared to meet

with me to discuss a Freeport in my

constituency post Brexit?

Of course I will meet with him to

discuss this matter. As this

conversation has gone on, misgivings

have been expressed about Freeport

and we need to make sure any

proposal is capable of giving this

country the security it needs.

Number 12, Mr Speaker.

With

permission I will answer questions

12 and 16 together.

The right by Wright memorandum

clarifies how human bites will

continue to be protected in domestic

law after the UK has exited --

writes. All substantive rights will

continue to be protected after exit.

Our assessment is in itself not

incorporating the Charter of

fundamental rights should not affect

substantive rights for individuals.

The papers leaked to Buzzfeed

suggest deregulating an area such as

the environment, and employment law,

could be an opportunity for the UK.

Is this part of the Government

economic strategy?

The garment has repeated our

commitment to ensure the environment

is improved and our commitments on

workers' rights have been repeated

time and again.

The Brexit secretary labelled

intimate revelations as crippling,

the Foreign Secretary described them

as backbreaking, the international

trade secretary said maximum working

our walls are a burden. Why is the

Government so prepared to take its

policy?

We will ensure workers' rights are

preserved and enhanced and keep pace

with the new working environment.

During the committee stage of the

Bill, concerns were raised critical

of our mental rights could be cast

aside as we exit. If the Government

is serious about raising

environmental rights, can the

Minister tell us why the Government

has failed to come forward with an

ambitious new environment Bill and

instead is commissioning analysis

suggesting Brexit could be an

opportunity to deregulate in these

areas?

The purpose of the Withdrawal Bill

was to preserve the effect of EU law

into far as possible after exit. And

not to bring forward new policy

changes. The Secretary of State has

laid out his policy and I look

forward to the Bill.

Number 13.

The duration of the emperor

meditation period should be in the

region of two years, the

commission's period -- position

points to the same. To give people

time to plan to allow an orderly

transition for the best possible

outcome for the UK.

Could it be shorter?

If I simply accept the proposal of

the European Commission, yes.

Unlike

the question from the right

honourable gentleman!

The EU has made it clear EU citizens

coming to the UK during the

transition period should be eligible

for settled status, the Prime

Minister says they will not be. Is

that a red line or is the Government

willing to optimise on that?

What I would point out to him is

that in the joint report, which we

can leaders and got agreement on in

December, the European Union agreed

that the transition date, the end

date for ongoing permanent

residents' rights, not

possibilities, writes, will be is

March 20 19. At the General affairs

Council on Monday, the European

Council agreed negotiating

directives on implementing Titian

period. We have to move quickly to

begin detailed discussions on the

implementation period. We can reach

political agreement by March. There

remain a number of areas we need to

discuss to make sure the period

operates smoothly. We look forward

to progressing substantially.

When

it came to the divorce Bill, after a

lot of huffing and puffing, the

government simply signed on the

dotted line. What can they tellers

will be different in the negotiating

and transition period we are

negotiating compared to the EU

guidelines which were issued this

week?

As to his opening remarks,

it's amazing, given that he's

intelligent and informed, that he

doesn't differentiate between the

100 billion demand and the 30

billion outcome. As for the next

stage, that is a negotiation to be

undertaken. The primary area for me,

there are a variety of areas, but

the biggest one is the question of

our right to sign trade deals during

the implementation period so we can

bring them into force immediately

after we leave. That is a massive

advantage for the United Kingdom to

have. Businesses in my constituency

tell me continued membership of the

single market and Customs union

during the transition period will

help them to safeguard jobs, but the

Prime Minister ruled this out. What

do you have against the employment

of people in Bristol West.

The

purpose of the implentation period,

which was asked for by just about

every business organisation, is to

make sure that they face stability

in the run-up to the conclusion of

the future relationship. That is

what is going to happen. That is why

companies and the CBI and others

will conduct when we announced it.

As we accelerate the pace of our

negotiations, I gave a speech last

Friday to lay out the terms of the

implentation period for a new

relationship. This bridge to the

future will be strictly time-limited

and will see a continuation of

existing structures and rules. We

will no longer be a member of the

EU, which is a legal requirement for

signing a treaty treaty, while still

ensuring the continuity of our

businesses. We use the period to

make sure we best place to grasp the

details of Brexit and I mean signing

a new trade agreement with countries

around the world.

Given reports

today of a huge gap between the UK

and EU on how financial services

will be able to be traded freely in

the post-Brexit environment, can the

Secretary of State set out exactly

how he sees this trade operating

successfully in future and exactly

how he plans to protect the jobs of

the 1.1 million people in the UK who

work in this sector?

Firstly, not

only have we not yet engaged in the

future relationship negotiation, the

European Union has not yet decided

its own negotiating guidelines. They

will be laid down by the March

council on the 22nd of March, we

expect. To that end, I'm talking to

every member state began to make

sure we at the same place on this

issue, rather than having a gap. At

the end of these questions, I'm

going to Luxembourg for specifically

that issue.

Can he confirm that we

will find a way during the

implentation period to address the

consequences of any EU legislation

deemed contrary to our national

interest?

The duration of the

implentation period should be around

two years. Normally when UK is no

longer a member of the EU can we

take advantage of status. We will

negotiate our own trade agreements

but not bring them into effect until

after the implentation period has

concluded. For this period, we will

have a process for discussing laws

that might be brought in on which

we've not had our say.

There have

been lots of questions this week

about the leaked EU exit analysis

final briefings, but this is the

first chance I've had to ask the

Secretary of State directly, so I

will choose my words carefully. Can

he confirm when he first knew that

economic modelling work on Brexit

scenarios was being undertaken

across Whitehall?

He doesn't have to

ask me, he should read the book. In

addressing the select committee on

the 6th of December last year, I

said in terms, we will at some

stage, and some of this has been

initiated, do the best we can to

quantify the effect of different

negotiating outcomes as we come up

to them. Bearing mind, we have not

started phase two yet. We will try

to assess the effect of various

outcomes. We will do that a little

closer to the negotiating timetable.

I say that because I read with

interest the Hansard reports this

morning, reading about myself being

introduced. I thought I should tell

the house that I told the select

committee this work was on the way

last December.

I think it follows

that in December, the Secretary of

State knew that this modelling was

going on. Can he confirm when he was

first talked through the economic

modelling of the Brexit scenarios by

his department? Not when he told

others, but when he was talked

through.

One of the things that he's

trying to pretend is that somehow my

colleagues have been critical of the

civil service doing its job, because

the outcome is as yet a work in

progress. That is what it is, a work

in progress. I say that because we

are trying to do something which is

incredibly difficult, something

which every institution that is

astride it has failed. They forecast

that has been made about the period

post-referendum has been wrong. As I

told the select committee, the Bank

of England, the best forecasting

organisation in the business,

forecast for 2017 a reduction in

exports. There was a growth by 3%. A

reduction by 2%, it grew by 1%. A

reduction in housing investment, a

flat employment growth and growth of

0.5%. What has been going on has

been an attempt to find a way of

getting a better outcome. And in

those terms, I talked to my own

department and the cross

departmental group in early January.

The undersea oil and gas pipeline

that Germany intends to build

directly to Russia has been

condemned by the American Secretary

of State as a threat to the security

of countries in Central and Eastern

Europe. Does the Minister agree with

that sentiment?

This is an important

issue and we need to make sure that

Europe continues to protect its

security and diversity of supply.

We'll continue to work with the

colleague in those departments on

it.

UK civil aerospace companies are

leading the world in the development

of future technologies, but

everyone, from the chief executive

of a bus, to the Unites frets at

Rolls-Royce, say that a hard exit

threatens that success. Why isn't

continued membership of the customs

union and the single market on the

table to protect the UK's

engineering manufacturing sector?

As

a chartered aerospace engineer, this

is a subject close to my heart.

Aviation is crucial to the UK

economy and we are committed to

getting the best deal possible. We

are focused on getting the right

arrangement so that our industries

can continue to thrive, so that

passengers and the industry can have

opportunity, choice and be

profitable. We will seek the right

customs arrangements between us to

make sure trade is free and

frictionless and that they are able

to succeed.

Does he agree with me

that, while the manner of our

leaving the EU is Mark -- is rightly

a matter for debate, the fact that

we are leaving the EU was decided

beyond doubt in June 2016 by the

British people?

I am happy to

reassure him on his point. The

British people voted to leave the

European Union. 17.5 million of them

in the biggest mandate in his silly

and committed to respecting the

result of that referendum. The

government is and do take the

analysis to make sure we get the

best for British people in our

negotiations. Whichever outcome we

choose and negotiate, it will

involve leaving the EU and

respecting that democratic mandate.

The report commissioned by the Mayor

of London found that a hard Brexit

will lead to the loss of 56,500 more

jobs in London alone and if the UK

remains in the single market and

Customs union. Does he agree that

this is clear evidence that a hard

Brexit would be catastrophic for

jobs?

No, I don't. One of the great

difficulties in these forecasts is

they have proven entirely wrong in

every town so far. This is not just

the view of a politician. The

smartest and most innovative

economist in the country is probably

the governor of the Bank of England

to refer to these forecasts as

having faced a microfiche moment. In

other words, they have to find out

if they've work. It may be in

opinion, but it's not evidence.

Over

the last 45 years, British taxpayers

have had far too much of their money

taken from them to go to the EU. And

that we are leaving, can he give us

an idea of our share of the assets

and is he negotiating to get it all

back?

She picks an important point.

This was a component of the

negotiation which brought the public

claim down from 100 billion down to

35 billion. Part of that was offset

by assets.

The chemicals industry is

the largest employer in the

Grangemouth Ely of my constituency,

an industry that explores a lot of

its goods within the EU. Prime

ministers tell us what the EU exit

analysis projects with the sector?

We have met with the chemicals

industry on a number of occasions.

On the last occasion, we had quite

constructive conversations, which

ended positively. We will make sure

we carry through the positions we've

set out, particularly in relation to

goods on the markets, and that we

hope to preserve continued

registration of chemicals. We will

continue to make sure our deep and

special partnership covers the

chemicals industry so that they can

continue to flourish.

Will the

Minister confirm to this house that

it is possible for non-EU countries

to access only three of the single

markets, specifically free movement

of goods, capital and services, but

are not required to accept freedom

of movement, as can be seen by the

association agreement countries. Is

this an arrangement currently being

looked at the Department?

She makes

a good point. Trade continues all

round the world on a basis which is

free and there, particularly under

free trade agreements. It is our

expectation and intention to secure

a free-trade agreement of

unprecedented scope and ambition,

which should meet just the kind of

criteria she sets out.

The

parliamentary undersecretary told

the house yesterday that the

documents I hope very sure that will

be handed over to the select

committee to not yet reflect the

government policy approaches.

"Secretary Of State has just claimed

from the dispatch box, that everyone

knows the government position, can

he spent my loss of analysis has

been done of the options the

government does not want, but

apparently no analysis yet of the

option the government does want.

The

government cannot control the timing

of leaks. This is a work in process,

a preliminary analysis which does

not yet reflect government policy.

Once the analysis has been carried

through, I'm quite sure that it will

do.

He almost yells from a sedentary

position his sympathy for the former

Chancellor of the extra cover. I'm

sure he will be able to bear not

been mentioned by the

representatives of the Treasury

bench.

Will my honourable friend the

Minister confirm that he heard from

Charles Grant that officials in the

Treasury have deliberately developed

a model to show that all options

other than staying in the customs

union were bad and that officials

intended uses to influence policy?

If this is correct, does he share my

views that goes the spirit of

reforms that and then our civil

service.

I am sorry to say that my honourable

friend's account is essentially

correct. At the time I considered it

implausible because my direct

experience is that civil servants

are extraordinarily careful to

uphold the impartiality of the civil

service. I think we must proceed

with great caution in this matter,

but I have heard him raise this

issue. I think we need to be very

careful not take this forward in an

inappropriate way, but he has

reminded me of something I heard. I

think it would be quite

extraordinary if it turned out such

a thing happened because... I didn't

say it was correct, the account that

was put to me, Mr Speaker, is

correct. It was put to me, I

considered it an extraordinary

allegation, I still consider it an

extraordinary allegation, and I

think we must... I said it was

correct... Mr Speaker, I said it was

correct that the allegation was put

to me, I did not in any way seek to

confirm the truth of it, but what I

would say is that we need to proceed

with great caution because it is

essential that we continue to uphold

and support the impartiality of the

civil service.

Every day, literally

hundreds of tracks crisscross the

channel carrying vital components

for the highly integrated supply

chain for the British car industry.

What assessment has the Minister

made of the impact that that travel

on customs, tariffs and extra

bureaucracy if we come out of the

customs union?

We are seeking a

frictionless access to the single

market for our automotive industry.

We want to continue to feel the

benefits.

Could the minister

reassure me that the upcoming

negotiations on future migration

arrangements with the EU will

prioritise the needs of UK science

and research, allowing a two-way

flow of talent which is vital for

our top universities, such as York

university in my constituency?

I am

very happy to give that we have been

having interesting negotiations with

the science sector and we want to

make sure the UK can continue to

attract the brightest and the best

from around the world.

I want to

hear from the two colleagues who

have not contributed to these

exchanges.

On the 11th of January,

Lord Callaghan visited Bristol and

he made a promise to the

constituents in my constituency that

there would be more jobs after

Brexit. Was he briefed by the

Department at that point on the true

state of the modelling analysis when

he made that promise to those

people?

Let me say this, as I told

the House earlier, every forecasting

model on the performance of the

British economy post the referendum

by every major organisation, the

banks, the government organisations

and international organisations, has

proven wrong. One of the ways it has

been proven wrong is because

employment has grown in this country

to record levels today. We will be

seeking to do the best we can to

ensure that growth record is

maintained.

If the second enquiry is

a single sentence of fewer than 20

years -- words, I will hear it, if

it isn't, I want.

Can my right

honourable friend confirmed that we

will be able to implement decisions

during the transition period and not

wait until the end to implement

everything that is agreed?

For

example, our proposing to put in

place a registration scheme and so

on, and also we will be able to sign

trade deals but not put them into

force.

How is the government working

with the UK steel industry to make

sure that it prospers post Brexit?

We have had, my department alone has

had meetings with 350 companies, not

all in steel, obviously, and we have

a regular meeting between the

Chancellor, the Business Secretary

and myself, and leading