07/03/2018

0:00:20 > 0:00:29Order. Urgent question. Sir Vincent cable.The question is for the

0:00:29 > 0:00:33Minister to make a statement on the diplomatic relations with Saudi

0:00:33 > 0:00:41Arabia.Minister of State. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

0:00:41 > 0:00:45Thank you, Mr Speaker and can I thank the right honourable gentleman

0:00:45 > 0:00:49for his question. I am responding for the Foreign Secretary because he

0:00:49 > 0:00:54is at an engagement at the Palace. The Prime Minister has invited his

0:00:54 > 0:01:03Royal Highness to the visit the United Kingdom. We are delighted to

0:01:03 > 0:01:06welcome him on his first official visit to the UK taking place from

0:01:06 > 0:01:13today until Friday. They will launch its GJ partnership between our two

0:01:13 > 0:01:19countries, which will allow us to debate policy issues of mutual

0:01:19 > 0:01:25interest. We have a close and wide-ranging relationship with Saudi

0:01:25 > 0:01:31Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the third growing fastest market for exports

0:01:31 > 0:01:34and we work together to discuss regional issues. It will allow for a

0:01:34 > 0:01:42discussion between the Prime Minister and the Prince of how to

0:01:42 > 0:01:48address the humanitarian crisis. The UK supports the social and economic

0:01:48 > 0:01:53reform programme. His visit is an opportunity for him to underline his

0:01:53 > 0:01:58vision of an outward looking Saudi Arabia, one that embraces a tolerant

0:01:58 > 0:02:03form of Islam and an inclusive society. Greater freedom for women,

0:02:03 > 0:02:08in line with the statements made by the Crown Prince. We believe these

0:02:08 > 0:02:13reforms are the best for the prosperity of Saudi Arabia and it is

0:02:13 > 0:02:22right the UK supports the Crown Prince and his endeavours.Mr

0:02:22 > 0:02:27Speaker, further to the exchange, can I say there will be widespread

0:02:27 > 0:02:32concern across parties at the fact that the dictatorial head of the

0:02:32 > 0:02:42medieval regime is being the two given the red carpet visit. Can I

0:02:42 > 0:02:48ask if the Foreign Secretary will be demanding of the ending of the

0:02:48 > 0:02:52bombing of civilian targets in the civil war, which the Prince

0:02:52 > 0:02:58initiated. Can I also ask if he can explain why the safeguards on the

0:02:58 > 0:03:03use of British weapons, which were introduced at the end of the call is

0:03:03 > 0:03:08on at the assistance of myself and my Liberal Democrat colleagues, I no

0:03:08 > 0:03:15longer being applied? Will he insist on the ending of the blockade of

0:03:15 > 0:03:19ports in Yemen, which are contributing to the devastating

0:03:19 > 0:03:24humanitarian crisis and famine, which we have heard much of this

0:03:24 > 0:03:30house? Will he defend the nuclear agreement with Iran, to which we are

0:03:30 > 0:03:36a party and the Prince is seeking to undermine. Will he condemn the

0:03:36 > 0:03:50attempt by the Crown Prince to fan the flames of sectarian conflict?

0:03:50 > 0:03:54Can I ask if he has consulted the economic service on the economic

0:03:54 > 0:03:59position of Saudi Arabia, which is no longer an oil producer, which is

0:03:59 > 0:04:05running out of money and the main potential long-term deal to the UK

0:04:05 > 0:04:10is the flotation, which will only be achieved by devaluing the standards

0:04:10 > 0:04:16applied in the City of London? Finally, on the threshold of

0:04:16 > 0:04:22International Women's Day, can I ask if he intends to endorse the Crown

0:04:22 > 0:04:25Prince's view of modernisation, that women should be allowed to go to

0:04:25 > 0:04:31football matches but not allowed to marry, divorce, have a driving

0:04:31 > 0:04:37licence or operation without the approval of their male relatives?

0:04:37 > 0:04:43Minister of State. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank him for his

0:04:43 > 0:04:49question. His starting point and his opening view of Saudi Arabia

0:04:49 > 0:04:53represents one of the reasons why I think the Crown Prince is here. Used

0:04:53 > 0:05:00the medieval. The Crown Prince has been conducting a series of reforms

0:05:00 > 0:05:04and has made statements about where he wants to take the kingdom of

0:05:04 > 0:05:09Saudi Arabia. Everyone is aware of the past but it is important to look

0:05:09 > 0:05:12at the present, good things as well as difficult things, but also point

0:05:12 > 0:05:17the way forward he has with vision 2030. When he speaks about a

0:05:17 > 0:05:23modernising country, supporting moderate Islam, that should be taken

0:05:23 > 0:05:27as seriously as any reference to the kingdom in the past. He asked a

0:05:27 > 0:05:34series of questions. He referred to the war in Yemen being initiated by

0:05:34 > 0:05:41Saudi Arabia. This is not correct. Sorry, the war in Yemen, this is not

0:05:41 > 0:05:46correct. What happened there was an insurgency overthrew a legitimate

0:05:46 > 0:05:50Government, backed by the UN, which sought support from its neighbours

0:05:50 > 0:05:56in order to deal with that insurgency. The insurgency is cruel.

0:05:56 > 0:06:00A number of people have been executed, including the former

0:06:00 > 0:06:04president of Yemen. They hold people to run some in areas that they

0:06:04 > 0:06:08occupy and have been preventing people getting humanitarian aid. We

0:06:08 > 0:06:14support the efforts of the Saudi led coalition in order to defend Yemen

0:06:14 > 0:06:20against the insurgency, but equally, bring the conflict to an end. It is

0:06:20 > 0:06:24the most important thing. It will take both parties, not just Saudi

0:06:24 > 0:06:29Arabia. In terms of weapons sales, these are as strict as any in the

0:06:29 > 0:06:33world, the right honourable gentleman is aware of. We keep under

0:06:33 > 0:06:37strict check to make sure to run a teary in law is abided by to make

0:06:37 > 0:06:48sure we can provide the support we can... -- Trinitarian lark. --

0:06:48 > 0:06:53humanitarian law. This should not be forgotten. He referred to a

0:06:53 > 0:06:57blockage. There is no blockade. There are no restrictions on the

0:06:57 > 0:07:03ports. The ports are open. There was a restriction from the 19th of

0:07:03 > 0:07:08December, following a missile attack on the capital of Yemen. There is a

0:07:08 > 0:07:11strong suspicion that weapons were being struggled into the country,

0:07:11 > 0:07:16that is why the restrictions were there. It would of 50 ships since

0:07:16 > 0:07:25then have now docked and the ports are open. Humanitarian aid has been

0:07:25 > 0:07:34coming in. We will defend this which is in the interest of the region. In

0:07:34 > 0:07:38relation to the economic prospects of Saudi Arabia, we know the area is

0:07:38 > 0:07:43changing and that is what vision 2030 is about. It is about moving in

0:07:43 > 0:07:48time from an oil based economy to something different. This provides

0:07:48 > 0:07:53opportunities for the region and we strongly support that. We would like

0:07:53 > 0:07:59the option to be issued in the United Kingdom and we will suggest

0:07:59 > 0:08:05the city will be the best place for it. The right honourable gentleman

0:08:05 > 0:08:12mentioned international women's date. It is obvious to ourselves

0:08:12 > 0:08:21that some of the things related to women in Saudi Arabia seem mundane,

0:08:21 > 0:08:26attending a football match, mixed spaces, the ability to drive. In a

0:08:26 > 0:08:31Saudi context, these changes have meant significance which we do not

0:08:31 > 0:08:39always appreciate the need to make reference to. Further progress seems

0:08:39 > 0:08:43likely and it is in everyone's minds. I do not think we should

0:08:43 > 0:08:48judge the progress to date. The engagement of women, not only in the

0:08:48 > 0:08:53areas we have mentioned, but in business, Government, makes a real

0:08:53 > 0:08:58difference to the area. I think the International Women's Day is

0:08:58 > 0:09:03enhanced by the sort of changes we have seen in Saudi Arabia and we

0:09:03 > 0:09:06shall be sure that our Prime Minister make sure the progress

0:09:06 > 0:09:13gives every support from the United Kingdom as we move forward.Thank

0:09:13 > 0:09:18you, Mr Speaker. Can I congratulate my right honourable friend to the

0:09:18 > 0:09:24answer. Is he as surprised as I am that the question was short of the

0:09:24 > 0:09:29context of the scale of the reforms that are now taking place in Saudi

0:09:29 > 0:09:33Arabia? Can I urge the Government to continue our assistance to the

0:09:33 > 0:09:38Government of Saudi Arabia to deliver the astonishing scale of

0:09:38 > 0:09:43ambition associated with vision 2030's I am grateful to my right

0:09:43 > 0:09:47honourable friend who rightly sets it in context.No one denies that

0:09:47 > 0:09:53are difficult aspects a to relationship with the Kingdom of

0:09:53 > 0:09:58Saudi Arabia, just as there are with engagement is the United Kingdom has

0:09:58 > 0:10:02whose countries and human rights issues we do not always share. The

0:10:02 > 0:10:07important point my right honourable friend made is engagement.

0:10:07 > 0:10:13Engagement to seek a common view of a future. As he rightly says, a

0:10:13 > 0:10:17future that is changing markedly and in a way no one anticipated, because

0:10:17 > 0:10:22of the arrival of the Crown Prince and his position. He could have an

0:10:22 > 0:10:27influence on the region for 30 years and our engagement and support for

0:10:27 > 0:10:34the modernising image she has is important to all of us.Thank you,

0:10:34 > 0:10:39Mr Speaker. Thank you for granting this urgent question. Let me

0:10:39 > 0:10:43congratulate the member for securing it, even if it was ahead of my

0:10:43 > 0:10:50application.

0:10:50 > 0:10:54Want to have a good diplomatic and economic relationship with Saudi

0:10:54 > 0:10:58Arabia. Like any good relationship there must be honestly and most

0:10:58 > 0:11:03important we must tell them that as long as they continue the

0:11:03 > 0:11:07indiscriminate bombing of residential areas, farms, of markets

0:11:07 > 0:11:11in Yemen, as long as they continue to restrict the flow of food and

0:11:11 > 0:11:17medical supplies to a population suffering mass epidemics of money

0:11:17 > 0:11:21division and cholera, it would not expect our support in that war.

0:11:21 > 0:11:26Their crown prince does not deserve to have the red carpet rolled out to

0:11:26 > 0:11:31him here in Britain. Let us look at the man who the British Government

0:11:31 > 0:11:40are bowing to today. The architect of the blockade in Yemen, funding

0:11:40 > 0:11:44jihadi groups, ordering his guards to beat up the Prime Minister of

0:11:44 > 0:11:49Lebanon, doubling the number of executions in Saudi Arabia. If we

0:11:49 > 0:11:54are supposed to ignore all of that, we're supposed to ignore it because

0:11:54 > 0:11:59of his proposal that Saudi women be allowed to drive, just as they can

0:11:59 > 0:12:03everywhere else in the world. The UK Government prepared to back pretends

0:12:03 > 0:12:10to care about human rights. But there is nothing but a shameful

0:12:10 > 0:12:16silence. We all know that all they ultimately care about is how to plug

0:12:16 > 0:12:22the hole in trade because of their plans on Brexit. If the minister

0:12:22 > 0:12:28wants to dispute that, can he answer one simple question. When is the

0:12:28 > 0:12:34Government going to stop bowing down to Saudi Arabia and instead demand

0:12:34 > 0:12:41an immediate ceasefire and end to the blockade, proper peace talks and

0:12:41 > 0:12:48a permanent end to this dreadful, shameful

0:12:54 > 0:13:02I thank the Right Honourable lady for her words.She started well in

0:13:02 > 0:13:06terms of wanting to welcome a relationship with the King of Saudi

0:13:06 > 0:13:11Arabia. She might want to review some of the personal comments that

0:13:11 > 0:13:17you made after that. And wonder how that might constitute a decent

0:13:17 > 0:13:24relationship. Firstly, there is not indiscriminate bombing of civilians

0:13:24 > 0:13:32as has been alleged. It is absolutely vital that we make sure

0:13:32 > 0:13:35that in dealing with the military aspect of the conflict, which was

0:13:35 > 0:13:42not started by Saudi Arabia, but we keep... That we are able to see in

0:13:42 > 0:13:50terms of international humanitarian law and that it is as helpful as

0:13:50 > 0:13:54possible in trying to make sure that the training is appropriate to do

0:13:54 > 0:13:59that. In cases where there have been allegations of civilian casualties,

0:13:59 > 0:14:03these should be dealt with and monitored in a manner completely

0:14:03 > 0:14:13different to that in terms of Houthi activity. In relation to the

0:14:13 > 0:14:15humanitarian issues, there is not a blockade, there is not a restriction

0:14:15 > 0:14:29of God is coming in. -- there is not a restriction of goods coming in. We

0:14:29 > 0:14:35have worked very hard to try and ensure that there is protection for

0:14:35 > 0:14:41Saudi Arabia and in doing so give them the confidence to allow more

0:14:41 > 0:14:48ships to comment to deal with the humanitarian issues. This seems to

0:14:48 > 0:14:53be a more sensible approach than the outright condemnation that the

0:14:53 > 0:15:03honourable lady has come out with. As I indicated to the right

0:15:03 > 0:15:08honourable gentleman, who asked a more serious set of questions, the

0:15:08 > 0:15:15issue about women's progress is not simply about a driving issue.

0:15:15 > 0:15:22Driving in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has a totemic importance for

0:15:22 > 0:15:27many people. In terms of Yemen, there has been no silence from the

0:15:27 > 0:15:34United Kingdom. This is why we have been working so hard for a

0:15:34 > 0:15:40diplomatic solution and why we welcome the new UN envoy which has

0:15:40 > 0:15:47been appointed, which the honourable lady did not mention. Inhalation to

0:15:47 > 0:15:53a ceasefire, all of our evidence is that ceasefires work when there is

0:15:53 > 0:15:58some relation on the ground. Because of the activity of the Houthi and

0:15:58 > 0:16:05those who support them, it is not possible for a ceasefire to have any

0:16:05 > 0:16:18sense of purpose that it will actually work.I very gently say to

0:16:18 > 0:16:23the Shadow Foreign Secretary who is normally a restrained individual, I

0:16:23 > 0:16:26understand how passionate years, I feel sure that in a courtroom she

0:16:26 > 0:16:37would not chunder miserly. -- noisily.Let me be very

0:16:37 > 0:16:40straightforward. Calling for a ceasefire is not the same as having

0:16:40 > 0:16:47one. We all want to see an end to the conflict in Yemen. We support

0:16:47 > 0:16:52the appointment of the new UN envoy. Simply calling for it does not do

0:16:52 > 0:16:56it. What you have to make sure is that you have the facts on the

0:16:56 > 0:17:01ground to make sure a ceasefire actually works. It is for the

0:17:01 > 0:17:05honourable lady to shake her head. She has not faced with some of these

0:17:05 > 0:17:17issues and knowledge to back nor is she giving full credit. As we deal

0:17:17 > 0:17:21with the difficulties of trying to deal with the humanitarian crisis in

0:17:21 > 0:17:25Yemen, that is what we are seeking to do and we will bend all of our

0:17:25 > 0:17:33efforts to that and continue to do so, with or without her support.I

0:17:33 > 0:17:39am happy to confirm that there is no prohibition of shaking or nodding of

0:17:39 > 0:17:46heads. Another person who has been chuntering from a sedentary position

0:17:46 > 0:18:00cannot speak from her feet.As you know I am a feminist. I had the

0:18:00 > 0:18:08honour to lead a delegation to Saudi Arabia as a woman and at no time did

0:18:08 > 0:18:14I find any prejudice or disrespect. I was quite surprised. But the

0:18:14 > 0:18:21Minister agree and I commend all his fine words today. Would he agree

0:18:21 > 0:18:28with me that whilst obviously we are a long way from seeing the sort of

0:18:28 > 0:18:32rights in the kingdom that we would expect of any modern society, the

0:18:32 > 0:18:37best way to achieve that and to influence that country is to have

0:18:37 > 0:18:47firm conversations and good relations in private.Over the

0:18:47 > 0:19:05course of her visit,...Can I thank my honourable friend for her

0:19:05 > 0:19:13question. Absolutely, I concur with her sentiments. We talk very

0:19:13 > 0:19:18friendly to counterparts, even the most of the cult circumstances. It

0:19:18 > 0:19:27is right that we express our interest in how reforms are going.

0:19:27 > 0:19:32The progress being made is significant in the context of where

0:19:32 > 0:19:37Saudi Arabia wants to go. And how it wants to lead the region. Talking

0:19:37 > 0:19:44about moderate Islam, in an area where those who propose this are at

0:19:44 > 0:19:49threat takes a degree of bravery from the leadership of Saudi Arabia.

0:19:49 > 0:19:57That is what we recognise. There is more to go but as my right

0:19:57 > 0:20:00honourable friends said making sure it is done with engagement is a key

0:20:00 > 0:20:10part of that process.Thank you. He will be aware that Yemen has been

0:20:10 > 0:20:14described as the world's worst man-made humanitarian disaster.

0:20:14 > 0:20:19Members have been right in highlighting women's rights in Saudi

0:20:19 > 0:20:29Arabia. Will he be raising the plight of women in Yemen as well. It

0:20:29 > 0:20:35is reported that they often have to choose which child to save because

0:20:35 > 0:20:43of the cholera. UK arms sales have outstripped its two Yemen eight

0:20:43 > 0:20:53times over. Will he use that on average and finally will he have

0:20:53 > 0:21:04discussions. Backtwo issues, if I may. In relation to Yemen, no one

0:21:04 > 0:21:14denies the scale of the humanitarian crisis. We are as confident as we

0:21:14 > 0:21:20can be that support to deal with the next round of cholera is going to be

0:21:20 > 0:21:23in place. None of this would be necessary of the conflict was not

0:21:23 > 0:21:31there. That of course is what we're bending all of our efforts to. I do

0:21:31 > 0:21:37genuinely wish it was a straightforward as saying to one of

0:21:37 > 0:21:41the parties, if you stop doing everything everything will be all

0:21:41 > 0:21:49right. I do not believe that to be the answer. We have done all that we

0:21:49 > 0:21:55can in relation to providing food and fuel. The restrictions are

0:21:55 > 0:22:02caused by the conflict and we will do all that we can to break it down.

0:22:02 > 0:22:16Full.Does my honourable friend welcomed the Crown prince 's

0:22:16 > 0:22:21statement that his country is to -- that his goal is to build a country

0:22:21 > 0:22:33of modern Islam.I thank my honourable friend for her question.

0:22:33 > 0:22:38That statement about moderate Islam is one that we would all take for

0:22:38 > 0:22:43granted here. Setting it in the context, where there are disputes

0:22:43 > 0:22:49about the way Islam should go and the propaganda that emerges from

0:22:49 > 0:22:52those who would see Islam taken quite a different course, but it

0:22:52 > 0:22:58comes from someone who in time will be the custodian of the mosques, is

0:22:58 > 0:23:07quite significant.We all want to see a modernised regime in Saudi

0:23:07 > 0:23:14Arabia. The Government however have called for an extra eight

0:23:14 > 0:23:20executioners to be appointed. Can the Minister assure us that the

0:23:20 > 0:23:24Government will be raising their plight with the Saudi prince while

0:23:24 > 0:23:32he is here?United Kingdom stands against the use of execution and

0:23:32 > 0:23:39against the use of the death penalty. Whether it is the king of

0:23:39 > 0:23:52Saudi Arabia or anywhere else, we make that clear. We have received

0:23:52 > 0:24:03assurances in reference to minors. We stand. Where against the death

0:24:03 > 0:24:10penalty in any circumstances.Those of us who've been to Saudi Arabia

0:24:10 > 0:24:16recently have seen how quickly things are changing there. In such a

0:24:16 > 0:24:18conditional country, with International Women's Day tomorrow,

0:24:18 > 0:24:25does my weight honourable friend agree that this is a good

0:24:25 > 0:24:32opportunity to...I am grateful to my honourable friend for raising

0:24:32 > 0:24:39that. The purpose of Parliamentary visits, it is to get to see the

0:24:39 > 0:24:47context of a country. In my experience, not be giving a grandeur

0:24:47 > 0:24:58of easy options. -- not be giving a grand tour of easy options. In

0:24:58 > 0:25:03relation to where women are going, women in culture and music and in

0:25:03 > 0:25:08business, it it is to see country intends to take itself. A woman's

0:25:08 > 0:25:13voice in relation to where it going is an important one.

0:25:13 > 0:25:21My constituents in Glasgow have all been e-mailing me with deep concerns

0:25:21 > 0:25:29over the hospitality being afforded to the Crown Prince with the

0:25:29 > 0:25:32backdrop of the bombs we are selling them. What is the Government doing

0:25:32 > 0:25:41to make sure the Saudi take out the material response plan. Children of

0:25:41 > 0:25:47Yemen are dying to frequently every day and Yemen cannot wait.I agree

0:25:47 > 0:25:52with the honourable lady. Yemen cannot wait. As I said earlier, if I

0:25:52 > 0:25:57believed for a moment asking one party to stop the activities would

0:25:57 > 0:26:02bring an end to it, we would all advocate that solution. I do not

0:26:02 > 0:26:08believe that is the case. That has to be a negotiated end. It should

0:26:08 > 0:26:11come as quickly as possible and we have been pressing this for some

0:26:11 > 0:26:17considerable time. We are doing everything we can to ease the

0:26:17 > 0:26:23situation and we have seen, since my right honourable friend was there in

0:26:23 > 0:26:29December, she was able to explain to the coalition what the international

0:26:29 > 0:26:33community was doing to seek to protect them. That used to an easing

0:26:33 > 0:26:38of the restrictions. Nothing will help the people of Yemen and to the

0:26:38 > 0:26:46conflict comes to an end. Everyone is right about that.I am keen to

0:26:46 > 0:26:50accommodate the colleagues. We are appreciative of the fund of

0:26:50 > 0:26:54knowledge and wisdom on display from the right honourable gentleman.

0:26:54 > 0:27:01There is also no procedural standing order bar, where appropriate, on

0:27:01 > 0:27:11single sentence and servers.Thank you. Does my right honourable friend

0:27:11 > 0:27:15support the reforms and does he confirm the Government will be

0:27:15 > 0:27:19encouraging the authorities to go further in this regard? The best way

0:27:19 > 0:27:26to influence them is to keep the door open. Out of interest, 52% of

0:27:26 > 0:27:33all graduates in 2017 where women. There are 30 women members of the

0:27:33 > 0:27:41council, more than the Senate has, and in the transformation camp there

0:27:41 > 0:27:47is some very positive views on the environment. These will have a far

0:27:47 > 0:27:50reaching effect, not just on the people of Saudi Arabia, but indeed

0:27:50 > 0:27:58globally.Minister of State. Mr Speaker, as I could not put it any

0:27:58 > 0:28:02better myself, I agree with my right honourable friend. The UK will

0:28:02 > 0:28:07continue to give support in the direction she advocates.Does the

0:28:07 > 0:28:14Minister share my view that people in positions of responsibility may

0:28:14 > 0:28:20unwittingly put themselves on the side of prolonging and potentially

0:28:20 > 0:28:26worsening the crisis if they either, by deceit or by design, choose to

0:28:26 > 0:28:34ignore areas where the kingdom has, in part, corrected what where at

0:28:34 > 0:28:40times deplorable mistakes and their initial conduct of the conflict?The

0:28:40 > 0:28:46honourable gentleman has a deep knowledge of the area and the

0:28:46 > 0:28:52complexities it involves. It does require handling with balance, as

0:28:52 > 0:28:57any of these difficult circumstances are. We are right to understand what

0:28:57 > 0:29:00caused the conflict, be concerns that have been raised in the conduct

0:29:00 > 0:29:07and things have changed since international pressure. A situation

0:29:07 > 0:29:11where an insurgency that brings in external forces to attack his state,

0:29:11 > 0:29:17that that could be left until with would seem to be an unfortunate set

0:29:17 > 0:29:22of consequences for the future. We want to see the matter resolved with

0:29:22 > 0:29:27the security of Saudi and Yemeni at the heart of a future peace

0:29:27 > 0:29:33arrangement.I refer to my declaration. Does my right

0:29:33 > 0:29:37honourable friend acknowledge that the intervention of Saudi Arabia and

0:29:37 > 0:29:41its coalition partners in Yemen was at the request of the legitimate

0:29:41 > 0:29:45Government of that country? Does he agree that the principal insurgents

0:29:45 > 0:29:53and their allies are supplied by Imran, whose actions are prolonging

0:29:53 > 0:30:00the conflict in that country?I am grateful to my right honourable

0:30:00 > 0:30:06friend for his observations. It is right, although the circumstances in

0:30:06 > 0:30:11Yemen are indeed dire and do call for a conclusion to the conflict,

0:30:11 > 0:30:18not to understand the origins of the conflict, however it was started,

0:30:18 > 0:30:23with the two failed to understand how the conflict can properly be

0:30:23 > 0:30:27brought to a conclusion. Outside influences have been involved in

0:30:27 > 0:30:32causing great danger and great fears and concerns in the region is also

0:30:32 > 0:30:39extremely clear.Mr Speaker, the Minister mentioned the two holy

0:30:39 > 0:30:45places. Hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of British

0:30:45 > 0:30:53citizens aspire to, or will go there. Will he be raising these

0:30:53 > 0:30:58issues about their security and the way in which they are treated during

0:30:58 > 0:31:03these discussions? Will he also be emphasising the importance that

0:31:03 > 0:31:11Saudi Arabia revitalise the initiative for a middle East peace

0:31:11 > 0:31:16settlement?In relation to his first question, I do not know what is on

0:31:16 > 0:31:23the agenda at the honourable gentleman can be assured that safety

0:31:23 > 0:31:27of those going from the United Kingdom is always important and that

0:31:27 > 0:31:32is raised by the ambassador. He knows how important it is to all

0:31:32 > 0:31:45that undertake the pogrom edge. Pilgrimage. I am interested in how

0:31:45 > 0:31:50Saudi Arabia might respond. So that the peace initiative, that lies at

0:31:50 > 0:31:57the base of the solutions remains in the minds of everyone who wants to

0:31:57 > 0:32:02see peace between the Palestinians and Israel.Historically Saudi

0:32:02 > 0:32:08Arabia has channelled hundreds of billions of pounds into the violent

0:32:08 > 0:32:12end of the Islamic extremism all around the world. In his assessment,

0:32:12 > 0:32:20has that shifted visibly under the Crown Prince?I thank my honourable

0:32:20 > 0:32:26friend. I think the short answer to that is yes. I think as we are all

0:32:26 > 0:32:33aware of recent history, and that elements in Saudi Arabia may have

0:32:33 > 0:32:37been involved in elements of violent extremism, I think the setting of

0:32:37 > 0:32:43his state against that by calling for moderate Islam, modernisation,

0:32:43 > 0:32:48which flies in the face of those very extremists, I think that is

0:32:48 > 0:32:53making clear the way in which Saudi Arabia wants to deal with its past

0:32:53 > 0:33:03and seek an alternative future. There is no mention at all of human

0:33:03 > 0:33:08rights in the Vision 2030 programme. That involves the hundred people

0:33:08 > 0:33:11being executed since it was launched, including children and

0:33:11 > 0:33:21protesters. I was not sure if he said this was going to be raised and

0:33:21 > 0:33:25can act as if it is and the juveniles who have been on death row

0:33:25 > 0:33:33for many years, this question will be raised?I did make clear to the

0:33:33 > 0:33:46House that it has been mentioned by us in relation to this and seeking a

0:33:46 > 0:33:50situation where they might not be executed and that matter remains

0:33:50 > 0:33:55very much a matter of concern for the United Kingdom. That is why we

0:33:55 > 0:34:02talk about it and raise it privately as well.It was evident earlier that

0:34:02 > 0:34:04propaganda has been affected. There's anything we can learn from

0:34:04 > 0:34:14that?I defer to my right honourable friend in his knowledge of

0:34:14 > 0:34:21propaganda and how it might be used. I am not sure whose voices are

0:34:21 > 0:34:29listened to most in relation to this. I think what it indicates is

0:34:29 > 0:34:33because it is not a state what you're talking about and not been

0:34:33 > 0:34:41easy to target, a more comprehensive picture of the conflict would lead

0:34:41 > 0:34:45to different conclusions. The conclusion however that we all want

0:34:45 > 0:34:49the conflict to end so that there can be peace and better security for

0:34:49 > 0:34:54the people of Yemen who deserve better governance is a matter of

0:34:54 > 0:35:02importance to all of us.There has been huge disruption for access to

0:35:02 > 0:35:07humanitarian aid. That is caused by Saudi Arabian blockades mainly will

0:35:07 > 0:35:12that be brought as a matter of urgency with the Crown Prince, to

0:35:12 > 0:35:18open the ports for the 22 million people who need urgent assistance?I

0:35:18 > 0:35:25can assure at the right honourable gentleman and the House. The reasons

0:35:25 > 0:35:30for the restrictions were because of the concerns of Saudi Arabia that

0:35:30 > 0:35:34weapons that are directed against them first smuggled into Yemen and

0:35:34 > 0:35:40we wanted to give assurances that we would do all we can to prevent that.

0:35:40 > 0:35:46The restrictions of ships coming in can be used and these have been used

0:35:46 > 0:35:52and the ports are now open. 50 ships have blocked since the restrictions

0:35:52 > 0:35:56were imposed in December and we shall do all we can and the United

0:35:56 > 0:36:02Kingdom has taken a leading part in reassuring the caller Shin and

0:36:02 > 0:36:08talking about the crucial need for human Terry and aid to enter Yemen.

0:36:08 > 0:36:17In seeking to have a ceasefire, does the UK believe Iran has broken

0:36:17 > 0:36:23sanctions... Sorry, UN sanctions. Yes, I thank my right honourable

0:36:23 > 0:36:27friend for the question. The UN panel of experts held within recent

0:36:27 > 0:36:38weeks very clearly that Iran had not been able to demonstrate that it had

0:36:38 > 0:36:43abided by the resolution, about the availability of weapons going to and

0:36:43 > 0:36:49a rear... Going to Yemen. That was the concern of the preach of UN

0:36:49 > 0:36:56sanctions. It emphasises again external... That should come to an

0:36:56 > 0:37:01end as part of a peace agreement.My inbox has been flooded by

0:37:01 > 0:37:07constituents wanting to see and enter the ceasefire in Yemen. ...

0:37:07 > 0:37:11The conflict in Yemen. How does you square that Circa when this

0:37:11 > 0:37:16Government has been facilitating 4.6 billion pounds worth of arms, making

0:37:16 > 0:37:23us complicit in Yemen?I understand the question and let me repeat

0:37:23 > 0:37:27again. The long-standing relationship with the Kingdom of

0:37:27 > 0:37:32Saudi Arabia, in terms of defence and its place in a difficult and

0:37:32 > 0:37:37hostile region is long-standing. In relation to Yemen and the arms

0:37:37 > 0:37:41export are covered by strict guarantees and scrutiny of this

0:37:41 > 0:37:48house and the courts. In relation to the conflict, if it was as simple as

0:37:48 > 0:37:53saying to one party, stop doing this and all will be all right, when they

0:37:53 > 0:38:01have on the borders, missiles directed at them, I do not think he

0:38:01 > 0:38:05would have any credibility. We must continue to do all we can through

0:38:05 > 0:38:10the UN to CNN in this conflict, in which military pressure on the

0:38:10 > 0:38:14insurgency has been part of the process. As I said before, we do not

0:38:14 > 0:38:19see a military solution to this, a protest leading to negotiations and

0:38:19 > 0:38:24an end to the conflict as soon as possible.The Crown Prince has been

0:38:24 > 0:38:29clear that he wants to build a moderate moderate future for Saudi

0:38:29 > 0:38:33Arabia. That is something the whole house would want to see him achieve.

0:38:33 > 0:38:37Does the Minister agree that the best way to see that happen is to

0:38:37 > 0:38:41work with him and to assist them, and not build diplomatic walls

0:38:41 > 0:38:47between our two countries?I agree with my honourable friend. That is

0:38:47 > 0:38:52the point of the engagement, which I can assure the House covers the

0:38:52 > 0:38:56positive parts of what is happening in Saudi Arabia but also does not

0:38:56 > 0:39:00shy away from the difficult things that I know is on the minds of

0:39:00 > 0:39:10members and constituents.Thank you, Mr Speaker. That is right that we

0:39:10 > 0:39:12engage with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and it would be unrealistic

0:39:12 > 0:39:18to suggest we do not. The freedom of religion and the right for people to

0:39:18 > 0:39:25practice their own faith, can he say these issues will be picked up in

0:39:25 > 0:39:30this meeting?I am grateful to my honourable friend. Freedom of

0:39:30 > 0:39:34religion is a difficult issue in relation to the Kingdom of Saudi

0:39:34 > 0:39:39Arabia because of its position as a custodial of the two holy mosques.

0:39:39 > 0:39:47We are clear, greater collagen and throughout the region, one faith for

0:39:47 > 0:39:53another is crucial if the region is to move away from the path it

0:39:53 > 0:39:58appears set. There will always be a voice here for tolerance of other

0:39:58 > 0:40:01faiths and progressive moves towards freedom of faith throughout the

0:40:01 > 0:40:09region.Thank you, Mr Speaker. I referred to the register. This will

0:40:09 > 0:40:13embarrass him but can I invite my right honourable friend to comment

0:40:13 > 0:40:18and reflect on those that relations between countries will often depend

0:40:18 > 0:40:24on the quality of diligence of our diplomatic ambassadors overseas. We

0:40:24 > 0:40:30are very lucky to have a first class ambassador to Saudi Arabia. He has

0:40:30 > 0:40:38converted to is lamb, undertaken and I have seen the close and honest

0:40:38 > 0:40:42relationship that he has with Saudi Arabia. He is a pinnacle and best

0:40:42 > 0:40:49example of our diplomatic corps and we should be grateful to him. I

0:40:49 > 0:40:53welcome this visit.

0:40:53 > 0:41:00Mr Speaker, I am grateful. Behind all of the efforts of the ministers

0:41:00 > 0:41:07at the dispatch box is an extraordinary ambassadorial team. I

0:41:07 > 0:41:15fully endorse everything that my honourable friend has said and also

0:41:15 > 0:41:22mentioned the former ambassador to Yemen's. It is a first-class team

0:41:22 > 0:41:26and it is representative of a first-class team throughout all of

0:41:26 > 0:41:37the region.I gather it relates to the exchanges that have just taken

0:41:37 > 0:41:43place.It has just been on the register. I did go on a delegation

0:41:43 > 0:41:52to Saudi Arabia.The house would appreciate that. Thank you to the

0:41:52 > 0:42:00Minister and colleagues. Urgent question, Tom Watson.Whilst

0:42:00 > 0:42:08referring to my register, my entry on the register, I would like to ask

0:42:08 > 0:42:14the secretary of state to make a statement on the allegations of

0:42:14 > 0:42:35Barking. And the -- blagging.This morning we saw allegations of

0:42:35 > 0:42:38behaviour that appears totally unacceptable and potentially

0:42:38 > 0:42:41criminal. The investigation is therefore a matter for the police.

0:42:41 > 0:42:47The house will understand that there is only so far I can go on

0:42:47 > 0:43:01discussing this significant details. More broadly, some have said that we

0:43:01 > 0:43:03should change policy. Policy should be based on all available

0:43:03 > 0:43:14information. Indeed, it was precisely because of cases like this

0:43:14 > 0:43:20that the Levenson enquiry was set up. And that this sort of behaviour

0:43:20 > 0:43:29was covered and Mr Ford's activities were raised as part of the enquiry.

0:43:29 > 0:43:33As we discussed last week, and again on Monday, there have been three

0:43:33 > 0:43:38detailed police investigations and over 40 people were convicted and

0:43:38 > 0:43:44many went to prison. To date's revelations if proven are clearly

0:43:44 > 0:43:52already covered by the law and appear in contravention of sect

0:43:52 > 0:43:59tweet section -- in contravention of section 50 five. Once more, the fact

0:43:59 > 0:44:06that this activity stopped in 2010, underlines the fact that the world

0:44:06 > 0:44:12has changed. Newspapers today are in a very different position to run

0:44:12 > 0:44:18these alerted offences took place. This view is strengthened by today's

0:44:18 > 0:44:21example, because the behaviour we discovered today was before the

0:44:21 > 0:44:26Levenson enquiry and an existing law is in place to deal with that.

0:44:26 > 0:44:32Criminal behaviour should be dealt with by the police. Anyone who has

0:44:32 > 0:44:36committed a criminal offence should face the full force of the law. The

0:44:36 > 0:44:43future of a vibrant, free press is important to us all. We want to see

0:44:43 > 0:44:48the higher standards and we must face the challenges of today to

0:44:48 > 0:44:52ensure that Britain has a high-quality discourse to underpin

0:44:52 > 0:44:58our democracy for the heirs to come. Mr Speaker, the world has not

0:44:58 > 0:45:09changed. When he announced last week that he was dropping the Levenson

0:45:09 > 0:45:12enquiry, the culture secretary said he was doing so because the enquiry

0:45:12 > 0:45:17looked into everything in this area. It was followed by three police

0:45:17 > 0:45:22investigations and we looked into these things as a society and we had

0:45:22 > 0:45:26a compliance of Levenson enquiry. He told is that the matter was closed

0:45:26 > 0:45:31and there was nothing more to say. Overnight, the BBC has reported

0:45:31 > 0:45:39allegations by another whistle-blower, who says he was a

0:45:39 > 0:45:51blagger for the Sunday Times for 15 years. He says that he obtained

0:45:51 > 0:45:56information from Cabinet members. He says that the information was

0:45:56 > 0:45:59illegal, intrusive and ultimately wrong. In his reference to the first

0:45:59 > 0:46:06half of the enquiry, it was conceded that Ford had worked for the paper

0:46:06 > 0:46:12but have not done so for over a decade. Today, the Sunday Times have

0:46:12 > 0:46:18disputed these new claims. The second half of the enquiry could

0:46:18 > 0:46:23establish where the truth lies. That is what it was set up to do. The

0:46:23 > 0:46:25Government is closing down the public enquiry before it has done

0:46:25 > 0:46:32its work and despite the fact that Sir Levenson says that he disagrees

0:46:32 > 0:46:37with that decision. 130,000

0:46:37 > 0:46:40concerned citizens have said it should go ahead and the Secretary of

0:46:40 > 0:46:44State has chosen to disregard them. The secretary of state as

0:46:44 > 0:46:50capitulating to the press barons who want to use their raw power to close

0:46:50 > 0:46:54down a national public enquiry. I would likely ask him, in light of

0:46:54 > 0:47:04these new allegations, we will -- will he reconsider? If not, how will

0:47:04 > 0:47:09he is sure this house and the public that this new allegation of criminal

0:47:09 > 0:47:13behaviour by the Sunday Times will be fully investigated? Is it not now

0:47:13 > 0:47:22clear to him that too many questions remain unanswered to justify this

0:47:22 > 0:47:25decision to break David Cameron's solemn promise to the victims of

0:47:25 > 0:47:32press abuse?Thank you. I think I covered all of those questions in my

0:47:32 > 0:47:38statement. As I mentioned, the Levenson enquiry not only had terms

0:47:38 > 0:47:44of reference which covered this type of allegation, but indeed this

0:47:44 > 0:47:49person was raised at the Levenson enquiry and of course as he implies,

0:47:49 > 0:47:54it is a matter for the police to follow up any evidence of criminal

0:47:54 > 0:48:00wrongdoing. He also asks, should we therefore bring in an enquiry that

0:48:00 > 0:48:09is backward looking and bring in rules which will help to undermine

0:48:09 > 0:48:17further the free press that we need, notably section 40. The answer to

0:48:17 > 0:48:22those questions last week was both clearly no. The answer with this new

0:48:22 > 0:48:28evidence of activity that took place up to 2010, it appears, and

0:48:28 > 0:48:35therefore up to seven years ago is not a reason to reopen decisions

0:48:35 > 0:48:39that were taken exactly on the basis that the world has changed. If

0:48:39 > 0:48:43anything, this evidence demonstrates further just how much things have

0:48:43 > 0:48:52changed.I was just a secretary when we set up the Levenson enquiry and

0:48:52 > 0:48:57we were promised the second stage of the enquiry. By right honourable

0:48:57 > 0:49:02friend will not be surprised to discover that I share the

0:49:02 > 0:49:07disappointment that the second stage of the enquiry was postponed. Does

0:49:07 > 0:49:11he really think that there is no longer a sufficient public interest

0:49:11 > 0:49:16in new allegations of this kind or knowing which newspapers were

0:49:16 > 0:49:23browbeating which policeman because it was as long ago as seven years?

0:49:23 > 0:49:28Does he think that the best newspapers in this country will

0:49:28 > 0:49:32accept that judgment for a moment if it was applied to any other sector

0:49:32 > 0:49:38of the economy? We have public enquiries in hand at the moment

0:49:38 > 0:49:44looking into much older allegations of sexual abuse, paedophilia,

0:49:44 > 0:49:50tragedy and other things. Will he not wait until we have a new

0:49:50 > 0:49:55allegation that his post-2011 before at least thinking again about about

0:49:55 > 0:50:01his decision? Wing of course, I respect my right honourable friend's

0:50:01 > 0:50:15view.The question that faces us now is what is the right thing to do now

0:50:15 > 0:50:21going forward to ensure that we have a high-quality democratic discourse,

0:50:21 > 0:50:27when we have such great challenges facing the press, to make sure that

0:50:27 > 0:50:35we can tackle fake news and the Brit disinformation -- and deliberate

0:50:35 > 0:50:41misinformation. We are taking that work forward but allegations of

0:50:41 > 0:50:49behaviour like this where covered by the original enquiry and looked into

0:50:49 > 0:50:54and if it comes to another police case into these allegations, the

0:50:54 > 0:51:03existing law is already there to cover it.Clearly these new reports

0:51:03 > 0:51:08are worrying, and the only add to the serious concerns that many of us

0:51:08 > 0:51:11have across this house in regard to the behaviour of the press. We have

0:51:11 > 0:51:14always said that individuals should be able to seek redress when they

0:51:14 > 0:51:19feel they have been the victim of press malpractice. It benefits

0:51:19 > 0:51:22everyone of us to have immediate that is both transparent and

0:51:22 > 0:51:29accountable. The Scottish Government must be consulted and Scotland and

0:51:29 > 0:51:32their distinct legal system recognise. Under those circumstances

0:51:32 > 0:51:41we would support efforts to re-establish the enquiry. What

0:51:41 > 0:51:45action, if any, is he proposing to take on these new allegations and

0:51:45 > 0:51:53can he guarantee that if the new enquiry is established that it would

0:51:53 > 0:52:00only happen with respect to Scotland's distinct legal system.

0:52:00 > 0:52:04There is action that is necessary as a result of these allegations and it

0:52:04 > 0:52:09is action for the police into allegations of what appeared to be

0:52:09 > 0:52:19criminal activities.He is right to say it is a matter for the police.

0:52:19 > 0:52:31Is he listening to her called to further strengthen her powers.Of

0:52:31 > 0:52:34course, we have a good working relationship with the information

0:52:34 > 0:52:39Commissioner and her powers are being strengthened as a part of the

0:52:39 > 0:52:43data protection Bill Popper for this house. I'm sure that the level to

0:52:43 > 0:52:47which they are being strengthened and the ways in which they are being

0:52:47 > 0:52:49strengthened will be properly scrutinised as the Bill goes

0:52:49 > 0:52:58through.I would urge the secretary of state to stop trying to hide

0:52:58 > 0:53:02behind the Levenson enquiry, because the man who was responsible for that

0:53:02 > 0:53:04enquiry says he fundamentally disagrees with them. It was a

0:53:04 > 0:53:10remarkable letter that he wrote. He said I have no doubt that there is a

0:53:10 > 0:53:13legitimate expectation on behalf of the public and of the alleged

0:53:13 > 0:53:22victims and other unlawful conduct that there will be a full public

0:53:22 > 0:53:25enquiry and clear reassurances that nothing of the same scale will occur

0:53:25 > 0:53:32again. That is the point. Of course the police can look at specific

0:53:32 > 0:53:35instances, but the question is what is the culture that allowed those

0:53:35 > 0:53:39practices to happen and how come we have reassurance that that culture

0:53:39 > 0:53:47has changed? How come we have that reassurance without an enquiry?Not

0:53:47 > 0:53:51only has already been a Levenson enquiry into those areas, but that

0:53:51 > 0:53:59culture has clearly changed. These are historic practices. What we have

0:53:59 > 0:54:03two address now is how do we ensure that there is high-quality

0:54:03 > 0:54:07journalism in the as to come rather than going and revisiting a time

0:54:07 > 0:54:14when he was at the height of his powers.Does my right honourable

0:54:14 > 0:54:21friend agree that allegations of blagging from reporters employed by

0:54:21 > 0:54:29newspapers have been known about for over ten years. And that that did

0:54:29 > 0:54:33lead to prosecutions and convictions. The newspapers today

0:54:33 > 0:54:37are facing real challenges and it is those that we should be looking at

0:54:37 > 0:54:42through the enquiry that the Government has set up rather than

0:54:42 > 0:54:50revisiting events of a decade ago? It was a great honour to serve in

0:54:50 > 0:54:53Government with my right honourable friend. He proceeded me in this job

0:54:53 > 0:54:58and has great wisdom in this area. He understands the challenges that

0:54:58 > 0:55:02faced by having a high-quality media with high-quality journalism that

0:55:02 > 0:55:08must behave appropriately and where people need to ensure that they can

0:55:08 > 0:55:14have redress such as in the low-cost arbitration system that now exists

0:55:14 > 0:55:17and he put a lot of work into putting all of that into place and I

0:55:17 > 0:55:23bet paid tribute to him.

0:55:23 > 0:55:31We have heard it was just one rogue reporter, one rogue newspaper. No,

0:55:31 > 0:55:35one rogue company. Now the truth is because of the civil actions were

0:55:35 > 0:55:39people have put their homes in danger to take civil action, we

0:55:39 > 0:55:45learn, and because of revelations last night, we learned it was

0:55:45 > 0:55:49extensive, including at the Sunday Times which has always denied any

0:55:49 > 0:55:54involvement in this activity. Last week the Secretary of State said he

0:55:54 > 0:55:59hopes there will be improvements to the press conference system. What

0:55:59 > 0:56:05improvements would you like to see? I went to see the low cost

0:56:05 > 0:56:10arbitration system that has been put in place to work. At the moment, we

0:56:10 > 0:56:14have not seen a full case go through. It has just been put in

0:56:14 > 0:56:19place in November. I want to see it work better and when there are wrong

0:56:19 > 0:56:23decisions made, that the acknowledgement of that and apology

0:56:23 > 0:56:29for it is properly done.Those who believe in a truly free press,

0:56:29 > 0:56:34should not accept it and those who don't believe in a truly free press

0:56:34 > 0:56:38cannot accept it either. In the light of these criminal confessions,

0:56:38 > 0:56:43or make the Guardian and BBC reported, will he not agree that

0:56:43 > 0:56:47implementing section 48 would be more in the spirit of building a

0:56:47 > 0:56:51country that works for everyone, then the system now where only the

0:56:51 > 0:56:56very rich can challenge the press? Well, I have a lot of time for my

0:56:56 > 0:57:00honourable friend. On this... LAUGHTER

0:57:00 > 0:57:07I think in making sure a country works for everyone, making sure the

0:57:07 > 0:57:12press that can investigate people and cannot be put off such

0:57:12 > 0:57:15investigations by the threat of costs, even though everything they

0:57:15 > 0:57:21report is accurate. I think section 40 is not important. It is important

0:57:21 > 0:57:25we have proper redress and the recently brought in a new system. As

0:57:25 > 0:57:30I said in my previous response, I would like to see that working.My

0:57:30 > 0:57:36honourable gentleman will go about his business with a spring in his

0:57:36 > 0:57:48step.Does he agree that the behaviour described as John Ford is

0:57:48 > 0:57:53being criminal would also be actionable at civil law? Is section

0:57:53 > 0:57:5840 were in force, it would be a benefit to any member of the public

0:57:58 > 0:58:02who is a potential claimant, particularly if the publisher of the

0:58:02 > 0:58:10Sunday Times was held liable.The honourable member has demonstrated

0:58:10 > 0:58:18just how much this is a matter for the courts. It is potential criminal

0:58:18 > 0:58:22activity, she mentioned civil action, that is how we deal with

0:58:22 > 0:58:27this, that is potentially criminal in this way.Good my right

0:58:27 > 0:58:34honourable friend confirm that if the allegations that are published

0:58:34 > 0:58:38are true, the would-be criminal acts and prosecuted today without any

0:58:38 > 0:58:45records for Leveson Inquiry or any other. If there was concerned about

0:58:45 > 0:58:49access to funds, might it not be the case that Max Mosley and his

0:58:49 > 0:58:55supporters might find such an action? The allegations and what we

0:58:55 > 0:58:59have read about our potentially criminal and dealing with that is a

0:58:59 > 0:59:09matter not for Ministers rightly for police.Hundreds of thousands of the

0:59:09 > 0:59:14British people, lord Leveson and the revelations make it clear that this

0:59:14 > 0:59:18matter is not closed which might lead the public to ask, what is

0:59:18 > 0:59:22there to hide? Why would the Secretary of State not let it take

0:59:22 > 0:59:30place and chic and put a line under it. -- and he can put a line under

0:59:30 > 0:59:33it?I am concentrating what we need for the future and not what happened

0:59:33 > 0:59:41years ago.Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Sunday Times revelations are

0:59:41 > 0:59:46disquieting that they are historic. Can my right honourable friend

0:59:46 > 0:59:51assure me that the victims of press intrusion and those who face it at

0:59:51 > 0:59:55times of bereavement, that the new model introduced something Leveson

0:59:55 > 0:59:59Inquiry makes the instances less likely and there are sanctions in

0:59:59 > 1:00:07place?Not only is that what is put in place but what must be put in

1:00:07 > 1:00:15place. Making sure that happens and the free press at the same time is

1:00:15 > 1:00:22protected is extremely important. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Secretary

1:00:22 > 1:00:26of State tells us that the world has changed. Can I remind him when the

1:00:26 > 1:00:30press Council was set up we were assured the world had changed and

1:00:30 > 1:00:36then when the PCC was set up we were assured the same. We do not know it

1:00:36 > 1:00:40has changed or this action has stopped with the Leveson Inquiry.

1:00:40 > 1:00:45Perhaps the only way we would know if we had a second enquiry. Witty

1:00:45 > 1:00:54reconsider?With -- will he reconsider? Policy is also

1:00:54 > 1:00:58different. We have changes in the behaviour of the rules around the

1:00:58 > 1:01:05police, a new police code of ethics and on the press side, the new

1:01:05 > 1:01:09regulator and so the idea that things are the same as the wearer is

1:01:09 > 1:01:16underlined by the fact that this activity is historic activity and

1:01:16 > 1:01:23not weasel activity.A free and independent press and local press is

1:01:23 > 1:01:26eight colour of our democracy. Press should adhere to the highest

1:01:26 > 1:01:34standards and any criminal investigations are investigated. It

1:01:34 > 1:01:39is a difficult balance to strike. Can he reassure me it is that

1:01:39 > 1:01:43difficult balance that he and his predecessor have sought to strike?

1:01:43 > 1:01:48That is right. We are always facing the challenges that are in front of

1:01:48 > 1:01:53us. The idea that we should put at risk hundreds more of local

1:01:53 > 1:02:03newspapers over and above the 200 that have shut since 205 -- 2005, it

1:02:03 > 1:02:08is wrong to me. People who support section 40 and its implementation

1:02:08 > 1:02:17support the ending of the ability of the local press to investigate

1:02:17 > 1:02:24people locally and undermine the businesses.If these allegations are

1:02:24 > 1:02:30proved true, not only would it mean they had been a serious abuse of

1:02:30 > 1:02:34power by major newspapers for a period of the decade, it would also

1:02:34 > 1:02:39mean the then editor of the Sunday Times, now the editor of the times,

1:02:39 > 1:02:43was only partially truthful in his evidence to the enquiry. How will

1:02:43 > 1:02:48the Secretary of State ensure the full truth is finally revealed?

1:02:48 > 1:02:54Well, as she knows, for these allegations to be investigated, that

1:02:54 > 1:02:58is a matter for the police. They will therefore look into the

1:02:58 > 1:03:03allegations. That is the right place for this.Thank you, Mr Speaker. I

1:03:03 > 1:03:07should declare that in the allegations printed in the Guardian,

1:03:07 > 1:03:13it is alleged that Mr Ford worked for the Telegraph. Is it not in

1:03:13 > 1:03:20itself a demonstration of how much the culture has changed? We have our

1:03:20 > 1:03:22newspapers reporting on the allegations and we have a regulator

1:03:22 > 1:03:26that provides the low-cost arbitration that would provide the

1:03:26 > 1:03:34redress for the victims?He is spot on. There is a group of people in

1:03:34 > 1:03:37this house interested in the past and there is a group interested in

1:03:37 > 1:03:42the future. I am interested in having high-quality journalism for

1:03:42 > 1:03:49the future.The father of the House is completely right that the press

1:03:49 > 1:03:54would not allow other institutions or organisations to be judged by

1:03:54 > 1:03:59such a low bar. Why is he satisfied that the press is not being judged

1:03:59 > 1:04:06by the sort of bar?These are allegations of criminal behaviour.

1:04:06 > 1:04:10These were printed any newspaper and a newspaper that supported the

1:04:10 > 1:04:18approach we last Thursday. They are printed by the media. They are being

1:04:18 > 1:04:22discussed in this house and, of course, allegations of criminal

1:04:22 > 1:04:25behaviour should be dealt with properly by the police in the normal

1:04:25 > 1:04:38way.Will he agree with me that it would not only be costly and lengthy

1:04:38 > 1:04:43but could also potentially undermine the freedom of our press, being

1:04:43 > 1:04:45disproportionate and too narrow, given that newspaper circulations

1:04:45 > 1:04:50have been declining but digital and media consumption has been

1:04:50 > 1:04:57increasing?She is quite right we have to make sure we have in place a

1:04:57 > 1:05:00vibrant, high-quality journalism, free press that can hold the

1:05:00 > 1:05:03powerful to account. There are some people who do not like that, but

1:05:03 > 1:05:08that is an important part of having a high-quality political discourse

1:05:08 > 1:05:14and liberal democracy as we know it. That is what we are focused on. She

1:05:14 > 1:05:20mentions the cost. The potential costs of another enquiry would

1:05:20 > 1:05:24estimate around £5 million. I think that money is better spent ensuring

1:05:24 > 1:05:30there is is attainable future of high-quality journalism.The

1:05:30 > 1:05:32Secretary of State says it is not desirable to look at the past

1:05:32 > 1:05:39because they are focusing on fake news, why cannot we do both?We have

1:05:39 > 1:05:44already had a full investigation through Leveson in what happened.

1:05:44 > 1:05:54The question is now what we do next. The Secretary of State excuse that

1:05:54 > 1:05:59the world has changed is wrong but ignores the fact that it was built

1:05:59 > 1:06:05into the enquiry to allow a police investigation. The revelations show

1:06:05 > 1:06:09evidence is there to be investigated. Doesn't have wilful

1:06:09 > 1:06:12refusal to allow the enquiry to proceed make it look like the media

1:06:12 > 1:06:19has something to hide?No, he says that the evidence this morning shows

1:06:19 > 1:06:22there needs to be further investigation, and, of course, this

1:06:22 > 1:06:26is why we have the police to investigate and the courts if

1:06:26 > 1:06:33necessary to ensure that justice is done.The Secretary of State stated

1:06:33 > 1:06:37at the start that policy must be based on all information, but how

1:06:37 > 1:06:43can this possibly happen if there is no second stage of the enquiry? Can

1:06:43 > 1:06:50he stop contradicting himself and get on with the job?It is very hard

1:06:50 > 1:06:53to add anything more that there will be an investigation if the police

1:06:53 > 1:07:00think what appear to be criminal behaviour is deemed to be by the

1:07:00 > 1:07:04police but the point is that as a matter for the police in this

1:07:04 > 1:07:09country, not a matter for Ministers. The Secretary of State talks about

1:07:09 > 1:07:14these being historic events but the victims of the latest act only found

1:07:14 > 1:07:18out about it yesterday and might not even know about it at the moment.

1:07:18 > 1:07:25That is not historic. Can I ask, Sir Brian Leveson wrote to him and said

1:07:25 > 1:07:28matters have not been fully considered and we need a second

1:07:28 > 1:07:34party. Why does you think he knows better? -- why does he think he

1:07:34 > 1:07:42knows better?I have thought about the recommendations from Sir Brian

1:07:42 > 1:07:47and my judgment is we need to concentrate on making sure we have a

1:07:47 > 1:07:51sustainable, high-quality journalism in the future. When he says these

1:07:51 > 1:07:54things are current and not historic, the activities that have been

1:07:54 > 1:07:58alleged in the newspapers and by the BBC this morning where activities

1:07:58 > 1:08:07that, it says, were ended in 2010. That is, indeed, historic.Does he

1:08:07 > 1:08:10not understand why I and my colleagues find it odd that he

1:08:10 > 1:08:15should decline at an enquiry on the basis that these things happen

1:08:15 > 1:08:20before 2010? By that logic, we would never have had an Iraq enquiry,

1:08:20 > 1:08:27child abuse enquiry, enquiry is by definition examine events that have

1:08:27 > 1:08:31happened in the past.We have had an enquiry that investigated what

1:08:31 > 1:08:38happened in the past. It cost millions of pounds. There was a

1:08:38 > 1:08:43total of 48 million spent, including on the police investigations, three

1:08:43 > 1:08:47separate police investigations, over 40 convictions. The gentleman

1:08:47 > 1:08:53mentioned this morning his issue was raised in the Leveson Inquiry. The

1:08:53 > 1:08:58idea that we therefore need to have a new enquiry is actually undermined

1:08:58 > 1:09:03by today's revelations, rather than support it. I think that what

1:09:03 > 1:09:07matters is we look forward to making sure we have high-quality journalism

1:09:07 > 1:09:14and sustainable business models for that in the future.Order. I will,

1:09:14 > 1:09:22to the honourable gentleman. Point of order.In an oral statement on

1:09:22 > 1:09:28social care in 2017, the then care Minister, who is in her place on the

1:09:28 > 1:09:31front bench, reply to a question I asked about the Government

1:09:31 > 1:09:34abandoning the killer strategy that was due to be published in summer

1:09:34 > 1:09:422017. -- clearing strategy. The Government said this, and I caught

1:09:42 > 1:09:46her, we have listened to them and we will consider what they have said in

1:09:46 > 1:09:49bringing forward the paper. It is important to put together what

1:09:49 > 1:09:54support that is at present and respond to that and we will publish

1:09:54 > 1:09:59our action plan in January. Mr Speaker, it is now March. This is

1:09:59 > 1:10:03the second time I have raised this. We have no prospect any more of a

1:10:03 > 1:10:06strategy from the Government but they have not met their own target.

1:10:06 > 1:10:13It is a shabby way to treat them. I want to ask if you have any

1:10:13 > 1:10:16indication that the current minister or any health Minister plans to come

1:10:16 > 1:10:20to the House to update us on what, if anything, the Government

1:10:20 > 1:10:31proposals to do about this issue?

1:10:31 > 1:10:34There is a health minister on the Treasury bench who has heard what

1:10:34 > 1:10:37the honourable lady has had to say and she is welcome to respond that

1:10:37 > 1:10:42she wishes but she's not under any obligation to do so. What I would

1:10:42 > 1:10:45say to the honourable lady he was an experienced denizen of the house is

1:10:45 > 1:10:48that there will be opportunities through the business question and

1:10:48 > 1:10:53subsequently for her to seek to draw the attention of the house again and

1:10:53 > 1:10:57perhaps a more detailed to their concerns and to elicit a ministerial

1:10:57 > 1:11:09reply.I would ask your advice on how the house on record: put the

1:11:09 > 1:11:19manifesto in 2017 with its promise to scrap Levenson to Mac produce the

1:11:19 > 1:11:24results of the departments carry out. How can we proceed and be sure

1:11:24 > 1:11:32particularly the comments that this decision was fairly reached and not

1:11:32 > 1:11:38subject to judicial review?I would say two things in response. Firstly,

1:11:38 > 1:11:45I think he seeks and perhaps even rather over generously expects from

1:11:45 > 1:11:50me a degree of reassurance and indeed even of wisdom, which is it

1:11:50 > 1:11:55not within the capacity of the chair to provide. Secondly, when the

1:11:55 > 1:11:59honourable gentleman says how can we, meaning a house as a whole, be

1:11:59 > 1:12:04sure, I simply say, the honourable gentleman who is no stranger to

1:12:04 > 1:12:09these matters has raised something of a philosophical question. The

1:12:09 > 1:12:20matter of whether, when and to what degree members can be confident of

1:12:20 > 1:12:26certainty. These are not matters that can be broached now from the

1:12:26 > 1:12:30chair. However, insofar as the honourable gentleman was seeking

1:12:30 > 1:12:38thinking perhaps the puckish grin on his face suggests, that he wish to

1:12:38 > 1:12:48register his own concerns, he is found a zone solvation.At PMQs on

1:12:48 > 1:12:51the 31st of January, I asked for a meeting with the minister and I was

1:12:51 > 1:12:54promised I could have that. I had a letter some two or three weeks ago

1:12:54 > 1:12:58saying that it had been passed to help. I would seek your guidance or

1:12:58 > 1:13:02anyone's guidance as to how I can progress that because no meeting, no

1:13:02 > 1:13:09date so far and it is five weeks ago so I think I've been fairly patient.

1:13:09 > 1:13:12You have certainly been patient. I would say to the honourable lady

1:13:12 > 1:13:16that raising a point of order in the chamber and reminding the Treasury

1:13:16 > 1:13:22engine of a promised meeting that has not yet been delivered can be a

1:13:22 > 1:13:28remarkably effective way of bringing out about the said meeting. The

1:13:28 > 1:13:31other advice I would offer to the new member of the house is the

1:13:31 > 1:13:34tabling of a written question. If the honourable lady is interested in

1:13:34 > 1:13:42exploring historic copies of the official report, she will know that

1:13:42 > 1:13:46speed then member for Manchester Gorton, our late and dear friend Sir

1:13:46 > 1:13:53Gerald Kaufman was fond of highlighting unanswered

1:13:53 > 1:13:56correspondence to which he demanded a reply or unanswered questions to

1:13:56 > 1:14:03which he demanded a reply or undelivered meetings which he had

1:14:03 > 1:14:09promised upon which he still insisted of tabling. He was fond of

1:14:09 > 1:14:14tabling questions to remind ministers of these matters and to

1:14:14 > 1:14:21enquire when that promised reply or meeting would take place. In my

1:14:21 > 1:14:23experience, Sir Gerald was remarkably effective at obtaining

1:14:23 > 1:14:31that response, as was indeed the former member for Walsall South,

1:14:31 > 1:14:37North, Mr David Winick. The honourable lady can perhaps learned

1:14:37 > 1:14:46usefully from there and many other examples.In January of this year

1:14:46 > 1:14:49the Government announced plans to incentivise local communities to

1:14:49 > 1:14:52agree to explore the possibility of storing radioactive nuclear waste

1:14:52 > 1:14:58near their homes, an initiative widely reported in the media. I was

1:14:58 > 1:15:03anxious this could revive proposals to soar nuclear waste under

1:15:03 > 1:15:06thousands of homes in billing in my constituency and I raise the issue

1:15:06 > 1:15:12at PMQs on the 31st of January. The Prime Minister attitude to it for

1:15:12 > 1:15:15the Cabinet Office despite the publicity and it being deemed

1:15:15 > 1:15:18Government policy knew nothing about this particular initiative by his

1:15:18 > 1:15:21Government. But he promised to investigate the matter and writes to

1:15:21 > 1:15:26me. That was five weeks ago. Can you advise me if it is unreasonable of

1:15:26 > 1:15:30me to have expected an answer by now?Grateful to the honourable

1:15:30 > 1:15:33gentleman free his point of order and giving me the advance notice of

1:15:33 > 1:15:41it. I think it is not unreasonable. For an honourable member to expect a

1:15:41 > 1:15:45response from ministers in five weeks, ministerial correspondence is

1:15:45 > 1:15:50the responsibility of the minister concerned. The Chancellor of the

1:15:50 > 1:15:54Duchy of Vista and Minister for the Cabinet Office, who happens to me my

1:15:54 > 1:16:00constituency neighbour, is normally most courteous and I am sure that

1:16:00 > 1:16:09his colleagues on the Treasury bench including the representatives of the

1:16:09 > 1:16:11patronage secretary will swiftly alert the Right honourable gentleman

1:16:11 > 1:16:16to this outstanding action. He certainly should have had a reply

1:16:16 > 1:16:20and he should now get one, sooner rather than later. Meanwhile the

1:16:20 > 1:16:25honourable gentleman has placed his concern on the record. If there are

1:16:25 > 1:16:31no further points of order, we come now to the ten minute rule motion.

1:16:31 > 1:16:39Mr Gareth Snell.Moved to bringing a bill to make provision of health

1:16:39 > 1:16:47scrutiny by authorities including decisions and connected purposes.

1:16:47 > 1:16:50The 2012 health and social care act introduced radical changes to the

1:16:50 > 1:16:54way health care was organised. Holidays of large Primary Care

1:16:54 > 1:16:59Trusts and reasonable health and in came smaller Doctor led

1:16:59 > 1:17:02commissioning groups and with each clinical commissioning group a

1:17:02 > 1:17:09so-called accountable officer. There are 207 CCG is in England and they

1:17:09 > 1:17:17are responsible for two thirds of all NHS spending. Decisions taken by

1:17:17 > 1:17:24CCGs effect community care and mental health support services as

1:17:24 > 1:17:32well as waiting times. Ensuring that health services reflect our needs of

1:17:32 > 1:17:39those committees are sensible. All providers of public services and

1:17:39 > 1:17:42spenders of public money should be accountable to the public they seek

1:17:42 > 1:17:46to serve and decisions should be made available for public scrutiny.

1:17:46 > 1:17:50That is what this bill seeks to achieve. The present system of

1:17:50 > 1:17:55scrutiny by clinical commissioning groups is opaque, cumbersome and

1:17:55 > 1:18:00impenetrable to most. They are all bound up in clause 20 39 of the

1:18:00 > 1:18:03local authority regulations, which sets up local authorities can set up

1:18:03 > 1:18:08decisions of CCGs where they believe that either proper consultation on

1:18:08 > 1:18:11the service is not taken place although they consider that the

1:18:11 > 1:18:16proposal would not be in the interest of health services in an

1:18:16 > 1:18:20area. That sounds all very well but in reality, it is the tapes will be

1:18:20 > 1:18:26that scenario. Local authorities and their memberships are not currently

1:18:26 > 1:18:28empowered to do anything that accepts decision or escalate it

1:18:28 > 1:18:32straight the Secretary of State. This binary approach does not make a

1:18:32 > 1:18:37good scrutiny and nor does it allow for councillors and local

1:18:37 > 1:18:42authorities in helping CCGs make better decisions. However, Madame

1:18:42 > 1:18:45Depp to Speaker, that is not the only flaw in the current system.

1:18:45 > 1:18:53Should a local authority make a mistake it is immediately referred

1:18:53 > 1:18:56to a panel but since 2013 only 18 referrals have been received in the

1:18:56 > 1:19:02last four referrals including my own city of Stoke-on-Trent sought to

1:19:02 > 1:19:09keep the most and the report from the independent configurations panel

1:19:09 > 1:19:15published. But I'm sure we'll all agree is a totally unacceptable

1:19:15 > 1:19:18weight and during which CCGs are free to implement the decisions they

1:19:18 > 1:19:23had taken despite being subject to referral. This, is not scrutiny

1:19:23 > 1:19:29process that I believe anyone would see as being either fair or robust.

1:19:29 > 1:19:33My bill therefore would seek to impose a maximum 45 day referral

1:19:33 > 1:19:42limit. It would also crucially seek to put any decisions referred to the

1:19:42 > 1:19:44Secretary of State on hold until such time as the Independent

1:19:44 > 1:19:47reconfiguration panel has made its deliberations. I would like this

1:19:47 > 1:19:52bill is go further. It was also grand local authorities a new power

1:19:52 > 1:19:56to call in decisions of CCGs to their local health scrutiny

1:19:56 > 1:20:00committee and compel accountable officers to properly consider the

1:20:00 > 1:20:03views of councillors before progressing with decisions. This

1:20:03 > 1:20:07would be no different to the mechanisms that councils already

1:20:07 > 1:20:08have the challenge decisions regarding public health, which had

1:20:08 > 1:20:13been a function of local Government since 2013. No where would this new

1:20:13 > 1:20:17power have been more welcome than in my own city of Stoke-on-Trent. For

1:20:17 > 1:20:22over two years now, the clinical commissioning groups have been

1:20:22 > 1:20:25pursuing a fraught and deeply unpopular group preferred

1:20:25 > 1:20:32decommissioning care beds. Across many different hospitals have all

1:20:32 > 1:20:39the lost. Over 200 in total. A referral to the Secretary of State

1:20:39 > 1:20:44of the disastrous my care my way home first plan dreamt up by the

1:20:44 > 1:20:50accountable officer was opposed by both Stoke-on-Trent City Council and

1:20:50 > 1:20:53Staffordshire Council and Newcastle Borough Council. But the referral to

1:20:53 > 1:21:00commit a year to be considered. I want to thank the city councillors

1:21:00 > 1:21:04who many people will remember formerly of this place for their

1:21:04 > 1:21:07help in achieving those referrals from the county city councils.

1:21:07 > 1:21:13During that year long will wait the plan continued on and closed those

1:21:13 > 1:21:18much-needed committee care beds. When the fire Allport came back, it

1:21:18 > 1:21:26was scathing about that process. It is said that what been presented in

1:21:26 > 1:21:30September 2013 was entirely incorrect and misleading. It also

1:21:30 > 1:21:37said that the circumstances of the NHS's original decision was unclear.

1:21:37 > 1:21:40The reconfiguration panel also said of the consultation that he did not

1:21:40 > 1:21:45include any meaningful reference to the impact of community beds and

1:21:45 > 1:21:49hospitals. Frankly, if you or I or any local council for that matter

1:21:49 > 1:21:54was subjected to a report that said we had missed out the public in the

1:21:54 > 1:21:58way that we had spent taxpayer money, we would be out of a job and

1:21:58 > 1:22:03frankly I see no difference weight Marcus Warner should be any

1:22:03 > 1:22:06different. Against the wishes of the local authorities, to be the single

1:22:06 > 1:22:12accountable at office of the polar Staffordshire. A huge amount of

1:22:12 > 1:22:16power into an entirely unaccountable individual. In Staffordshire...

1:22:16 > 1:22:25Case, absolute power is easing traffic chaos. Last week, led by

1:22:25 > 1:22:28Andy day, came to Parliament to protest against these bed closures

1:22:28 > 1:22:31because they do not have the faith of the current scrutiny system is

1:22:31 > 1:22:36working. This is just one example from Staffordshire and there are

1:22:36 > 1:22:40many more. The botched privatisation of cancer care programmes or the

1:22:40 > 1:22:42continuation of the clinical commissioning group to find our

1:22:42 > 1:22:47local hospital millions of pounds for missed targets. There are other

1:22:47 > 1:22:56examples. The Shadow Health Secretary expose last week but CCGs

1:22:56 > 1:23:01would paying GPs not to refer people to hospital. This is an example of

1:23:01 > 1:23:05how CCGs are in fermenting dangerous policies and the NHS without proper

1:23:05 > 1:23:12scrutiny. They should have no place in how GPs should be practising and

1:23:12 > 1:23:15use. Practice like this should be blocked and that is why believe this

1:23:15 > 1:23:18bill is necessary. It will provide local accountability of the

1:23:18 > 1:23:27decisions being taken by CCGs. It will provide new scrutiny power to

1:23:27 > 1:23:33elected councils to rein in unaccountable CCGs officers. It will

1:23:33 > 1:23:36make sure that they are scrutinising the same way as other public health

1:23:36 > 1:23:39services. This bill will come too late to challenge the decisions in

1:23:39 > 1:23:42North Staffordshire or support the 70 referrals that came before it but

1:23:42 > 1:23:46it could help ensure that future decisions by all CCGs are genuinely

1:23:46 > 1:23:49in the interest of communities that they are there to serve. There are

1:23:49 > 1:23:54still lots more to do and to turn genuine accountability to the NHS

1:23:54 > 1:24:06but this bill could be the start. I beg to move.The question is that,

1:24:06 > 1:24:10it is not the honourable gentleman's fault, it is mine for hesitating, I

1:24:10 > 1:24:16beg your pardon. The question is that the honourable member has leave

1:24:16 > 1:24:25to bring in a bill. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the

1:24:25 > 1:24:29contrary, "no" on the contrary say no. The ayes have it. He will

1:24:29 > 1:24:38prepare and bring in the bill?Diana Johnson, Rosie Cooper, Mike Gates,

1:24:38 > 1:24:52and myself.Mr Gareth Snell.

1:25:12 > 1:25:16Local health scrutiny bill.Second reading, when? Friday the 6th of

1:25:16 > 1:25:32July. We now come to the motion in the name of the leader of applied

1:25:32 > 1:25:41Cymru on EU citizenship.

1:25:41 > 1:25:48I have a very bad head cold which also renders me slightly deaf. I

1:25:48 > 1:26:00caution anyone who intervenes might have difficulty.

1:26:00 > 1:26:08It calls for us to retain our European citizenship after we leave

1:26:08 > 1:26:13the European Union, and the keyword here is retained. Retain what we

1:26:13 > 1:26:17already have. It is supported by a wide range of organisations and

1:26:17 > 1:26:22individuals. The SNP, Liberal Democrats and Green Party, open

1:26:22 > 1:26:29Britain, best for Britain and the European movement, Wales for Europe,

1:26:29 > 1:26:37the new Europeans, our future, our choice. It is a very wide range of

1:26:37 > 1:26:47organisations that has got behind us and included with this the QC of the

1:26:47 > 1:26:52project and Professor, two of the authors of the EU citizenship report

1:26:52 > 1:26:57commissioned by my good friend Jill Evans, MEP. They have been arguing

1:26:57 > 1:27:02the case for retention of EU citizenship consistently since the

1:27:02 > 1:27:08referendum. I have referred to the report commissioned by my European

1:27:08 > 1:27:14friend. It is now disappeared. Here it is. And I would recommend it as

1:27:14 > 1:27:19an interesting read for anyone who wishes to pursue this argument. For

1:27:19 > 1:27:25the relief of hard-pressed members, I would say there is also an

1:27:25 > 1:27:29executive summary which is very good. The crux of our argument is

1:27:29 > 1:27:35that, although we are leaving the European Union, the European

1:27:35 > 1:27:43citizenship rights conferred on citizens are not distinguished.

1:27:43 > 1:27:45Continuing citizenship is the more convincing interpretation of

1:27:45 > 1:27:51international and European law. Indeed, the principal that it might

1:27:51 > 1:27:58be brought to an end, the rights conferred by it, is enshrined

1:27:58 > 1:28:03strongly in international law. I refer members to the 1969 Vienna

1:28:03 > 1:28:07Convention on the Law of treaties, which will be binding on member

1:28:07 > 1:28:15states in the UK and EU post-Brexit. Article 70, one B of that

1:28:15 > 1:28:19convention, provides that legal situation is created with the

1:28:19 > 1:28:24currency of treaties continue after the withdrawal. That is the

1:28:24 > 1:28:30principal and the Vienna Convention, as the professor said the report on

1:28:30 > 1:28:36page five, this interpretation of the the ongoing situation, is

1:28:36 > 1:28:41supported by the overriding objective of ensuring legal

1:28:41 > 1:28:45certainty and preventing withdrawals from treaties having an effect. It

1:28:45 > 1:28:51is also supported by state practice. That is a crucial aspect of

1:28:51 > 1:28:54international law, governments by withdrawing from treaties just

1:28:54 > 1:28:58cannot abandon the rights which the citizens already have. Professor

1:28:58 > 1:29:06Auburn tells me that this article was drawn up with a prominent

1:29:06 > 1:29:11participation of British legal experts. There is however an

1:29:11 > 1:29:17alternative reading that Article 50 extinguishers or rights of

1:29:17 > 1:29:23individuals. In that case, but the EU and international law would

1:29:23 > 1:29:29demand that the treaty be negotiated an associate union citizenship

1:29:29 > 1:29:34bringing with it rights that would bring very little difference for

1:29:34 > 1:29:39those that have full citizenship one way or the other. We think the EU

1:29:39 > 1:29:47citizenship of the sort is required. Now, the European Union could

1:29:47 > 1:29:50legislate citizenship post-Brexit. This legislation would protect UK

1:29:50 > 1:29:57nationals in the EU, but has no binding effect of the UK

1:29:57 > 1:30:03post-Brexit. By definition, we would have left. So we would ask the

1:30:03 > 1:30:07government rather to look at achieving continuity and citizenship

1:30:07 > 1:30:10through the withdrawal agreement. That is why this debate today is

1:30:10 > 1:30:18particularly timely. The report concludes that neither continuity

1:30:18 > 1:30:21now associated citizenship would require any revision of the founding

1:30:21 > 1:30:24treaties. There is a great deal more detail and the report which I will

1:30:24 > 1:30:28not going to today, but will become pertinent if the government

1:30:28 > 1:30:34recognises the force of our argument and proceeds as we recommend.

1:30:34 > 1:30:39However, for now, I wish to set the context for our position as a party

1:30:39 > 1:30:45and see plainly from the start that my party campaign to stay in the EU,

1:30:45 > 1:30:49this was consistent with our long-term pro-European policy.

1:30:49 > 1:30:53Indeed, our policy from our very establishment in 1825. We have

1:30:53 > 1:30:59always been aware of our European history and heritage as a nation,

1:30:59 > 1:31:04and I have sat great store by it as it has influenced our party

1:31:04 > 1:31:11profoundly. The member would rarely miss the opportunity to remind

1:31:11 > 1:31:16people of Wales of our European heritage as a people with our own

1:31:16 > 1:31:23language and culture from beginnings onwards to the present day. In fact,

1:31:23 > 1:31:30his speeches would often consist of retelling our history and I am

1:31:30 > 1:31:34reminded by a small joke made by two valleys members during a speech. One

1:31:34 > 1:31:39valley member saying to another, 20 minutes in and we are only in the

1:31:39 > 1:31:46ninth century!I am extremely grateful to my honourable friend the

1:31:46 > 1:31:50giving way. He is making his usual excellent case. We could go further

1:31:50 > 1:31:58back even to the president before when Evans. So does of course saw

1:31:58 > 1:32:03our European heritage is vital to his for Wales for the future, partly

1:32:03 > 1:32:06driven by his time in the trenches in the First World War and his

1:32:06 > 1:32:09desire not to seek another generation of Welshmen die at

1:32:09 > 1:32:17foreign hands.He makes very good point. I was going refer later on to

1:32:17 > 1:32:22the fact that the European Union has of course helped prevent war on the

1:32:22 > 1:32:27European continent 's, but there are exceptions such as the former

1:32:27 > 1:32:31Yugoslavia, which were not members of the time. But he makes a

1:32:31 > 1:32:36pertinent point about Saunders Lewis's profound experience in the

1:32:36 > 1:32:40trenches. This was one of the reasons why him and his friends set

1:32:40 > 1:32:47up Plaid Cymru in August 1925 and my hometown. I might as will also say

1:32:47 > 1:32:53while I am on my feet, that our profound lack of the Lisbon reality

1:32:53 > 1:32:58at that time meant that in the country that was almost exclusively

1:32:58 > 1:33:01nonconformist, the total and in favour of the British Empire, we had

1:33:01 > 1:33:10as our president a wine drinking Catholic! I think Machiavelli was

1:33:10 > 1:33:16still retreating in his grave! The roots of our pro-European stance a

1:33:16 > 1:33:24very deep indeed.Given that his party exists for the fundamental

1:33:24 > 1:33:28purpose of trying to remove British citizenship and the people of Wales,

1:33:28 > 1:33:32something which is of more importance to them than their

1:33:32 > 1:33:38European identity, isn't as argument a bit inconsistent?I can only say,

1:33:38 > 1:33:43frankly, that my ambition is to ensure that Wales has an independent

1:33:43 > 1:33:48future. Whether that means that we are reconciled to a British identity

1:33:48 > 1:33:55from now on as a multiple identity, our members will know all about

1:33:55 > 1:33:59this, allegedly Welsh and British, I hear this argument consistently from

1:33:59 > 1:34:04members of both sides of the House, or the Welsh and European, which is

1:34:04 > 1:34:12our argument, I feel Welsh and European.I think this goes to the

1:34:12 > 1:34:17crux of the argument. What we are talking about here is our rights as

1:34:17 > 1:34:20individuals and our identity as individuals. I speak as a Londoner

1:34:20 > 1:34:25born and bred. I live in Wales and claim Welsh nationality and I'm

1:34:25 > 1:34:30proud of being European. But our rights as individuals are under

1:34:30 > 1:34:36threat here and this is what we tried to bring to the Chamber.I was

1:34:36 > 1:34:40going to go on that this is more than just a matter of self-described

1:34:40 > 1:34:47identity. It is about the practical matters of rights to travel to work,

1:34:47 > 1:34:53to have European rides that have been befitted people in Wales and

1:34:53 > 1:34:57throughout the UK. There is a nod at about identity, and I will go on to

1:34:57 > 1:35:01talk about that in a moment, though I do not think it has the force that

1:35:01 > 1:35:04the honourable gentleman seems to imply in his intervention. I was

1:35:04 > 1:35:13talking about a story, by would like to say and remind everyone of the

1:35:13 > 1:35:17three pillars of the policy in the 15th century War of Independence. As

1:35:17 > 1:35:23was related to the king of France, some people would have seen that

1:35:23 > 1:35:31some years ago, he wrote to the King of France and said that one of the

1:35:31 > 1:35:34central pillars was the need for direct relationship with Rome for

1:35:34 > 1:35:39the Church in Wales. It was a very long time ago. It was a direct

1:35:39 > 1:35:43relationship with the overarching European institution rather than an

1:35:43 > 1:35:51indirect link mediated. Some people will see echoes with the current

1:35:51 > 1:35:56situation and our policy. The other two pillars of policy work for Welsh

1:35:56 > 1:36:00to be the state language and to establish two universities, this is

1:36:00 > 1:36:05a time when universities were first being established across Europe by

1:36:05 > 1:36:09ambitious leaders. Some 600 years later, we have excellent

1:36:09 > 1:36:14universities in Wales, but on the European issue we are taking a

1:36:14 > 1:36:23serious step back. From the start, from continental developers of

1:36:23 > 1:36:28economic and social cooperation, as exemplified in the writings of DJ

1:36:28 > 1:36:30Davies, we found European

1:36:30 > 1:36:34multilingualism far more congenial than the stifling monolingual is so

1:36:34 > 1:36:41much of the UK's public life. And in passing, honourable members may not

1:36:41 > 1:36:44know that the most recent meeting of the grand committee was held in

1:36:44 > 1:36:52Westminster. Half of those who spoke did so partly or wholly in Welsh. No

1:36:52 > 1:36:57one was hurt, a revolution did not break out, Hansard published the

1:36:57 > 1:37:02very first fully bilingual record. I shall passing mention the honourable

1:37:02 > 1:37:05gentleman opposite who has spoken in Welsh and I congratulate sincerely

1:37:05 > 1:37:13on his efforts. As I said, Hansard published what I think is the very

1:37:13 > 1:37:20first fully bilingual record. But that affection of the linguistic

1:37:20 > 1:37:23condition on these islands is remarked upon as an exception rather

1:37:23 > 1:37:30than the rule, not so the rest of our continent. Turning to present

1:37:30 > 1:37:34times, given our radical political stunts, Plaid Cymru has always

1:37:34 > 1:37:38supported the growth and development of European policies beyond the

1:37:38 > 1:37:43narrow confines of the common markets which we initially joined.

1:37:43 > 1:37:46Those social workforces and environmental policies from which

1:37:46 > 1:37:50people across the UK have arrived so much benefit and EU citizenship is

1:37:50 > 1:38:00in that category. Importantly, the EU has an overt regional economic

1:38:00 > 1:38:04policy, cohesion policy from which is derived additional funding. Of

1:38:04 > 1:38:08course it is a cruel irony that we benefit less only because of our

1:38:08 > 1:38:14poverty, because of our economy performance on a par with the

1:38:14 > 1:38:20regions of the former Soviet bloc. And in passing I must also refer to

1:38:20 > 1:38:25other EU measures such as interregional contact between Wales

1:38:25 > 1:38:32and Ireland, Wales faces west as well as East, though many government

1:38:32 > 1:38:42ministers sometimes do not realise that. My colleague, the member,

1:38:42 > 1:38:46Colsaert Holyhead was eased, Dublin, rather than Northwest Anglesey. We

1:38:46 > 1:38:52have also benefited from Horizon 2020, the research and innovation

1:38:52 > 1:39:03programme. That is just a part of which Wales has benefited in respect

1:39:03 > 1:39:07of which there is much concern, not least at our universities, and I

1:39:07 > 1:39:13mentioned Banga, my own.I am grateful to the honourable gentleman

1:39:13 > 1:39:17for giving way. Whilst he is on that subject, does he agree with me that

1:39:17 > 1:39:20it would be useful if the government would make an estimate as to the

1:39:20 > 1:39:25amount of money that would have come to Wales from the European regional

1:39:25 > 1:39:30development fund and the regional social fund in the 2021-27 tranche

1:39:30 > 1:39:33and promised that Wales will still receive that same amount of money or

1:39:33 > 1:39:37more?I thank the honourable gentleman for that intervention and

1:39:37 > 1:39:44agree entirely with him. As with so many things Welsh which we lack, we

1:39:44 > 1:39:47lack basic statistical information on projections. I know the

1:39:47 > 1:39:52government does not believe in experts all projections and

1:39:52 > 1:39:57forecasts. I sometimes wonder what they depend on. I know, in Rome,

1:39:57 > 1:40:10they depended on examining the entrails of sacrificed animals!

1:40:10 > 1:40:14If we knew what we were dealing with then we could make the argument more

1:40:14 > 1:40:23effectively. I'm very glad he mentioned in Erasmus and Horizon.

1:40:23 > 1:40:26These are two schemes by the Welsh Government could work bilaterally

1:40:26 > 1:40:33with the EU and I'm concerned from my discussions with colleagues in

1:40:33 > 1:40:35Brussels that the Scottish Government seemed in far in advance

1:40:35 > 1:40:38of whether Welsh Government is at the moment it is negotiating with

1:40:38 > 1:40:43the EU and how we can continue their schemes in Wales.That is very good

1:40:43 > 1:40:46point. We have examined the bilateral agreement that other

1:40:46 > 1:40:51countries have with the EU. I am a member of the Brexit select

1:40:51 > 1:40:56committee and recently we had the Swiss ambassador to the EU with us

1:40:56 > 1:41:01and we also have Swiss experts discussing these bilateral

1:41:01 > 1:41:07agreements and they are extremely useful to Switzerland. They are less

1:41:07 > 1:41:10useful, apparently, in the eyes of the EU but certainly the point that

1:41:10 > 1:41:15he makes that other devolved governments and administrations have

1:41:15 > 1:41:20taken these matters further and we sincerely wish that are in

1:41:20 > 1:41:24Government would do so. I am drifting a little bit from the

1:41:24 > 1:41:27simple question this afternoon which is a matter of European citizenship

1:41:27 > 1:41:36so I will return to that. By saying, actually, many people listening and

1:41:36 > 1:41:42many people listening to me will be thinking that Wales didn't vote to

1:41:42 > 1:41:49leave the EU although by a narrow margin. I continue to receive angry

1:41:49 > 1:41:52messages from Brexit supporters, the only one repeatable here is will you

1:41:52 > 1:42:01get on with it. The others are slightly less polite. The cases that

1:42:01 > 1:42:04we are leaving unless there is a sudden outbreak of common sense on

1:42:04 > 1:42:10the Government benches but it is not as simple as that. We are learning

1:42:10 > 1:42:14and even the Secretary of State for International traders learning that

1:42:14 > 1:42:19it is not as simple as that. He famously said that negotiating trade

1:42:19 > 1:42:23deals with the EU would be the very simplest thing in the world. Today's

1:42:23 > 1:42:30motion is just one part of the effort to salvage something from the

1:42:30 > 1:42:36wreckage of the slow, this very slow motion disaster. But for the benefit

1:42:36 > 1:42:42of my Brexiteer and as a backbench MP responsible to my constituents I

1:42:42 > 1:42:51want to note that Plaid Cymru voted to remain. This is in marked

1:42:51 > 1:42:55contrast to the Welsh constituencies with socio economic characteristics

1:42:55 > 1:42:59such as marginalisation, powerlessness and low wages,

1:42:59 > 1:43:03represented by other parties in this place whose policies on the EU are a

1:43:03 > 1:43:09little less clear. Being broadly in favour of the EU, even in our poor

1:43:09 > 1:43:15present economic condition is the constituency you. To illustrate this

1:43:15 > 1:43:21with a couple of points on the 2050 general election, at the peak of UK

1:43:21 > 1:43:28support, 39 of Wales is 40 constituencies swung to UK, the

1:43:28 > 1:43:38exception was our farm that swung to Plaid Cymru. We value our membership

1:43:38 > 1:43:44of the EU, we value the support and economic support that has given us

1:43:44 > 1:43:51and one aspect further of this value is valuing our European citizenship.

1:43:51 > 1:43:59The Welsh philosopher J R Jones commented on the apparent terminal

1:43:59 > 1:44:03decline of the Welsh language, and I paraphrase in English are the

1:44:03 > 1:44:08benefit of the House, he said leaving the country is a common and

1:44:08 > 1:44:11sad experience as I is of no something that is much more

1:44:11 > 1:44:16heart-rending because you could always return to your native land

1:44:16 > 1:44:19not as if you leave your own country but that your country is leaving

1:44:19 > 1:44:22you. Being finally drawn away into the hands of another people or

1:44:22 > 1:44:29another culture. J R Jones and many others inspired the coming

1:44:29 > 1:44:34generations including myself to campaign for the language. It is not

1:44:34 > 1:44:36threatened with extinction but his insight is particularly telling

1:44:36 > 1:44:42today. Particularly amongst the younger generation, leaving the EU

1:44:42 > 1:44:51is just such a heart rending experience. I will give way.I found

1:44:51 > 1:44:55the quote used used their particularly moving. I found my

1:44:55 > 1:44:59constituency and indeed in my own family we have young people know

1:44:59 > 1:45:07nothing more than being part of the EU and what we are in fact doing is

1:45:07 > 1:45:11taking their identity away from them and indeed from all of us because

1:45:11 > 1:45:15her 40 years we've know nothing else that being Europeans and being proud

1:45:15 > 1:45:21of it.I thank the honourable member for that intervention, it is exactly

1:45:21 > 1:45:30the point I'm not intending to make. Many young people told me after the

1:45:30 > 1:45:33referendum about the result was a profound emotional shock to them,

1:45:33 > 1:45:39the assault on their very personal foundations of their identity as

1:45:39 > 1:45:43Europeans. One told me she was in floods of tears. They told me that

1:45:43 > 1:45:49how they regretted losing key practical rights, such as the right

1:45:49 > 1:45:57to travel in the EU and to work and study in the European countries.

1:45:57 > 1:45:59Today there is opportunity for the UK Government heels of these

1:45:59 > 1:46:04divisions. Some intergenerational divisions and some divisions between

1:46:04 > 1:46:08all peoples of these islands and we've heard in the debates

1:46:08 > 1:46:12erratically around Ireland how that are so many divisions. I give way to

1:46:12 > 1:46:17my friend.I'm sure my honourable friend would share my concern that

1:46:17 > 1:46:20so many decent people who are coming of age will be most directly

1:46:20 > 1:46:24affected by this had no say whatsoever and from year to year

1:46:24 > 1:46:31this situation is worsening.That is a telling point. This is covered by

1:46:31 > 1:46:37the two aspects of citizenship that we are proposing, that is continuing

1:46:37 > 1:46:43citizenship for those such as ourselves, who are now citizens of

1:46:43 > 1:46:51the EU by treaty. And also those who are unable to access that

1:46:51 > 1:46:56citizenship being an born, it is something fried children and our

1:46:56 > 1:47:03children's children and particularly for me at least, say those are the

1:47:03 > 1:47:08age of 14, 15 or 16 who understood the issues that could not vote. I

1:47:08 > 1:47:11would say in passing that my party has always been in favour of the new

1:47:11 > 1:47:16voting age of 16 and I think that would have had a considerable

1:47:16 > 1:47:23difference in the results. As I've said today there is an opportunity

1:47:23 > 1:47:28for the UK Government heels of these divisions. There is a positive point

1:47:28 > 1:47:31from these benches and I hope the Government sees us enough light.

1:47:31 > 1:47:35Today we are calling on the UK Government to secure and retain our

1:47:35 > 1:47:39rights to EU citizenship not to take away what is already rightfully

1:47:39 > 1:47:48ours. So as we leave the EU, we're just a little less self-inflicted

1:47:48 > 1:47:52injury by remaining European citizens. We are European citizens,

1:47:52 > 1:48:01I have to confess that I am biased. I am married to a European citizen.

1:48:01 > 1:48:04She, likewise is married to a European citizen and we're both from

1:48:04 > 1:48:13Wales. I both Welsh and Europeans I'm biased. And so many of our

1:48:13 > 1:48:18friends and colleagues who have chosen to live and work in Wales.

1:48:18 > 1:48:23They have chosen to become Welsh but not by rejecting their European

1:48:23 > 1:48:31citizenship although European identity. Anyone could be Welsh, to

1:48:31 > 1:48:36quote again, if anyone is prepared to take the consequences. The

1:48:36 > 1:48:42citizens of Wales are people who are committed and I would commend that

1:48:42 > 1:48:48is a general definition of civic identity. I should suppose say civic

1:48:48 > 1:48:53nationalism that I might let that pass. As to those consequences, I

1:48:53 > 1:49:00will give way.I would like to congratulate him and his Plaid Cymru

1:49:00 > 1:49:03colleagues on securing this debate and I look forward to giving the SNP

1:49:03 > 1:49:07address at the conference a couple weeks' time. Does he agree with me

1:49:07 > 1:49:11that the Welsh nationalism that he and his colleagues espouse is very

1:49:11 > 1:49:14much like Scottish nationalism and that is is outward looking and

1:49:14 > 1:49:18internationalist and all our parties want is for our country is to be

1:49:18 > 1:49:21nation states with a seat at the top table in the EU, wielding the count

1:49:21 > 1:49:27of power that the Republic of Ireland is currently wielding?I

1:49:27 > 1:49:33would agree entirely. Your European identity whether it be Welsh,

1:49:33 > 1:49:38Scottish or English or whatever it is, it is self subscribed. That is

1:49:38 > 1:49:42why we have members in our party who like my honourable friend come from

1:49:42 > 1:49:50London. Entirely Welsh and Welsh speaking thing that is probably a

1:49:50 > 1:49:57consequence of marrying someone from where there is no cause given or

1:49:57 > 1:50:00expected but we have people in our party who come from all over the

1:50:00 > 1:50:08world and long may that remain. We have no exclusive definition. As

1:50:08 > 1:50:11long as he prepared to take the consequences, and those consequences

1:50:11 > 1:50:19for us is European citizens, right to travel, live work in the EU, it

1:50:19 > 1:50:25also gives his rights under EU law in respect of health, education,

1:50:25 > 1:50:28work and security and the right to be free of discrimination based on

1:50:28 > 1:50:32nationality. A point that flows from what my honourable friend was

1:50:32 > 1:50:39saying. This option so far however on both sides of the EU and the

1:50:39 > 1:50:42Government here is that EU citizenship lapses at the point of

1:50:42 > 1:50:50our exit from the EU. But European union citizenship did not replace UK

1:50:50 > 1:50:55citizenship. When it came into force, it is indeed additional. Both

1:50:55 > 1:51:01continue to coexist and leaving the EU does not entail the end of the EU

1:51:01 > 1:51:06citizenship that UK citizens. This Government is by default,

1:51:06 > 1:51:10unfortunately, intent on taking away something significant value to the

1:51:10 > 1:51:19people these islands. They should not do so. In fact, they should make

1:51:19 > 1:51:22the retention of EU citizenship they as a future negotiations. It is

1:51:22 > 1:51:27something that we can ask and demand of the EU, something that is enough

1:51:27 > 1:51:33how to give an something that will be valued by our citizens. It would

1:51:33 > 1:51:36benefit us all, not least by establishing a common status for all

1:51:36 > 1:51:41EU citizens who live here. Including those of Irish heritage and the 3

1:51:41 > 1:51:46million or so people who have moved here from the EU member states. It

1:51:46 > 1:51:52would establish a level playing field. There was a glimmer of hope

1:51:52 > 1:51:57when the Secretary of State relieving the European Union last

1:51:57 > 1:52:01year that was reported on the 2nd of November, said that the UK was, open

1:52:01 > 1:52:04about talking about associated citizenship after Brexit. This will

1:52:04 > 1:52:09come as a surprise to some people but that is what he said. This would

1:52:09 > 1:52:18allow Visa free working rights to UK nationals. The aim of this exercise

1:52:18 > 1:52:23is to be good for Europe, the citizens of Europe and Britain. I do

1:52:23 > 1:52:29note that the Prime Minister said in her statement on Monday that UK and

1:52:29 > 1:52:33EU citizens also want to work and study in each other's countries and

1:52:33 > 1:52:38we are open to discussions about how to maintain links between our people

1:52:38 > 1:52:46and perhaps I am over interpreting that it seems to be potentially good

1:52:46 > 1:52:51for this so citizenship, we shall see how things develop. It is hard

1:52:51 > 1:52:56for me at least, the get out of jail free card about it. Today I'm

1:52:56 > 1:53:00arguing for the maintaining of the status quo. We are European citizens

1:53:00 > 1:53:05will continue be so but obviously I would urge the Secretary of State

1:53:05 > 1:53:08and the Prime Minister, even now to pursue the less ambitious line

1:53:08 > 1:53:26further. For those asking me what fall this EU citizenship points to

1:53:26 > 1:53:30the situation an island became a free state. The UK allow viruses is

1:53:30 > 1:53:33to retain their UK citizenship and as Brexit problems and

1:53:33 > 1:53:44contradictions closing, the Prime Minister down to remain. The model

1:53:44 > 1:53:48that they approve and a model which retain citizenship for Irish

1:53:48 > 1:53:57citizens. Earlier on, I also mentioned people of Irish heritage.

1:53:57 > 1:54:03The qualifying link with the entire islands either through family or by

1:54:03 > 1:54:06residents, even assured residents in Northern Ireland, can then apply for

1:54:06 > 1:54:09an Irish passport. This applies to millions of British people,

1:54:09 > 1:54:16including my neighbour. Her passport application I was happy to sign some

1:54:16 > 1:54:19weeks ago. A passport has now arrived, much to her satisfaction. I

1:54:19 > 1:54:26would caution ministers listening in not to tangle with angry older

1:54:26 > 1:54:31citizens as they do so with peril. Her links with Ireland through her

1:54:31 > 1:54:37mother reached at the last century. My link peters out before hers and I

1:54:37 > 1:54:43do not qualify but I will pass way. Will you agree there is a little

1:54:43 > 1:54:47known anomaly that we're trying to address and a leader to

1:54:47 > 1:54:51inadvertently just now in the 20 Irish Republic or the free State as

1:54:51 > 1:54:55it did then left the Commonwealth in 1949, the British governor to the

1:54:55 > 1:54:58Tyne then allowed anyone who was born in the Republic and perhaps

1:54:58 > 1:55:02move to Northern Ireland or elsewhere around the UK to retain

1:55:02 > 1:55:04their British citizenship that anyone born in the Republic and

1:55:04 > 1:55:08lives in Northern Ireland is now cannot get a British passport in the

1:55:08 > 1:55:12same way as people who've never been to the Republic can get an Irish

1:55:12 > 1:55:15passport and therefore their citizenship rights and terms of

1:55:15 > 1:55:19members of the UK are still somewhat disadvantaged and I understand he is

1:55:19 > 1:55:22arguing obviously an issue worth EU citizenship but given what is

1:55:22 > 1:55:25alluded to, does he agree with me that that is a matter that needs to

1:55:25 > 1:55:29be addressed?I have to convince that I was entirely unaware of this

1:55:29 > 1:55:35points raised and that has been the case I think it bears further

1:55:35 > 1:55:37examination and I would be happy to discuss this matter with him

1:55:37 > 1:55:43further.

1:55:43 > 1:55:48I was talking about Irish citizens and those of Irish extraction. The

1:55:48 > 1:55:55point is there is a certain serendipity to citizens having these

1:55:55 > 1:56:02rights on the basis of one's grandparents. People like myself

1:56:02 > 1:56:07will have British citizenship and people of Irish extraction will have

1:56:07 > 1:56:10Irish citizenship and Irish people who have Irish citizenship are

1:56:10 > 1:56:15living, working and voting here and we will have EU citizens of a

1:56:15 > 1:56:20certain status, whatever that is. There is a certain randomness about

1:56:20 > 1:56:24the whole matter whereas an overarching European citizenship

1:56:24 > 1:56:35with in some ways address this. I am afraid this sort of serendipity will

1:56:35 > 1:56:38inevitably become more pressing when those with the favoured passports

1:56:38 > 1:56:42joined the short queues at the airports whilst the others wait in a

1:56:42 > 1:56:47long line. The government say they want a close relationship with our

1:56:47 > 1:56:55EU partners. This is their ambition, cited over and over again. Here is a

1:56:55 > 1:56:59practical opportunity to support that relationship through

1:56:59 > 1:57:07citizenship for current British and EU citizens. For all those who are

1:57:07 > 1:57:15not at the moment of leaving, the unborn, they should have EU

1:57:15 > 1:57:22citizenship. So far at the debate has been dominated by two issues, by

1:57:22 > 1:57:24the Irish border, and those are the issues that we have been grappling

1:57:24 > 1:57:29with over these past few months. Many Brexit premises before the

1:57:29 > 1:57:36referendum had an individualistic quality. We would be richer, we

1:57:36 > 1:57:43would have better services. The NHS would have an extra £350 million

1:57:43 > 1:57:47each week. Those are some of the promises that persuaded people. And

1:57:47 > 1:57:53also the immigration issue.And also we were promised that we would be

1:57:53 > 1:57:58freer with all the implications of independence and yet what we are

1:57:58 > 1:58:09having to discuss today is the fact that we are unlikely to be.That is

1:58:09 > 1:58:16a paradox we cannot escape. Madam Deputy Speaker, my cold is rather

1:58:16 > 1:58:19taking charge of me. Here is a chance for the government to

1:58:19 > 1:58:24partially redeemed itself by securing the future for all UK

1:58:24 > 1:58:30individuals. That which we already have, our UK and European

1:58:30 > 1:58:40citizenship. This would be popular. The LSE opinion research published

1:58:40 > 1:58:43last year found that six out of ten people want to keep the EU

1:58:43 > 1:58:51citizenship. Support for retaining the right is particularly strong

1:58:51 > 1:58:56amongst 18-24 -year-olds, 85% want to retain their EU citizenship. They

1:58:56 > 1:58:59are the generation more than any other that will have to deal with

1:58:59 > 1:59:04the long-term fallout of Brexit over the coming decades and deal

1:59:04 > 1:59:09particularly practically and emotionally with the loss of their

1:59:09 > 1:59:13further expectation of continuing EU citizenship. Many of this generation

1:59:13 > 1:59:18did not have a vote in the referendum and yet they are

1:59:18 > 1:59:20profoundly affected by its consequences, unless the government

1:59:20 > 1:59:25takes heed of our argument today. Thankfully it is not my

1:59:25 > 1:59:32responsibility to drum up support for the Conservatives, but it is

1:59:32 > 1:59:38clear from this debate this afternoon if the government cannot

1:59:38 > 1:59:40do so, can we expect the Labour Party to show where their interest

1:59:40 > 1:59:49lies? I am advised that there would be no new treaty requirements so now

1:59:49 > 1:59:53is the time for this government to give a clear and practical sign that

1:59:53 > 1:59:57it is taking UK citizens draw rights seriously not by taking away our

1:59:57 > 2:00:03rights with out our specific consent, but by securing European

2:00:03 > 2:00:11Union citizenship for all, not just the random few. What is currently

2:00:11 > 2:00:14lacking is vision and political leadership to mend some of the

2:00:14 > 2:00:19divisions that Brexit has opened up. In the Prime Minister's own words

2:00:19 > 2:00:26last Monday, let's get on with it. The question is as on the order

2:00:26 > 2:00:35paper. Minister.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I would like to

2:00:35 > 2:00:38thank the honourable member for Arfon for his typically thoughtful

2:00:38 > 2:00:42comments and also congratulate him on having managed to get through his

2:00:42 > 2:00:46entire speech with a very difficult throat, which I thought improved as

2:00:46 > 2:00:52time went on. I welcome this opportunity to debate the

2:00:52 > 2:00:55government's policy on EU citizenship after the UK leads the

2:00:55 > 2:00:59European Union. EU citizens in the UK make a significant contribution

2:00:59 > 2:01:03to our national life and we want them and their families to stay.

2:01:03 > 2:01:06From the very beginning the Prime Minister has been clear that

2:01:06 > 2:01:10safeguarding the rights of EU citizens living in the UK and UK

2:01:10 > 2:01:15nationals living in the EU was her first priority for our negotiations.

2:01:15 > 2:01:18We have now delivered on that commitment and have reached an

2:01:18 > 2:01:23agreement with our EU partners on citizens' rights. It was set out as

2:01:23 > 2:01:26part of a joint report issued on the 8th of December and provides

2:01:26 > 2:01:33millions of EU and UK citizens with certainty about their future rights

2:01:33 > 2:01:36and importantly allows them and their families to carry on their

2:01:36 > 2:01:41lives broadly as they do now. The agreement will protect citizens who

2:01:41 > 2:01:45have been exercising free movement rights at the time of the UK's

2:01:45 > 2:01:49withdrawal from the EU. All family members living lovely with a

2:01:49 > 2:01:52qualifying citizen at this point are protected and close family members

2:01:52 > 2:01:57can continue to join qualifying citizens on EU law terms after exit.

2:01:57 > 2:02:02We have agreed that we will introduce the new settled status

2:02:02 > 2:02:05scheme under UK law for EU citizens and their family members covered by

2:02:05 > 2:02:09the agreement. Those who have already had five years of continuous

2:02:09 > 2:02:14residence in the UK will be eligible to apply for settled status. Others

2:02:14 > 2:02:17will be able to remain in the UK to build up their five years'

2:02:17 > 2:02:24residents. The scheme will be open for applications by the end of 2018

2:02:24 > 2:02:29is being designed and built from scratch, yet the system will be

2:02:29 > 2:02:33streamlined, user-friendly and draw on existing data to minimise the

2:02:33 > 2:02:38burden on applicants to provide evidence. We are engaging the

2:02:38 > 2:02:40stakeholders who represent EU citizens in the UK as well as

2:02:40 > 2:02:45Diaspora groups in the UK to discuss and understand their needs for the

2:02:45 > 2:02:49scheme. I would like to thank those who have already participated and

2:02:49 > 2:02:52shown willingness to engage and particularly the EU ambassadors who

2:02:52 > 2:02:57have beaten a path to my door to explain how they can assist. Our

2:02:57 > 2:03:01next priority is to turn the December agreement into binding,

2:03:01 > 2:03:04legal text for the withdrawal agreement. The European Commission

2:03:04 > 2:03:11published a draft.I would like to thank the Minister. But like a lot

2:03:11 > 2:03:15of members I have had a large number of EU nationals approach me who are

2:03:15 > 2:03:22worried about certainty, including those who have married for example

2:03:22 > 2:03:26German wives who still do not have this certainty. I know the minister

2:03:26 > 2:03:30might not be able to answer this today, but will she look into that

2:03:30 > 2:03:35particularly for military families, please?The honourable gentleman

2:03:35 > 2:03:37raises an important point, particularly for military families

2:03:37 > 2:03:43who move around a great deal. We are determined to make sure that this is

2:03:43 > 2:03:49a scheme that has a default position of accepting that people are EU

2:03:49 > 2:03:54citizens living here and we want it to be a default for settled status

2:03:54 > 2:04:00and not a default that says no. We have been clear that we will seek to

2:04:00 > 2:04:03agree an implementation period beyond March 2019 of around two

2:04:03 > 2:04:09years. The purpose of such a period is to give people, business and our

2:04:09 > 2:04:13own public services in the UK and across the EU the time they need to

2:04:13 > 2:04:18put in place the new arrangements that will be required to adjust to

2:04:18 > 2:04:22our future partnership. It will take time to implement a new immigration

2:04:22 > 2:04:27framework and the government has been clear...I thank the Minister

2:04:27 > 2:04:32for giving way. I fear she may have misunderstood the topic for debate.

2:04:32 > 2:04:36We are aiming to discuss the issue of the European citizenship of UK

2:04:36 > 2:04:42subjects as opposed to the right of EU citizens.I am indeed going to

2:04:42 > 2:04:47move on to the point is the honourable gentleman for Arfon made.

2:04:47 > 2:04:51Perhaps he will indulge me by allowing me to get to that point. As

2:04:51 > 2:04:56I was about to say, during the implementation period, which will be

2:04:56 > 2:04:59time limited, people will be able to come to the UK to live and work as

2:04:59 > 2:05:03they do now and this will be reciprocal, meaning UK nationals

2:05:03 > 2:05:07will also be able to travel to live and work in the EU. Last week, the

2:05:07 > 2:05:13Home Secretary published a position paper that setting out that EU

2:05:13 > 2:05:16citizens arriving during this period should be able to walk toward

2:05:16 > 2:05:21settlement in the UK. People arriving in this period should not

2:05:21 > 2:05:24have the same expectations as those who arrived during our membership of

2:05:24 > 2:05:28the EU. But it is right we will set out the rules that apply to these

2:05:28 > 2:05:32individuals to give them the certainty they need. These rights

2:05:32 > 2:05:37will be enforceable in UK law and we will not seek to include them in the

2:05:37 > 2:05:39withdrawal agreement, but we will discuss this with the commission in

2:05:39 > 2:05:46the coming weeks. Turning more broadly to the question of EU

2:05:46 > 2:05:49citizenship, the government has been clear that our membership of the EU

2:05:49 > 2:05:54will end on the 29th of March 2000 and 19. We are content to listen to

2:05:54 > 2:05:58proposals from the EU on associate citizenship for UK nationals,

2:05:58 > 2:06:02however to date this has not been formally proposed to the UK in the

2:06:02 > 2:06:08negotiations. EU treaty provisions state that only citizens of EU

2:06:08 > 2:06:13member states are able to hold EU citizenship. Therefore, when the UK

2:06:13 > 2:06:17ceases to be a member of the European Union, UK nationals will no

2:06:17 > 2:06:21longer hold EU citizenship unless they hold dual nationality with

2:06:21 > 2:06:28another member state.Does she not agree that this is an interpretation

2:06:28 > 2:06:32of the law as it stands and that it is a matter of political will that

2:06:32 > 2:06:36we would be begging the government to bring this is the right of

2:06:36 > 2:06:40individual citizenship of individuals in the UK as something

2:06:40 > 2:06:47that should be negotiated as we move forward towards Brexit.As I said,

2:06:47 > 2:06:51the government's position is we are very happy to discuss the specific

2:06:51 > 2:06:54issue, but we have to do so reflecting on the law as it

2:06:54 > 2:06:59currently stands and the position in law is very clear. Once we have left

2:06:59 > 2:07:03the EU, citizens living here will no longer be residents of an EU member

2:07:03 > 2:07:08state. The Prime Minister has been clear and she reinforced this

2:07:08 > 2:07:12message on Friday that we are seeking the broadest and deepest

2:07:12 > 2:07:15possible future partnership with the EU and a key part of that is

2:07:15 > 2:07:21maintaining the links between our people. We are clear that as we

2:07:21 > 2:07:24leave the European Union, free movement of people will come to an

2:07:24 > 2:07:29end and we will control the number of people who come to live in our

2:07:29 > 2:07:34country. But UK citizens will still want to work and study in other EU

2:07:34 > 2:07:38countries, just as EU citizens will want to do the same here, which is

2:07:38 > 2:07:42why the Prime Minister is putting the interests of EU and UK citizens

2:07:42 > 2:07:46at the heart of her approach and we are open to discussing how to

2:07:46 > 2:08:00facilitate these valuable links.I beg your pardon! I bet the House's

2:08:00 > 2:08:07pardon. I was counting wrongly. The Shadow minister.I am grateful,

2:08:07 > 2:08:11Madame Deputy Speaker. Can I put on record my thanks to the honourable

2:08:11 > 2:08:14member for Arfon for the considered way in which he opened the debate

2:08:14 > 2:08:19and also to wish him a speedy recovery from the heavy cold he has

2:08:19 > 2:08:22been suffering from, and indeed congratulate him on getting to the

2:08:22 > 2:08:28end of his speech. I listened carefully to what the minister said,

2:08:28 > 2:08:33but I am afraid the weakness at the heart of the government's position,

2:08:33 > 2:08:37whether it is an EU citizenship in the future, the rights of EU

2:08:37 > 2:08:41citizens in this country or on immigration generally, is the

2:08:41 > 2:08:45failure of the government to bring legislation before this house. I

2:08:45 > 2:08:49start with the Immigration Bill, which was originally scheduled to be

2:08:49 > 2:08:54published last summer. The Home Secretary, Madame Deputy Speaker,

2:08:54 > 2:08:59said last October to the House and the Home Affairs Select Committee,

2:08:59 > 2:09:02there will be an immigration white paper by the end of last year and a

2:09:02 > 2:09:07bill early this year. That then Immigration Minister, not the right

2:09:07 > 2:09:11honourable lady, but her predecessor, the right honourable

2:09:11 > 2:09:13member for Great Yarmouth, told the Home Affairs Select Committee in

2:09:13 > 2:09:19November that white paper would be produced soon. The right honourable

2:09:19 > 2:09:22lady told this has on the 5th of February there would be a white

2:09:22 > 2:09:27paper, quote, when the time is right. She said on the 26th of

2:09:27 > 2:09:33February there would be a white paper in due course. Now, that is

2:09:33 > 2:09:38simply not good enough to deal with an issue of this seriousness. Words

2:09:38 > 2:09:43are very important. I do not mean the various contorted phrases the

2:09:43 > 2:09:47government has used to justify its inaction, but also remarks that have

2:09:47 > 2:09:56been made about the status of our is existing EU citizens and the

2:09:56 > 2:09:59important comments by the International Trade Secretary,

2:09:59 > 2:10:03quote, the uncertain status of EU nationals living in the UK is one of

2:10:03 > 2:10:07our main cards in the Brexit negotiations. That is a matter of

2:10:07 > 2:10:16great regret. I will give way.Would he agree with me that there are many

2:10:16 > 2:10:19companies that rely on their employees travelling often at very

2:10:19 > 2:10:24short notice? I am thinking of Airbus in particular where if a wing

2:10:24 > 2:10:29is not finished a certain number of people in this country will hop on a

2:10:29 > 2:10:34plane and will go to France or Germany to finish the work there.

2:10:34 > 2:10:38All these things need to be thought about because of the effect this

2:10:38 > 2:10:42will have on potentially future investment choices those companies

2:10:42 > 2:10:45will make.

2:10:45 > 2:10:52My honourable friend is absolutely right. I think it comes as no

2:10:52 > 2:10:58surprise the deputy director-general of the CBI, no less, has said of

2:10:58 > 2:11:03this Tory government that he is hugely frustrated by their lack of

2:11:03 > 2:11:11progress on an Immigration Bill. But when we speak of EU citizens, they

2:11:11 > 2:11:15are our friends, colleagues and neighbours, people on whose doors we

2:11:15 > 2:11:19knocked during the general election last year. The continuing feeling of

2:11:19 > 2:11:24the government to legislate, when we have people making a positive

2:11:24 > 2:11:27contribution to our economy, turn National Health Service were already

2:11:27 > 2:11:32there is an issue with recruitment, in social care, in universities and

2:11:32 > 2:11:35in other sectors, it only highlights the fact that the government could

2:11:35 > 2:11:42have done so much you know actually a long time ago. Now, the Minister

2:11:42 > 2:11:45has referred to the phase one agreement. I have that in front of

2:11:45 > 2:11:51me. I think the point was raised about continuing uncertainty, which

2:11:51 > 2:11:58continues to be an issue. Paragraph 34 is clear. Both parties agree that

2:11:58 > 2:12:00the withdrawal agreement should provide for the legal effects of the

2:12:00 > 2:12:06citizens right part also in the UK and in the union UK domestic

2:12:06 > 2:12:13legislation should also be enacted to this effect. Where is the

2:12:13 > 2:12:17legislation? It should be brought forward as soon as possible. Madam

2:12:17 > 2:12:21Deputy Speaker, we also now have a situation of course wears throughout

2:12:21 > 2:12:26the negotiations we know nothing will be agreed until everything is

2:12:26 > 2:12:30agreed. We also know because the Minister told us in the size a few

2:12:30 > 2:12:34weeks ago that the migration advisory committee has been asked to

2:12:34 > 2:12:40advise on the economic aspects of the UK's Brexit by September. She

2:12:40 > 2:12:47then said there is plenty of time to take account of the migration

2:12:47 > 2:12:56account recommendations. Plenty of time. This is a two-year parliament.

2:12:56 > 2:13:01She has until March 2019 to get legislation on the statute book.

2:13:01 > 2:13:06Time it is of the essence. If I take the Minister at her word that we

2:13:06 > 2:13:10will have the legislation when the time is right, then can I gently

2:13:10 > 2:13:18suggest that that time might be no. She needs to persuade the Cabinet to

2:13:18 > 2:13:23give her the time to bring the legislation before this House. And

2:13:23 > 2:13:28Madam Deputy Speaker, whilst it is my view and the view of the

2:13:28 > 2:13:32opposition that the status of EU nationals should have been dealt

2:13:32 > 2:13:36with unilaterally a long time ago and not left subject to negotiation

2:13:36 > 2:13:43in this way, nor should ever have the comments from the Secretary of

2:13:43 > 2:13:46State for International trade that people be used as bargaining chips.

2:13:46 > 2:13:55Nonetheless, she could act now and act she should. Going forward, I

2:13:55 > 2:14:00welcome the contribution that has been made today. And the Minister

2:14:00 > 2:14:05has said that it will be considered. And we do have to be very careful in

2:14:05 > 2:14:09this debate about not excluding options from the table as we go

2:14:09 > 2:14:12forward. Nonetheless, can I just suggest to the honourable lady, as

2:14:12 > 2:14:19she tries to put together the whole gamut of immigration policy for this

2:14:19 > 2:14:24country post Brexit, that in order to achieve a fear, managed and

2:14:24 > 2:14:28efficient policy she needs to look at the economic needs of our

2:14:28 > 2:14:34country, work together with business and the trade unions?I'm grateful

2:14:34 > 2:14:39to him for giving way. Will he outline in terms of our proposal for

2:14:39 > 2:14:42an associate citizenship, would it be the policy of the Labour Party to

2:14:42 > 2:14:49support what we calling for?All I have just set out is that we

2:14:49 > 2:14:55shouldn't be ruling any options off the table. I welcome the

2:14:55 > 2:15:00contribution by the honourable member for Carmarthen East and of

2:15:00 > 2:15:02course I look forward to the government's response to this

2:15:02 > 2:15:16position. I will certainly give him my position on a number of matters

2:15:16 > 2:15:20in a minute. Perhaps the Tory party could repair its relationship with

2:15:20 > 2:15:26the CBI, if it did properly consult business and communities about

2:15:26 > 2:15:34immigration in the future? They could increase the number of

2:15:34 > 2:15:37prosecutions that happen for breach of the National Minimum Wage act

2:15:37 > 2:15:44that has happened for far too long, reinstate the Migrant Impact Fund,

2:15:44 > 2:15:49remove international students from the statistics and above all perhaps

2:15:49 > 2:15:56move away from this obsession with bogus immigration targets and a

2:15:56 > 2:16:01numerical target which the Tories have never achieved, despite having

2:16:01 > 2:16:05promised at over three general elections.I greatly appreciate and

2:16:05 > 2:16:09I have much sympathy with which the gentleman has to say, but it is not

2:16:09 > 2:16:15the point of the motion. Emotion here is about the rights of UK

2:16:15 > 2:16:18citizens into the future. There is an interesting debate to be had on

2:16:18 > 2:16:22the rights of EU citizens coming into the UK, but that is for another

2:16:22 > 2:16:28debate.Well, I've already responded to the point that has been made on

2:16:28 > 2:16:32that by her honourable friend, but would also say to the honourable

2:16:32 > 2:16:37lady that of course I appreciate the narrow point about UK citizens going

2:16:37 > 2:16:43forward, but this is a broad debate. I'm sure the honourable lady would

2:16:43 > 2:16:46not lose an opportunity either to put the broader matters to the

2:16:46 > 2:16:52Minister, as I am seeking to do. But could I just end with this point?

2:16:52 > 2:16:58That there could have been and could still be an unconditional commitment

2:16:58 > 2:17:03to the rights of EU citizens in this country. That can still be offered.

2:17:03 > 2:17:06The government should move away from its obsession with numbers and

2:17:06 > 2:17:12restore confidence in our immigration system.Thank you. It's

2:17:12 > 2:17:19a pressure to be called so early in this debate and give me a window

2:17:19 > 2:17:27into the right honourable member for Rushcliffe's world. He said his

2:17:27 > 2:17:35party had been issued by -- he said his party been shaped by the issue

2:17:35 > 2:17:40of Europe. And can I say that it takes one to know one? My

2:17:40 > 2:17:43constituency has perhaps been shaped to a greater extent than almost any

2:17:43 > 2:17:54other. I was pleased to you can focus on the issues that of EU

2:17:54 > 2:17:59citizens and I'm afraid I will to some extent focused on the other

2:17:59 > 2:18:05side of that argument, but not I hope entirely. But I think it would

2:18:05 > 2:18:09be only fair to rebut some of what has been said recently. The side of

2:18:09 > 2:18:14the House brought in the modern slavery act to combat some of the

2:18:14 > 2:18:21issues which have been spoken of. We tripled a level of the migration

2:18:21 > 2:18:27funds that he praised. So I think we should not be ashamed of what we

2:18:27 > 2:18:30have achieved for the rights of migrant workers, but what we should

2:18:30 > 2:18:35also start off I think by acknowledging our all the thoughtful

2:18:35 > 2:18:40issues of identity that the right honourable member opened this debate

2:18:40 > 2:18:43with, and that is because my constituency may indeed have been

2:18:43 > 2:18:47that which voted to leave the European Union more resoundingly

2:18:47 > 2:18:53than anywhere else, but we are also the constituency that has come as I

2:18:53 > 2:18:57say, to some extent been shaped by citizens of the European Union,

2:18:57 > 2:19:01perhaps more than anywhere else. We have streets in Boston that are

2:19:01 > 2:19:07populated with shops that would otherwise be empty and are entirely

2:19:07 > 2:19:11focused on our new eastern European communities. And that means that I

2:19:11 > 2:19:14think we are uniquely attuned to the issues of identity that he has

2:19:14 > 2:19:21talked about. And I think what I would like to begin by saying in

2:19:21 > 2:19:25many ways is that actually when we think about why did I constituency

2:19:25 > 2:19:30like mine vote so strongly, it was not a rejection of those EU rights,

2:19:30 > 2:19:35and it was not a rejection of those EU citizens as individuals. It was,

2:19:35 > 2:19:42I think, and I don't wish to rerun the Brexit referendum again by any

2:19:42 > 2:19:48means, not least because I was on the other side of it, but I say to

2:19:48 > 2:19:54him that it was not a rejection of those individuals, it was a

2:19:54 > 2:19:57rejection of migration policy that hadn't worked for a constituency

2:19:57 > 2:20:07such as mine and it was a rejection of an approach that had been taken

2:20:07 > 2:20:11by Brussels over many years which did not affect the best interests of

2:20:11 > 2:20:15the United Kingdom as a whole. When he speaks of identity, I hope he

2:20:15 > 2:20:22would be in mind that we have far more of my own constituents who have

2:20:22 > 2:20:27married into the communities that have arrived, very often formed

2:20:27 > 2:20:39relationships and have children where one parent is English and the

2:20:39 > 2:20:44other is from an Eastern European country. To that position is

2:20:44 > 2:20:56altered. It suggests my constituency have a larger desire to be able to

2:20:56 > 2:21:01visit Poland, Latvia and Lithuania, and all those countries where

2:21:01 > 2:21:05reciprocal rights would benefit as. None of my voters I think voted for

2:21:05 > 2:21:10us to no longer have British driving licences valid on the continent or

2:21:10 > 2:21:17to any vote -- end some of the reciprocal rights we have had for

2:21:17 > 2:21:28many years.

2:21:28 > 2:21:32I think we should pay tribute to the negotiating position that the Prime

2:21:32 > 2:21:39Minister set out last week, which is a pragmatic, sensible bed to try and

2:21:39 > 2:21:45secure some of those rights that he talked about. But I think we should

2:21:45 > 2:21:48acknowledge that in the referendum people did vote for a different set

2:21:48 > 2:21:52of circumstances after we left, and that does inevitably mean that we

2:21:52 > 2:22:00have to consider what those differences might look like.- the

2:22:00 > 2:22:03Minister was absolutely right to say that the starting point does have to

2:22:03 > 2:22:09be in law when we leave, then we will have no longer precisely those

2:22:09 > 2:22:14rights. We have to acknowledge that is the case and how do we make sure

2:22:14 > 2:22:20we get to the best possible outcome by the end of the negotiations. I

2:22:20 > 2:22:27give way.Thank you. When he talks about the change, the view of people

2:22:27 > 2:22:31that would be changed circumstances, would you agree with me that what we

2:22:31 > 2:22:36also consider is given the vaults of a whole series, a plethora of nation

2:22:36 > 2:22:41states within the EU, not least at the weekend in Italy, who knows what

2:22:41 > 2:22:46changes are going to, than the very institution that we are talking

2:22:46 > 2:22:53about. May not be at all the way people envisage it at the moment.

2:22:53 > 2:22:59Absolutely. Years right to say that this is a movable feast on the other

2:22:59 > 2:23:06side of the channel and we should of course be that in mind. I think this

2:23:06 > 2:23:21motion...He would be aware of the Vienna treaties. Under those legal

2:23:21 > 2:23:26rulings, citizens rights may not be lost. Surely that is a can of

2:23:26 > 2:23:30precedent we should be following?He used the word me and I think that is

2:23:30 > 2:23:38right. I think we should be looking at what the potential is and what

2:23:38 > 2:23:42the presidents are. It remains a fact the Minister was right to say

2:23:42 > 2:23:46it is the case that when we leave we will no longer be members and

2:23:46 > 2:23:50therefore we will no longer have the rights that we currently have. Now

2:23:50 > 2:23:54he may pray in a presidents which suggest something else and we may be

2:23:54 > 2:23:59able to rely on some of those in due course, but we should not prejudge

2:23:59 > 2:24:04any of that. We have to be pragmatic. It is also worth bearing

2:24:04 > 2:24:10in mind that constituents across my constituency and others across the

2:24:10 > 2:24:14country did vote for precisely those kind of differences. They voted for

2:24:14 > 2:24:18the government to negotiate a new relationship with Europe and that is

2:24:18 > 2:24:23of course precisely what we are doing. I just want to touch on

2:24:23 > 2:24:27aspects of the motion that the honourable member opening didn't

2:24:27 > 2:24:32dwell on particularly, but that is single market access. And of course

2:24:32 > 2:24:42single market access does define a huge part of our relationship with

2:24:42 > 2:24:46the EU. I think it is a frustrating, and this is not our fault that he

2:24:46 > 2:24:48committed at all, but it is frustrating to see that people did

2:24:48 > 2:24:53not know what they were voting for when they came to make their vote in

2:24:53 > 2:24:56the referendum. I think my constituents were very clear that