Live Exiting the European Union Questions House of Commons

this evening. First we have

questions for the Secretary of State

for Exiting the European Union David

Davis and his team of ministers.

Order. Questions to the Secretary of

State for Exiting the European

Union.

With permission, I will answer

question one and 12 together. We

continue to work closely with the

Secretary of State for environment,

food and rural affairs. We want to

maintain stability for farmers as we

grow our world leading farming

industries in a sustainable way.

Where printer consulting on policy,

seeking views on a range of possible

paths to a brighter future for

farming.

I've provide financial support in

Wales and for the rest of the UK

after Brexit. Does the Minister

agree that the commitment will

provide the stability to allow

farmers to continue providing

high-quality produce without having

a negative effect on the

environment?

I agree, British food has a

reputation for quality that has been

built on high animal welfare

standards and strong environmental

protections. Proposals will support

farmers to grow more, sell more and

export more British food and ensure

we are the first generation to leave

the environment in a better state

than we inherited it.

Recently I met with local NFU

farmers Hugh were frustrated by the

delays of the basic payment scheme

from the EU. Can you encourage a

more simplistic system that sees

farmers paid on time once we leave

the EU?

Yes, we will give that

encouragement. I know my colleague

has listened to concerns and is

consulting on arrangements to

simplify and improve the delivery of

the common agricultural policy

whilst we participate in it. Outside

of that with a simpler effective

rules, we can support farmers to

sell, and grow more.

Why won't the Minister respect the

desire of NFU Scotland to see the

powers over agriculture devolved in

fall and then for the UK...

Yesterday I attended the GMC session

and the First Minister's tone was

very constructive and I am sure we

will work with her to take forward

the discussions and I hope

satisfactorily.

Going forward, farmers need to know

the position of what will look like

-- trade deals will look like. Why

won't it be the listened to do the

NFU Scotland that the powers go to

Scotland's said the Scottish

Government can sign a policy to suit

Scottish farmers?

We are listening, and as we run into

the economic Council, we have the

concern of the devolved governments'

in mind. With those two tensions in

we will go forward.

Staffordshire constituency has one

of the largest areas of soft fruit

growing meaning we have less reliant

on imports. They are very concerned

about the great workers who, and

harvest the crop is. What assurances

can he give that he is working with

his counterparts in deference to

make sure that the supply of people

to choose those produce is still

available when we leave?

We have commissioned a committee to

give us advice on immigration policy

and we have always said to the vote

was not to pull up the drawbridge

and we will ensure that policy

reflects the needs of the UK's

economy.

Wittering about Strawberry and

December or something like that. We

look forward to hearing his views.

Before I answer this question, can I

take the opportunity to express my

condolences to Warren Hawksley, a

colleague of hours, and despite him

being a master rebel, a great

friend, he was very energetic in his

pursuit of reviews, sometimes too

energetic, but I would like to

express my condolences to his

family. With permission, I will

answer question two, four and five

together. Our immediate goal is to

agree a strictly time-limited

implementation period by the match

European Council next week. This is

crucial to building a bridge from

where we are to where we want to be

on the exit. We are also working

hard to codify it into legal text.

We believe that is in reach. The

matter being Council will... We are

seeking to ensure the guidelines are

as broad and open as possible to

allow the most constructive

negotiation to gain a close

relationship and what we are aiming

for.

It could be the making of us,

couldn't it?

I could be just as pithy as my

honourable friend and say yes!

Does he foresee a scenario where the

deal negotiated is so

mind-bogglingly positive that all

the other states want that sort of

relationship as well and the EU

itself explodes. Orders he believed

the best religion should be can have

is membership and any new settlement

will be disadvantageous to what we

have now?

Firstly, the people who made the

decision on the last part of his

question where the British people,

millions of them, and they decided

it was not the case. Let me pick up

on the first point because he has a

serious point. There are certainly,

certainly in the institutions of the

union, and in some of the member

states, concerned that if we are too

successful, it will be tempting to

others. I do not believe that is a

real fear because we have unique

circumstances, the English-language,

our traditions, our world a network,

our law, all the advantages that the

countries do not have. No fault of

their own. And that will allow was

macro to make the best of this.

I'm aware some in his own party have

accused others in his own party of

fantasy politics, he believe that

any transition period can be based

on WTO principles?

It is fascinating to have a lecture

from the SNP on fantasy politics.

What we are posing is a transition

period based on the testing

arrangements and rules in order that

the British people and the British

companies and European people and

companies have won transition to

make.

It was disappointing to see the

aggressive line in last week's you

document on maintaining full access

to the fishing waters. Could the

Secretary of State for Exiting the

European Union say he is being

robust for fishermen in my

constituency to make sure we we gain

control of our fishing waters before

deciding who to allow to fish in

them?

It was a very odd linkage to make.

The truth is that when we leave the

EU, we will be an independent

coastal state. We will control our

own waters. We will be continuing

negotiations with neighbouring

states because fish move, about

catching quotas and the rest of it.

But we will control our own destiny.

There are around 40 trade agreements

and negotiated by the EU which the

UK is party to, but we now know that

two of those countries that they

will can seek concessions from the

UK in return for rolling over those

agreements during the transition

period. Can the Secretary of State

for Exiting the European Union

insurers macro that they can

continue to trade with those

countries on the same basis as now

with the exact same benefits and we

will not end up in a situation where

those countries will continue to

have preferential access to our

market whilst others lose it?

It is fascinating that that is the

stance he takes because if you look

at the customs union proposal that

the Labour Party came up with

reached the main -- recently, it

gives that risk that people have

access to our markets without us

necessarily having the cop entry

access to their own. That was by

their own international trade

secretary not long ago.

I wish my friend backing of the

success the negotiations which will

reach an important stage next week.

Could he confirmed that it remains

the Government's position that no

deal is better than a bad deal and

can he confirm also that all

necessary resources will be continue

to be displayed -- to be deployed?

This link to the first question from

the SMP, that some people think that

letting us get a good deal would be

bad for the EU. Yes, of course we

are absolutely abdicated the

resources necessary as the

Chancellor has said.

Given that the Government own impact

assessment points to every sector

and region of the UK being alleged

by Brexit, what discussions has the

Secretary of State had up with

different sectors about the extra

damage a short transition period

could inflict on jobs and which

sectors and companies have told him

that a 21 transition period is

acceptable Burr there was a call for

a three-year transition period and

eight two year tradition period.

Firstly, there is no official

Government document that makes the

forecast he says. It is a work in

progress, but that is not the

official forecast. We do not believe

it. The simple truth is we need the

most important priority is to

establish an implementation period

as soon as possible so the companies

can have certainty. That is the view

of the CBI, the commerce, the

Institute of directors and pretty

much every other group varies.

The Prime Minister reaffirmed her

commitments to the Northern Ireland

and Ireland border in her speech at

Mansion House, recognising the

unique circumstances of Northern

Ireland and our shared commitment to

avoiding a hardboard. The joint

report agreed in December, also made

clear it is our intention to avoid a

hardboard and physical

infrastructure or related checks and

controls between Northern Ireland

and Ireland. We have always been

clear that we will not agree

anything that threatens the

constitutional or economic integrity

of the UK.

Given the government have said that

the border will remain friction

free, or frictionless, and there

will be no border in the RUC, the

question many of us continue to ask

is, how can this happen?

Well, government has made clear its

unwavering commitment to three

guiding principles in relation to

Northern Ireland and the republic.

They should be no hardboard, North

and south, the Belfast agreement

must be honoured, and the

constitutional economic integrity of

the UK remains unimpaired. The Prime

Minister set up most recently in her

Mansion House speech how that might

be achieved. And also, building on

the options set out in the August

papers which set out practical

options how we might take this

forward.

How does the government expect to

avoid a hardboard? -- hardboard? --

hard border?

It is the unwavering commitment of

this government that the economic

integrity of the UK remains intact

and therefore if the UK is leaving

the customs union, so is Northern

Ireland.

I am certain that my honourable

friend has seen the paper, Smart

Boarders 2.0, that was prepared for

the constitutional affairs

committee. It does not provide the

whole solution but it does show how

technology will help solve this

problem and does she agree that will

solve and ensure the integrity of

the UK?

I thank my honourable friend for his

question. The report which she

refers to is an interesting document

but it does not go as far as the

United Kingdom has committed. Our

unwavering commitment is to not

introducing any physical

infrastructure at the border and we

have explicitly ruled this out.

While the report is interesting, it

doesn't go all the way.

Will the Minister recognised that

this is much more than just the

movement of goods or services, it is

about a cultural issue, it is about

the movement of people, it is about

all of that, and the symbolism of

this is enormous, and the minister

needs to make sure that is

recognised time after time in all

the talks she has to reassure the

people of all parts of Ireland.

The Common travel agreement is

absolutely fundamental to any future

arrangement, which ensures and

enables the free flow of people

across the border. It is vital that

that forms part of any future

arrangement.

I just don't think that ministers

quite appreciate the level of

concern that there is across the

House on this issue. Whenever I have

visited the Irish border, I have

come face-to-face with the reality

of what the installation of any

cameras or any infrastructure would

mean, and it would not last a day.

It would not last a day. Why won't

be Secretary of State even visit the

border so that he can appreciate why

people are so concerned? I don't

know if she has been but will she

encourage the Secretary of State to

do so?

We don't underestimate the

importance of this issue. My fellow

minister, has been to the border and

indeed regularly with members from

Northern Ireland and those involved

in this issue. The Secretary of

State has also been to the border

prior to his appointment to this

position and it is very much a price

of the sensitivities and importance

of this critical issue.

I think that says all we need to

hear. How... How can we ensure an

open border without a customs union?

We have looked everywhere that we

can think of to identify a border

anywhere on earth where there is an

open border and no customs union.

The Prime Minister referred to the

border between the United States and

Canada. Can she confirmed that the

Prime Minister has ruled that out as

an option and can she tell us where

on earth there is such a border that

is open with no customs union?

The honourable member really needs

to go back and listen to what the

Prime Minister said at Mansion

House. She has spent a lot of time

looking at this issue and is very

much interested in finding

solutions. There are many, many

proposals on the table which would

be viable and workable and the

government is in the process of

considering them. A trusted Trader

scheme, exemptions, all of these

options are on the table and they

are subject to the negotiations.

Question number six.

It is a topic of frequent interest.

Leaving the EU allows us to consider

how our economy is shaped and

presents an opportunity to deliver

procompetitive, pro-innovative

industrial strategy and stands the

test of time so we have a resilient

economy ready for the future.

To ensure that trade is there as

well as free, there are only over 40

trade defence instruments in place

regarding steel at European level.

The behaviour of the US

administration at the moment may

well mean that rises. Can the

Minister give confidence to be steel

industry that these trade defence

instruments will remain in place at

the point of moving out of the

European Union?

This government is very disappointed

by the President's intention to

place tariffs on steel and

aluminium. The UK supports free

trade and measures to tackle unfair

trade practices. As part of

preparations for the UK's exit from

the EU, we are committed to creating

a trade remedies framework. When the

UK leaves the EU, we will remain a

member of the World Trade

Organisation, we will play a full

part in promoting compliance and if

necessary make use of the World

Trade Organisation's procedures in

defence of our national interest.

What I would say is, if we adopted

Labour's position, all of our trade

remedies would be the policies of

the European Union and not of the

United Kingdom.

The chief Executive of the body

which represents companies in the

aerospace sectors has said "A

customs union with the EU is a

practical solution that would put

businesses in the best possible

position to compete after Brexit".

If the government cares about

manufacturing, will it reconsider

its position on the customs union?

Of course we are concerned about

aerospace and it is one of our

greatest industries but may I remind

the honourable gentleman of what was

said by his honourable friend, the

honourable member for Brent North,

he said maintaining membership of

the customs union would be deeply

unattractive. He said "As a

transitional phase it might be

thought to have some merit, however

as an end point it is deeply

unattractive. It would conclude us

from making trade agreements with

our five largest export markets

outside the EU". For all he says,

his party is at sixes and sevens.

If China is illegally dumping steel

into the UK, would the Minister

agree with me it is better that the

British government decides what the

remedy is, rather than the European

Union?

I would agree that we should have

our own trade remedy the policies in

place and what we should be doing is

not standing against free trade, we

should be embracing free trade, but

we must stand against unfair,

anti-competitive practices.

If the Secretary of State and the

government would consider the

customs union, what specific support

will they give to the aerospace

sector, that employs so many people

in Bristol?

I have got good news for the

honourable lady and that is that

both sides have agreed in principle

we should have a free-trade

agreement covering all sectors with

zero tariffs. With a good agreement,

we can achieve a mere frictionless

trade. I believe these things will

ensure that our manufacturing

industries will have an ever

brighter future.

The voice of UK manufacturing and

engineering as well as the CBI, the

Institute of directors and trade

unions welcomed Labour's call for

the negotiation of a new, copper

offensive UK, EU customs union post

Brexit. Can the Minister name any

significant manufacturing

organisation or association that is

on record as stating that either of

the two government's negotiating

positions are remotely credible or

workable?

I will just remind him that his

honourable friend said that

remaining in a customs union would

be a disaster. What we need to do is

stand up for the consumer interest

and that means taking control of our

tariff policies while ensuring free

and frictionless trade.

Question number seven.

We have committed to continually UK

participation in the Erasmus +

programme until 2020. No decisions

have yet been made about the post

20/20 participation since the scope

of that programme has not been

agreed. The Prime Minister said we

will seek an ongoing relationship

with regard to education and

cultural programmes to enhance

shared values and enhance our scope

in the world.

Will he speak with European

counterparts to discuss the Erasmus

+ programme?

Yes, and I recognise his

considerable expertise when it comes

to the European Parliament. We have

met with members of the cultural,

educational committee to discuss a

range of issues. We will continue to

seek opportunities to meet with this

committee. The Department for

Education's officials are in regular

touch.

Scotland has benefited from 64.8

million euros of funding since 2014.

Coming out of Erasmus + will mean

not only a loss of money but a loss

of opportunity for young people in

Scotland. How does he intend to

replace this?

The Prime Minister said there are

many areas where the UK has an

ambition to develop future

participation and the UK has a wide

range of international programmes

which we can look at how we can

extend in the years to come.

Number eight.

As I said in my speech, and

implementation period will be

mutually beneficial to the European

Union and the United Kingdom. It is

in no 1's interest to see businesses

rushed through contingency plans

based on on a future deal.

Businesses have been clear on the

importance of an implementation

period which will allow time to

build new structure, set that new

systems to support our future

partnership and to allow for as free

and frictionless trade as possible.

And implementation period will allow

them to make those decisions on the

basis of knowledge of what a future

deal will look like. That will make

sure our businesses are ready, will

only have to are just once, and will

allow the European government to do

the same.

I thank the Secretary of State for

that answer. Two thirds of people in

Middlesbrough... Can my right

honourable friend ensure voters that

any instrumentation period will be

time limited and pave the way for a

small exit?

A time limited in limitation period

will ensure a orderly exit from the

European Union. The UK and the EU

will continue access to each other's

markets on current terms. Businesses

will be able to continue to operate

on the same terms as now. It will

provide vital certainty and

stability as we move towards a

future partnership. Let's be clear,

we are leaving the European Union in

2019 and only when the UK is no

longer a member state can we take

advantage of our status as an

independent trading nation.

Number ten.

The manufacturing sector is of

course a frequent topic of

discussion between Cabinet members

across government. As the Prime

Minister set up, the UK will see the

broadest and deepest agreement with

the EU, covering more sectors and

cooperating more fully. I am

especially encouraged by the

Chancellor's Spring statement

yesterday which confirmed that the

Manufacturing sector is enjoying its

longest unbroken run of growth in 15

years.

Why every time we have mentioned

manufacturing question, the

Secretary of State hides behind his

junior team? That is the fact of the

matter. He doesn't want to confront

manufacturing. Isn't it the truth

there is a secret document in the

business document -- in which shows

puts Brexit, London will survive and

thrive and the rest of the country,

the North of England, manufacturing

is going to be in dire straits. That

is the truth, why doesn't the

Secretary of State defender

manufacturing?

'S I'll amend the honourable man

determination to talk down this

country. -- I lament. It has been

shown that the choosing to locate

its two fastest growing divisions in

this country safeguarding 7300 jobs

and £1 billion a year of investment

stock that is the company itself has

made clear its decision to transport

a small number of jobs to the HQ in

the Netherlands is part of

restructuring and are not connected

to the UK's departure from the EU.

On the basis that it is subject to

negotiation, the Government has

refused to implement the replacement

to the regime for the inadequate

2004 clinical trials directive. This

is essential for our pharmaceutical

trade because we face going off a

cliff and not being able to

participate in cognitive clinical

trials with EU research

institutions. When will he implement

that directive?

As part of the

negotiations, the Government will

discuss how best to continue

corporation in the field of clinical

trials. The UK has walked towards

the new regulations and it was

agreed in 2014. The application date

of the CTR will be set by the

European Commission and if it is

after our exit, then it will not be

part of the withdrawal bill.

Number 11.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will take

questions 11, 16 and 19 together. If

we were to remain in the customs

union, we would not be able to

implement our own trade deals set

our own tariffs. The EU would be

able to access other countries to

our market, but we would not get

access in return. This would not

give us control and would not

respect the referendum result. We

have a great chance to develop for

the first time in decades a new

trade policy by leaving the EU

Customs Union.

Will she make sure that the final

deal allows the UK to deal new trade

deals around the world on day one

when we leave Castres?

That is one of the big prizes of

Brexit, the freedom and a chance to

develop and design new free trade

deals around the world outside the

European union and it is our

commitment that once we leave the EU

that we enjoy that to its fullest.

If the minister aware that in

Norfolk where there are a large

number of SMEs, dynamic companies,

can you tell us further what

progress is being made with the EU

to make sure we are able to

negotiate the bilateral treatments

during the transition?

It has been the clear commitment of

the Government that during the

fermentation period we will be able

to take concrete steps forward in

negotiating and signing new

free-trade agreements with other

countries outside the EU, though

they would not come into force until

after the end of the implementation

period. My friend Mike is right,

leaving the union and farming a new

policy is a chance to open up to

businesses new markets which they

haven't previously had access to and

that will help consumers, increase

investment and only lead to

prosperity.

I thank my honourable friend for her

answers. India currently enjoys a

growth rate of 7.5% and is on course

to become the 50 biggest economy in

the world. Given our cultural links

and shared history, does my

honourable friend, get agree with me

that we have an opportunity to forge

a trade deal with India that will be

excellent news for the UK and India?

My honourable friend is absolutely

right. India represents a great

opportunity for Britain and British

consumers and Indian counterparts in

the name of trade. It is no

coincidence that the Prime Minister

made an appointment to visit India

very early on in her premiership.

There has recently been a trade or

did with India looking at the

particular barriers and the joint

economic committee that has been set

up has decided to look at four

sectors- food, life sciences, IT and

services to seek where opportunities

can be explored.

At a recent meeting, with the

director-general of the CBI, she

highlighted how Germany sells 4.7

times more than the UK to China, so

being in a customs union does not

prevent extending trade with global

partners. Does the Minister agree?

Being in the customs union also puts

up prices for consumers in food,

footwear, clothes, and do not

understand why the other party does

not celebrate the benefits of

leaving because communion as we are.

I don't often cite the international

trade Secretary favourably, but he

was right in China in the robbery

with the Prime Minister when he

accepted that a customs union with

the EU does not prevent us with

bilateral trade agreements with

China. What assessment has the

Government made of the comparative

benefits for the UK of being in a

customs union are not being in a

customs union on trade with

non-union-mac countries?

As we have a trade deficit with the

EU which is increasing and at £70

billion, and a trade surplus that is

growing with the rest of the world,

it is clear that our prospects for

increased demand, lies with the rest

of the world where smoke

fastest-growing economies live. Our

future prosperity lies with trade

both with the EU but with countries

outside of the youth. -- outside of

the EU.

The UK Scottish and Welsh Government

have agreed to a set of principles.

We have made progress in talks of

what future framework should look

like. These have been guided by

principles agreed in October and a

report GMC. I'm sure it will be

welcomed the substantial amendments

we have enacted.

I do indeed welcomed the amendment

to clause 11 that has appeared and I

am grateful to have this opportunity

to agree with the honourable man.

Can he ensure the House that Brexit,

far from undermining the devolution

settlement will in fact lead to a

significant increase in

decision-making powers in Holyrood

and other devolved administrations

question mark my honourable friend

is right and I know he has pressed

us hard on this issue will stop we

are looking at legislative

frameworks in a small month of areas

and may only be required to review

specific owners.

With Scotland, it shows that 83 out

of 107 powers returning to borstals

will go to Edinburgh on exit, and

was similarly slow to Cardiff and

Belfast.

It is interesting it took six months

to come up with a single amendment

to a bill but threatens to destroy

the devolution. Given a question was

on the mechanisms to agree common

policy, could the Minister clarify

what the procedure will be if the

bill goes through with the

Government's chosen amendments to

section 11? Does it still give the

UK Government the power to impose

those against the devolved nations?

I congratulate our Scottish

colleagues on their workrate. We are

seeking consent for the bill and

discussions continue to achieve

that. The UK has not responsible to

two protect the Common Market and we

cannot have our abilities restricted

so we do not believe it is right for

the devolved ministration to have a

veto on those. We have been clear we

need common frameworks when we leave

the EU to make different businesses

be able to trade with each other and

the UK to the its UK's International

relationships.

I hope the criticism of the SNP,

Scottish Labour Party, the Scottish

Government, the Welsh Government and

the Parliament of Northern Ireland

for all failing to fall into step

with the UK Government. The

Government has preferred legislation

to allow a power grab by Westminster

against the devolved nations will

stop it looks like a power grab and

reads like a power grab. It is a

power grab.

I would say it is clear there is not

a single power the devolved

administration currently have that

will be taken away or affected by

the bill. We're looking at the

increasing powers as they from

Brussels to each of the devolved

administrations. They should all

welcome that.

Yesterday following the. We cannot

have powers reduced restricted. My

honourable friend see the irony here

seeing that the SNP are the ones...

My honourable friend makes an

excellent point. I continue to help

we will be able to come together in

ensuring the powers of each of the

devolved administrations are

increased and we can work together

to secure prosperity of the UK,

Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales

and England.

Mr Speaker, as the Secretary of

State explained, we want to ensure

that you could just have the maximum

freedom to trade within European

markets and allow European produced

do the same in the UK. We have a

unique opportunities support a

thriving and self-reliant farming

area. To help protect and give

stability to farmers as we leave the

EU.

I thank the Minister for that reply.

One third of British land is

exported, a lot to EU markets. Well

my honourable friend be able to

reassure the House about these

markets will continue to have

friction and tariff free access post

Brexit?

I will seek to provide about. At the

Mansion House speech, we wanted deep

and special partnership with the EU

which gives the best trading goes.

We do not want to see the

introduction of any tariffs are

quotas and we will want to ensure

open markets for each other's

products, including agricultural

products. We are confident it is in

our mutual interests to agree to a

such an agreement.

Number 17.

We continue to work closely with the

Department of Health and social care

on delivering a smooth exit that

works for the health and adult

social care sectors will stop we

value the huge contribution that EU

nationals make to our public

services. We will provide them with

certainty about their rights going

forward.

With likely effects on workforce,

data-sharing, health research and

drug access, does the Minister not

agree that there should be a formal

impact assessment of leaving the U

on the health and social care

sector?

I should remind her that the latest

figures show there are over 3200

more EU nationals working in the NHS

than before the referendum result

and when it comes to formal impact

assessments, they will be produced

in the normal way in connection with

legislation.

Mr Speaker, we have been working

closely with our colleagues, the

marine management organisation is

working with the management, Navy,

and the inshore fisheries and

conservation authorities and other

organisations to deliver fisheries

protection and regulation.

Irrespective of agreement when we

leave the common fisheries policy.

The remainders and levers are united

over the common fish and piracy. And

when we leave, we leave the common

fisheries policy the stop on that

day, the armada of EU trawlers that

have been plundering Britain's

historic fishing ground since 1973

and not going to be happy that their

best years are behind them. Will you

ensure the Royal Navy has the wee

sources it needs to protect our

sovereign waters and ensure the

rebirth and Renaissance of the

British fishing industry?

My honourable friend makes an

important point. We do hope to agree

and reach an agreement and mutual

interest. As it was made clear, we

are leaving the common fisheries

policy, the UK will regain control

of our domestic fishing and access

to our waters. With enforcement, we

will strengthen our surveillance

capability and make sure the

appropriate capacity is in place to

control our waters and enforce

regulations as required. This will

be underpinned by a robust approach

stop.

We got through every question.

Over recent weeks, the Prime

Minister set out in more detail do

to keep the lives of our future

partnership with the European Union.

In Munich, the Prime Minister set

out our clear decided to continue

working closely. Add Mansion House,

the Prime Minister set a clear path

towards a conference of future

economic partnership. One that

recognises our unique starting

point, our shared history and our

common values. But one that also

respect the result of the referendum

and ensures that as we leave the EU,

we return control over our money,

laws and borders to this House. Over

the coming months we will be using

the negotiations to deliver that.

Is my right honourable friend able

to reassure the House that following

next week's EU Council meeting, the

negotiations will be able to move

beyond the transition arrangements?

We have made significant progress in

a number of areas, on the Internet

age and period, and while

negotiations are still ongoing, we

are confident we can reach an

agreement on that next week. Article

50 is clear that the withdrawal

agreement should be agreed in line

with a future relationship. We

expect new European Union guidelines

about our future relationship to be

agreed at the march council as set

out by the European Union in

December. The Prime Minister set out

a vision of the breath of the future

in a number of speeches and we hope

the European Union guidelines will

be flexible to allow the European

Union to think creatively and

imaginatively about our future

partnership. I would say to him that

at least half of the effort in the

last three months has been aimed at

making sure that we get that

flexible, open and broad guideline

by addressing that very issue to the

27th who make up the council as well

as of the commission.

In January last year, the Secretary

of State stood at the dispatch box

and assure the House, and I quote,

"What we have come up with is the

idea of a con pensive free-trade

agreement and a copper offensive

customs agreement that will deliver

the exact same benefits as we have

now. -- comprehensive". Then the

Prime Minister's Mansion House

speech downgraded the ambition is to

reduce access to European markets.

What has the Secretary of State got

to say for himself now?

I will say two things. Of course, in

a negotiation, you go in with the

highest possible aspiration.

Incidentally, he should read his own

policy, which has the same

aspirations. What we are about is

getting the best possible outcome

for this country and that is what we

will do.

We will have -- we have had a lot of

non-answers this morning. In

addition to downgrading the ambition

for the final deal, the government

are also delaying vital registration

in this House. We were expecting a

third reading. They have apparently

been parked until May because of the

government fears losing key votes.

But there is no sign of other vital

legislation coming down the track.

This should have been a busy period

in Parliament. General debates on

the EU are always interesting but

meaningful votes are better. What is

going on?

I must say, I thought business

questions going after this. However,

if they continue to try to thwart

the will of the British people by

blocking votes at every turn, I am

afraid that is their responsibility.

Does my right honourable friend

agree with me that remaining in a

customs union after Brexit would

prevent one of the major

opportunities that leaving the EU

presents, taking control of our

trade?

That is exactly right and as my

honourable friend, the Parliamentary

Secretary, said earlier, this is one

of the great prizes that will come

out of the departure from the union.

On the issue of the customs union, I

am rather sorry that the honourable

spokesman for the opposition didn't

raise that explicitly, because I

know he has this is -- difficulty

with his own leadership on this

matter. Tony Blair said the

following on customs union. "The Way

I look at it is that the Labour

Party position is that they have

pulled up the anchor that they would

be very unwise to drop anchor at the

customs union because the truth is

it doesn't really solve your

problems"

it doesn't really solve your

problems". By the way, it doesn't

resolve your problems in Northern

Ireland either.

Vital services for people suffering

domestic violence, hate crime,

discrimination and Labour

exploitation are funded from the EU

equality and citizenship programme.

When the consultation eventually

begins for the UK prosperity fund,

will this programme be part of it?

I have had extensive discussions

with my honourable friend the

Secretary of State for communities

on the prosperity fund, I will take

up the points with him.

Last weekend, the Secretary of State

for DEFRA released a joint statement

on the future of fisheries post

Brexit. Does my right honourable

friend agree with them that the UK

must on the 29th of March next year

leave the Common Fisheries Policy,

which means the UK will decide

annually who catches what, where,

when, in our exclusive economic

zone?

My honourable friend has become a

relentless champion of this cause of

fisheries. He is an undoubted

champion of his constituents and the

fishing cause more widely. The

government shares his impatience to

leave the Common Fisheries Policy.

The view of the House has been made

clear today. We will take that in

patients to leave forward to our

negotiations. As an independent

coastal state, we will have control

of our exclusive economic zone, we

will be responsible for the

management of natural marine

resources in this area and we will

manage access to UK waters.

In the government document released

by the Brexit Select Committee last

week, it stated that the business

department is coordinating analysis

of the impacts of a potential loss

of a 48-hour working week. Why is

the government seeking to use Brexit

as an excuse to steelworkers'

rights?

We have been very clear from the

start that we will be protecting all

workers' rights.

Leaving the common agricultural

policy gives the farming industry

and historic opportunity to take

back control of our farming policies

but does my right honourable friend

agree with me that it is essential

that we protect the interests of the

family farmer, as in my farming

constituency in Brecon and

Radnorshire, by continuing direct

payment of subsidies?

The government recognises the

importance of supporting smaller

farms, including family farms, as we

leave the common agricultural

policy. Our consultation paper sets

out our detailed proposals for a

gradual transition in which we

continue direct payments while

applying reductions. For example,

starting with those receiving the

highest payments. The government is

currently seeking views on these

proposals and is inviting all those

affected to contribute to the

discussion. I hope my honourable

friend will ask his constituents to

play their part.

The Minister talking about Northern

Ireland earlier made a very

significant statement when she said

that the report by Mr Lars Karlsson

did not meet the government's test

of no physical border

infrastructure. Could the Secretary

of State repeat that statement and

say in his roots it doesn't need

that test either?

I will certainly say it is not meet

all our criteria. We want to

maintain no physical structures at

the border and no visible border. I

will remind him, however, that the

border does exist as a financial

border. There are different fiscal,

excise policies north and south of

the border and we have to manage

that now. If we do it without the

border being visible, we will do

that in the future.

When we leave the single market, we

will also leave the passport

anguishing. What steps are being

taken to discuss successor results?

We are working closely with the

Treasury to prepare for the

ambitious arrangement on financial

services. The Prime Minister

indicated that in his Mansion House

speech and we are very clear that it

should be interests of the UK and

the EU to reach agreement in this

area, not least to protect the

financial stability of Europe.

We very much welcome the Secretary

of State's answer just now. It would

be helpful to understand if all the

government's requirements can be met

without any infrastructure

whatsoever. Last night, my

honourable friend made a generous

offer to take him to the Irish

border to see for himself how it

works now. I actually support her in

that offer. Will he join us in a

visit to see how it works?

I won't take the offer, I'm afraid,

but I will say this, the purpose of

a visit before the Belfast agreement

was to look at the issue of

smuggling. So this is an important

issue. When Martin McGuinness was

alive, the last conversation I had

with him was about that, and the

simple truth is, this border issue

is resolvable if we have a free

trade agreement and if we have a

customs agreement. It is resolvable

by technical means as well.

Can I applaud the government's

sensible decision in terms of

expressing an intention to remain

part of the European aviation safety

agency post Brexit. Can we expect

similar discussions around open

skies?

He can expect similar discussions

around open skies and I was

reassured that President Tusk, in

his remarks, mentioned aviation is

one of the key things he wishes to

address.

There are seven Everest Beluga

flights every day between Hamburg

and Toulouse and Chester and that

obligated supply chain is going to

be put at risk unless we get

regulatory certainty soon. When will

we get that detailed regulatory

certainty?

This is why we wish to move quickly

to agree on in the limitation period

and to discuss our future economic

partnership. As we have said, we

hope to be in a position to give

certainty on a future relationship

by the time we get to October.

I have to confess that... Don't have

many fishermen in the community. But

the important matter is the

fisheries and agricultural policies

of the European Union. Will the

Secretary of State confirmed that

the country of Norway has complete

control over its agriculture and

fisheries policy as a member of the

EEA and a successful member of the

single market?

Yes, but they are a rule taken up

with an economy substantially

different to our own and they are

outside the customs union. I think

we just need to make sure that we

follow a path which suits our

economy and that is the path set out

by the Prime Minister.

On what they were officials first

instructed to begin drafting

amendments to clause 11 of the

European Union (Withdrawal) Bill?

We have been working on clause 11

for some weeks and months. We have

been discussing our approach with

the devolved administrations. It was

always our ambition to achieve

agreement with the devolved

administrations.

Last week I met with the chief

Executive of the land Cumber chamber

of commerce and he expressed support

for the concept of exploring

Freeport speakers for the Humber

port. -- Freeport status. Is this

something we could have post Brexit?

While it is a very interesting

opportunity that flows from taking

control of our trade policy, it is

one of many options the government

is considering.

Can I ask the Secretary of State

directly, has he seen this

investigation from the business,

energy and industry Department that

apparently shows the disastrous

effect that Brexit will have on

manufacturing all over the country,

particularly in the North? Has he

seen it and is he colluding with

keeping a private?

What is he talking about? I don't

recognise the document he is talking

about.

On the issue of our fishing waters,

when we leave the European Union,

will my right honourable friend

confirm that it is going to be our

policy to control our fishing waters

and not give free and unfettered

access as is demanded currently by

the European Union?

As I think we have said, we will be

leaving the common fisheries policy

and taking control of our waters. I

think that they do wish to have

access to European markets and I

think we need to approach the

fisheries negotiation in the same

constructive spirit as other parts

of our negotiation.

Will the Government may get its

policy to fully implement the

International code of marketing

substitutes to following Brexit to

protect our most vulnerable

companies?

Didn't quite hear the

full detail of the question, but I

spoke at a conference earlier this

week to show how we are going to put

consumer rights as part of our

approach to Brexit.

Does the

promotion of leaker in chief and

Brexit phobic marten Selmeyer hinder

our progress, Michael Dawson is at

all?

As a matter of diplomatic

policy, we never comment on internal

operations of other governments.

As

we all know, in 379 days, we will

leave this dreadful European Union

superstate, but what you might not

know was that it will also mark the

end of the Secretary of State's

grand tour of Europe. And he is in a

unique position to advise the

British people what countries like

ours and what countries do not, so

we know what countries to go to

after we leave. Could the Secretary

of State tell us the answer?

I am

very tempted to give a list of the

last three weeks, which would take

about five minutes. One of the

things that has struck me throughout

talking to all of our European

opposite numbers is to make things.

One, most of them are sad we are

going. And two, they all want a

strong future relationship and wants

to remain our friends and allies,

which is what we will deliver.

Just

before we come to the business

question, I have to notify the House

in accordance with the Royal assent

Act 1967 that Her Majesty has

signified her royal assent to the

following acts. Finance Act, 2018.

Supply and appropriation brackets

anticipation and adjustments close

brackets 2018. Space industry Act

2018. City of