Brexit Negotiations Statement House of Commons

Thank you Mr Speaker. I will update

the House and the negotiation

between the United Kingdom and the

European Union in November

reflecting our actions since the

October Council. Both of the United

Kingdom and the European Union

recognise a new dynamic installed in

the talks since the Prime Minister

's Florence speech, at the October

European Council 27 states agreed to

start preparations for moving

negotiations on to trade and

official relationships we want to

see. And the conclusions also called

for work to continue on moving the

second phase of negotiation as as

soon as possible. It is inevitable

that discussions are now narrowing

to if you outstanding albeit

important issues that remain. Last

week our focus was on finding

solutions to those few remaining

issues. As we move forward towards

December counsel we have told the

European Union we are willing to

negotiate in a constructive way to

this end. Our teams are in

continuous contact even between

formal rounds. I turned to three key

ongoing areas of discussion and

outline the progress made last week

in each of these. We have made solid

progress in our ongoing discussions

on Northern Ireland and Ireland. Key

areas of achievement include

progress and technical discussions

on preserving north - south

co-operation, agreeing joint

principles on the travel area and

associated rights and shafting

further joint principles on how best

we preserve north - south

cooperation and the Belfast

agreement to help guide specific

solutions to unique circumstances in

Northern Ireland. Both sides also

remain firmly committed to avoiding

hardboard, a point we have remained

clear on throughout. We also remain

resolutely committed to upholding

the Belfast Good Friday Agreement in

all its parts and finding a solution

that works for the people of

Northern Ireland and Ireland, we

continue to hold frank discussions

of our European counterparts on

these issues. We have also made it

clear that why would respect the

desire to protect the legal order of

the single market and the customs

union that cannot come at a cost of

a constitutional or economic

integrity of the United Kingdom. We

cannot create a new border within

the United Kingdom. This is an area

where we believe we will only be

able to conclude talks finally in

the context of a future

relationship. Until such time as we

do so we need to approach the issues

which arise when a high degree of

political sensitivity, with

pragmatism and creativity.

Discussions on these areas will

continue in the run-up to the

December counsel. We continue to

make good progress on citizens

rights, both sides working hard

towards the resolution of

outstanding issues. Last week in

response to requests for

reassurances by the European Union,

we published a detailed description

of our proposals for procedures to

European citizens seeking to settle

in the United Kingdom. As the paper

demonstrates the new procedures will

be as streamlined, straightforward

and low cost as possible. They will

be based on simple transparent

criteria, laid out in the withdrawal

agreement. While they remain

differences on the issue of family

reunion and the export of benefits

we will be clear on what reassurance

we can provide to families of

existing citizens even if they are

not living together. We believe this

paves the way in this area which was

acknowledged by the commission on

Friday. Daily Mail some areas where

we are still seeking further

movement from the European Union on

issues like voting rights,

recognition of qualifications and

onward movement for British citizens

currently living in EU 27. In these

three areas in the United Kingdom 's

offer goes beyond that of the EU.

Finally the commission has not yet

matched the UK's offer in relation

to the right to stand and vote in

local elections. This is a core

citizens write normally enshrined in

European Union treaties. I have been

disappointed that the European Union

has not been willing to include

voting rights in the withdrawal

agreement so far. As a result we

will pursue this issue by laterally

with member states. We sought

further clarity on the agreement to

incorporate European Union citizens

rights into UK law which will mean

that European citizens can be sure

of clarity in the long term. We made

it clear over term we will take

account of the rulings of the

European Court of Justice in this

area to help ensure into perdition.

We had made clear that as we leave

the European Union is a priority for

the United Kingdom pressed to

preserve the sovereignty of our

courts and as such it will bring to

an end the direct jurisdiction of

the Libyan court of justice. Mr

Speaker, it's not my intention to

pre-empt the committee stage of the

European withdrawal bill but what I

say next several ovens. We need to

take extra steps to provide clarity

and certainty both in negotiations

and at home to implement any

agreement into UK law. I can now

confirm that once we have reached

agreement will bring forward a piece

of primary legislation to implement

that agreement, known as the

withdrawal agreement and

implementation bill. This confirms

that the major policy set out in the

withdrawal agreement will be

implemented into UK law by primary

legislation, not by secondary

legislation under the withdrawal

bill. This means parliament will

have time to scrutinise and vote on

the final deal with strike with the

EU. This agreement will only hold of

Parliament approves it. We expect

this bill to cover the contents of

the withdrawal agreement which

includes issues such as agreements

on citizens rights, any financial

agreement breast details on any

agreement reached by both sides, we

don't know the exact details of

these bills and are not likely to do

so until they are near completion.

These will be over and above the

undertaking we've already made which

will bring forward a motion on the

final deal as soon as possible after

it is agreed. We still intend expect

such a vote on the final deal to

happen before the European

Parliament votes on it. There can be

no doubt that Parliament will be

intimately involved at every stage.

I see laughter from the benches

opposite. This has been called for

by members on all sides of this

House. I would hope that we get

Labour Party support for it, for

once! Finally, on a financial

settlement. The Prime Minister 's

commitment made in her Florence

speech stands. Our European partners

will not pay more or receive less

and the remainder of the current

budget plan as a result of our

decision to leave. The UK will

honour its commitments made during

the period of our membership and

this would groove made substantial

technical process on the issues that

underpin these commitments. It has

been a low-key but important

technical set of negotiations

falling between councils. We need

there to pinpoint further

discussions that will take place. We

must also look ahead to discussions

on our future relationship. For

this, both parties need to build

confidence in the process and the

shared outcome. The UK will continue

to engage constructively as we have

done since the start.

Went to see flexibility, imagination

to make progress on both sides. I

commend this statement to the house.

Keir Starmer.

Can I thank the

Secretary of State for advance

notice of his statement. It is

clearly a statement of two halves,

Mr Speaker. First, the usual

Groundhog Day report back on the

negotiations in Brussels. A round of

negotiations, a press conference at

the end that leaves us wondering

whether the parties were in the same

negotiations. Then both sides

briefing the press in the days

immediately afterwards. Then a

statement from the dispatch box that

assures no one. Underlying this, a

profound lack of progress. We want

the next statements to be different.

We want the Secretary of State to

return and inform the house real

progress has been made, a

breakthrough, even. Last time we

were promised acceleration. What is

now, and what's the plan if the

December deadline is missed? Mr

Speaker, I recognise some of the

difficulties. As the Secretary of

State knows, I have some sympathy

with the position on Northern

Ireland that he has set out. As we

see from the legislation before this

house today, the political situation

in Northern Ireland is fragile. The

peace process is too precious to be

put at risk by rushing a Brexit deal

that doesn't have the support of all

communities. There must be no return

to a hard border. Mr Speaker,

Northern Ireland should not be used

by either side in the negotiations

for political point scoring, and I

think that's a really important

point in this house. The second half

of the statement is not a report

back at all. It's a recognition by

the government that is about to lose

a series of votes on the withdrawal

bill. Labour has repeatedly argued,

since the bill was first published

in July, that he Article 50 deal

required primary legislation,

including a vote of this house. A

point that was made forcefully at

second reading. Now, on the eve of

crucial amendments, we have this

statement under the cloak of a

report back from Brussels. I don't

think that fool is anyone. The devil

will no doubt be in the detail. Can

the secretary of state is now

confirmed the government accepts the

Labour argument that clause nine

should be struck from the withdrawal

bill altogether? And then there is

the question of transitional

arrangement. It is blindingly

obvious to anyone following these

negotiations that a final deal with

the EU, including a trade agreement,

will not be complete by March of

2019. Transitional agreements on the

same terms just now are in the

public interest. It's what

businesses, communities and Labour

have been calling for for many

months. Can he Save The Don Mint

will not stand in the way of

sensible transitional arrangements

on the same basic terms we have now

with the EU. -- can he say the

government will not. Can the

Secretary of State confirm to this

house that this house will get a

vote in the event that there is no

deal question your?

vote in the event that there is no

deal question These questions have

been pressing for months. This

last-minute attempt to climb down

brings it into sharp focus and we

are entitled to clear answers.

Yet

more carping opposite from the Right

honourable gentleman. He complains

that negotiations are not making as

much progress as he would like. Yet

he allowed his Labour members in the

European Parliament to vote against

progress this time around. The

question he needs to ask himself is

what would he be prepared to

sacrifice to buy the goodwill of the

European Commission? We are standing

up to allow European citizens to

move around Europe, use

qualifications and vote in municipal

elections. Is he proposing we let

them down the interest to rush

ahead. We are standing of British

taxpayers, not wasting their money,

with the clear position we will beat

our financial commitments, only

knowingly know more about future

relations. Would he sell them out?

We are using Brexit to restore the

sovereignty of the British courts.

Would he let that go as well, yes he

would, because he would give the ECJ

the right to dictate our laws in

perpetuity. Let me come back to his

description. He says the second half

does not arise from the negotiation.

Yes it does, because actually one of

the reasons for this bill that I

have announced today is providing to

European citizens a primary piece of

legislation which will put into

British law the withdrawal agreement

in total. It is as near as we can

come to direct effect. It comes

directly out of the negotiation

today. I hope next time I come to

report at this as we'll get more

support the Labour Party.

Kenneth

Clarke.

We will be debating tomorrow

Eilidh rather helpful new course,

first announced in the Telegraph,

which announces the processes. Can I

get the government's intentions on

the final processes on the role of

Parliament? Can he give me

reassurance that the parliament will

have a legally binding and

meaningful vote in which it will

approve or disapprove of any final

agreement or lack of agreement

before we leave the European Union?

And that there will be time, in

whatever circumstances, for the

necessary legislation to be

introduced and debated to pass to

implement in law smoothly and

properly whatever it is Parliament

has approved once the government has

made its proposals?

I thank my right

honourable friend for the question.

First of all, yes we will have a

meaningful vote. It has been said

from this dispatch box and in a bar

of times. What I have said today as

we will add to that, over and above

the meaningful vote on the outcome

of the bill, on the deal, we will

have legislation which puts it into

effect. In other words, the house

will be able to go through it line

by line and agree it line by line.

Beta grad.

I am grateful to the

Secretary of State for advance sight

of the statement. -- Peter Grant.

Turning to Northern Ireland, doesn't

the Secretary of State appreciate is

becoming increasingly clear that the

only sensible solution for Northern

Ireland is for it to remain in a

customs union. If that means the

rest of us remain in the customs

union as well, that's what we must

do. As he has said, there can't be a

border between the two parts of

Ireland, there can't be a border

between Northern Ireland and the

mainland UK, and they can't be a

border between the Republic of

Ireland and the European Union. They

cannot be a customs border anywhere

between the UK and the European

mainland without breaching

international treaties. On citizens

rights, I welcome the update on

progress. Does he not accept we are

now well past the time when our

constituents are entitled to

absolute legal guarantees and

progress reports are not enough.

People are still leaving businesses

the health service, social care

services, because they do not have

confidence there will be a deal in

time for them to make a future here.

Can I turn next to the update we

have had a financial settlement.

Would it be cynical to suggest, that

this will become a lot simpler when

the Chancellor has got his budget

out of the way? Can the Secretary of

State tell us what discussions he

has had with the Chancellor on what

might need to be in the budget next

week in order to pave the way for

financial settlement in the weeks to

come? Or is it the case that there

is no financial settlement in the

budget because the government they

know they can't get the budget

passed their own backbenchers if

there is admission of continuity to

the European Union in that. The

announcement of a new piece of

legislation, first of all can I give

credit that the Secretary of State

has done the right thing by

announcing this to the house, and

some of his Cabinet colleagues could

learn from his example. Can we get

more clarity on what the bill is

about. I know he can't give

detailed, but will it still is

simply be a case of take it or leave

it? Their Deal or no Deal? Will the

house get an opportunity to amend

that bill, as the house must have

the opportunity to amend any bill,

and therefore will the house have

the opportunity to attempt to amend

the agreement? Given the Prime

Minister is now on the eighth

disgruntled Conservatives away from

facing a vote of no-confidence, why

should anyone else have confidence

in this government to extricate us

from the mess have created, now they

are losing the confidence of their

own backbenchers?

Firstly on the

question of Northern Ireland, what I

have said in terms, which I have

said here, is that there will be no

internal border within the United

Kingdom. That is an absolute

fundamental, because, apart from

anything else, the Good Friday,

Belfast agreement, requires us to

run the government on behalf of all

communities. At least one community

in Northern Ireland would not accept

a border in the Irish Sea. As for

the border between Northern Ireland

and Ireland, everybody has accepted

there must be no return to a hard

border. Some of that is dealt with

by the continuation of the Common

travel area, which has been around

since 1923. In that respect, it's

not new. In terms of the customs

border, there is already a

difference between Levy and tax

rates and excise rates north and

south of the border, which we manage

without a hard border, which we will

continue to do. It ends up budget,

he is optimistic if he thinks the

Chancellor gives us any more of an

advance warning a recap from his

budget. I have discussed with him

the financial aspects of our

relationship with the European Union

at many meetings. As for new

legislation, I don't think it's in

the gift of the government to put

out a piece of primary legislation

before the house that is incapable

of amendment. It's the nature of

primary legislation, it has always

been carried on Amendment. We'll

have the practical limitations of

having a deal that we have signed

and there might be applications for

that, but the whole thing will be

put in front of the house.

Mr Iain

Duncan Smith.

May I congratulate my

right honourable friend for being

very clear in his statement that

come March 29 2019, as we leave the

European Union, the Court of Justice

itself will no longer have direct

authority here in the United

Kingdom, thus dispelling the game is

played out by the opposition this

morning. May I take my honourable

friend back to the statement he has

made with regards to the bill and

the motion. As I understand it, if

we had a motion that was voted on,

but was not passed, then that would

negate the idea of a bill that would

then be amended. And if there was a

bill, and it could be amended, as we

were always told through

negotiations with Maastricht and

beyond, you cannot accept an

amendment at the end of the day

because the agreement has already

been made and thus you would be

altering the agreement. This is not

that -- does that not leaders into

the situation where you would have a

bill that would change the

agreement, but the other side is not

wish to make those changes?

With

respect to the first half of his

question, if the motion, the

original motion that is but does not

pass, the deal falls in total. He is

right about the second part. He will

render the Maastricht Bill, as I

remember there was quite a lot of

amendments and quite a lot of

voting. The house can express its

view and did so in light of the

consequences.

Hilary Benn

I welcome

the Secretary of State's

announcement that there will be

primary legislation to implement the

EU withdrawal agreement. I would say

it's another recognition of the

government having to listen to the

House of Commons. The question I

want to ask is about Northern

Ireland. It is becoming increasingly

clear that there is a contradiction

between the government but I clearly

stated desire that there should be

no return to a hard border and no

customs border on the one hand, and

its determination to leave the

customs union. Since the proposal it

has put forward proposals to try to

square that circle. It doesn't

persuade the governance of the

Republic of Ireland that a hard

border can be achieved. What does

the government propose to do about

one of its central objectives?

I

will thank him for his opening

comments. At the time we published

the white Paper on what was then the

Great Repeal Bill, now the

withdrawal bill, I said at the time

that we would listen to the House of

Commons. I said to the front bench

opposite that if there were any

rights then we would endeavour to

replace them and any other changes

similarly. In terms of Northern

Ireland, the second stanza that we

face at the moment is that there are

a range of permutations and

possibilities depending on what the

outcome is and if the government

achieves is primary policy of having

a tariff free, barrier free free

trade agreement than a customs

agreement following on from that

will be a very light touch customs

agreement, in which case it will be

relatively straightforward to

maintain a relatively invisible

border.

If that is not the case I suspect

the alternatives will be expensive

but not impossible.

Mr Owen

Paterson.

Thank you Mr Speaker. Of

the House of Commons voted in the

new withdrawal bill will we still

leave on March 29, 2019 but without

an agreement?

Yes. Liverpool what

was that? The Secretary of State

said yes. Kate Hoey.

Mr Speaker may

I welcome the Secretary of State is

very firm rebuttal of the ridiculous

idea that Northern Ireland will be

taken out of the rest of the United

Kingdom and stay in the customs

union. Can I also say that does he

recognise that the Northern Ireland

affairs committee met with the

customs in certain to not in the EU

and the one thing that he said over

again was that that there was

nothing that could not make this

work if there was not full

cooperation between all sides.

Northern Ireland want no hard

border, no customs union, no EU,

this can happen.

The honourable lady

is exactly right, this is too

across-the-board whether talking

about free trade agreement, the past

commissioner for trade, the same is

true in this case, I'm sure the

political will is there north and

south of the border.

With the

Secretary of State confirm that any

such withdrawal bill would take

place after the withdrawal bill

itself has been enacted after March

29.

I don't confirm that, this would

depend on where the withdrawal

treaty is negotiated. And that is

the intention of the union, we try

to negotiate that by October of next

year. So the ideal outcome will be,

it will be before the conclusion.

Yvette Cooper.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

Can I welcome the government coming

forward with a separate bill for the

withdrawal agreement, it is

something I have made amendments for

and the Member for Beaconsfield has

also made amendments. Can you

clarify the timing on this. He just

said it was only in an ideal world

that this withdrawal agreement Bill

would come before Brexit date. May I

say it will be a real problem of the

government thinks they can simply

use clause nine to provisionally

implement the withdrawal agreement

through secondary legislation while

not having the withdrawal agreement

Bill until after Brexit date. Can he

clarify, will he confirm that the

government will bring the withdrawal

agreement Bill before the House,

before Brexit today and not after.

The right honourable lady corrects

me, the right word is our principal

policy aims. That is what we are

trying to do. But I cannot guarantee

is that if the union doesn't come to

a conclusion in negotiations we

cannot bring the withdrawal bill in

front of the House before we have a

withdrawal agreement. That is the

sequence I point you to.

Anna

Soubry.

Thank you Mr Speaker. All

very interesting because the

government has now decided to bring

forward an amendment to put into law

the Brexit leaving date, even though

it hasn't been to the Cabinet and

has not been subject to the usual

right around. Could my honourable

friend the Secretary of State help?

He's told us about this new piece of

legislation that will come forward

which we can all vote on and amend

and so forth in the normal way. That

is only if there is an agreement.

Can he confirm that in the event of

no agreement, no deal, this place

will have no say that any say from

this problem and which were to

detect that control.

What I can say

is if we don't have a withdrawal

agreement we can't have a withdrawal

agreement Bill. Full stop.

Hasn't he

just given the game away on this

sham offer. Totally worthless to

Parliament, trying to buy of people

by saying, we will give you an act

to shape things when in fact this is

a post-hawk, after the horse has

bolted bees of legislation. We might

have left the European Union, the

treaty and the deal will been down

and Parliament could do nothing at

all to shape the nature of that

withdrawal agreement. He has to do

much better than this. Parliament

must have a say on that withdrawal

agreement before we are thrown over

the cliff edge.

Let repeated to him

the probable sequence of events. If

Michel Barnier hits its target and

the hit man will conclude the

withdrawal agreement and associated

agreements in the latter part of the

water. That's his stated aim. If we

do, the first withdrawal and treaty

vote will come to the House, and

then as as soon as possible after

the withdrawal agreement Bill will

come before the house. That will

leave plenty of time and may be

amended at the time.

Sir Edward

Lidl. Liverpool imagine the outrage

in Europe if the European Union

decided to try to detach Catalonia

from Spain. But what is the European

Union today, they are saying they

were detach Northern Ireland from

the single market and customs union

of the United Kingdom. The

Conservative Party is nothing if not

the Unionist party. There will be no

amendment, no appeasement on keeping

Northern Ireland in the single

market and of the United Kingdom.

I

say to my honourable friend and

neighbour, I think I made that

plane. We won't have any borders,

any new borders within the United

Kingdom.

Ben Bradshaw.

Is he

accepting the amendment in the name

of the Member for Beaconsfield or

asking the House to take it on

assurance from the dispatch box?

I'm

stating what is government policy

from the dispatch box.

Mr Dominic

Greene.

Thank you Mr Speaker. I

greatly welcome Mike right

honourable friend in respect of

there being a for us to implement

the final deal. Unless my amendment

was not be accepted, man becomes

redundant. How can it be acceptable

that we implement Brexit by means of

clause nine after the date of our

departure? My anxieties are

heightened on this by the amendment

tabled by the government on Friday.

Surely the answer is, if we run out

of time none of these suggestions

put forward state that the time

should be extended after Article 50

so that all parties are able to deal

with that. That is the mechanism

that is provided and surely that is

the mechanism that the House and the

government should be following.

I

thank my right honourable friend for

his welcome of the bill. But I say

to him that Article 50, the

extension of Article 50 can only be

done by unanimity.

Alison McGovern.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. But this

doesn't make any sense. The

Secretary of State has said on any

number of occasions that a deal

could be done at the last moment. So

for the reasons explained can he be

clear that he can't have that

position, a deal done that at the

last moment, and support this new

clause from the government, nailing

down the specific date?

If I may say

so, any number of occasions, there

was one occasion in front of the

committee when I was asked that very

question, what could happen to the

negotiation in extremis. Since I was

pointing to previous examples, it's

hardly a statement of either intent

or expectation. As for the other

question, Michel Barnier hopes to

had October, I hope that amendment

for the bill, is that reflects and

European law tells you.

Is there any

prospect of Sir James Dyson being

invited to join our team of

negotiators?

Well, I have spoken to Sir James

Dyson. I don't necessarily agree

with his tactical advice but he is a

brilliant exponent of what a great

success this country can be when its

engineers get stuck into the job.

Thank you Mr Speaker., Secretary of

State clarify what government

thinking is around an adjudication

court as mentioned this morning on

Radio 4 by the Honourable member of

the Chingford and Woodford Green.

Adjudication. I am afraid...

I'm

sure it was a brilliant exposition

of did not hear it. He's got the

confirmation from the Right

Honourable gentleman that it was

very good. I'm sure that should

satisfy the Secretary of State. Mr

Bernard Jenkin.

Could invite my

right honourable friend to remind

this House that 498 members voted

for the withdrawal bill. In the full

knowledge that two years after

notification had been served we

would leave the European Union. They

seemed to be backtracking on their

promises to the British people.

My

honourable friend mixes point

clearly. March 29 is the departure

date and this has been known ever

since the data is passed.

Mr Speaker

I welcome the wretched of the

Secretary of State today in the face

of the impending votes on the

withdrawal bill. But why is he

intent on holding a gun to the head

of this House by presenting us with

a choice only between the deal he

negotiates and no deal at all?

Surely a meaningful vote and

meaningful legislation of asking the

government to go back and amend the

deal, including if necessary, as the

Honourable member for Beaconsfield

has said, extending the timetable if

that is required.

What I will say is

that the decision put before the

house was put there by 17.5 million

voters.

Sir Oliver Letwin.

Come my

right honourable friend assure those

of us who increasingly believe that

the strongest chance of ever

achieving a deal is being able to

demonstrate our EU counterparts that

we can manage exit without a deal

that he will shortly publish a

comprehensive and convincing account

of how this country will manage

affairs in the absence of any deal

whatsoever.

What I have said to the

House many times is that what my

right honourable friend alludes to

is not the primary policy of this

government, the primary policy is to

achieve a free-trade deal. But he is

right, if this did not happen we

would be able to make a good future

for Britain without that. It is not

the best feature, though, not the

best choice in front of us. Joanna

Cherry.

Thank you Mr Speaker. In

Brussels last week see the EU

officials were clear with members of

the select committee that

transitional deal under Article 50

means remaining in the singles

market, in the customs union and

remaining subject to the

jurisdiction of the Court of

Justice. Is it not time that the

Secretary of State explained that to

his backbenchers so that members

such as the Right Honourable member

for Chingford and weird group can

avoid embarrassing themselves in

legal matters on the radio, and will

he also clarify that parts of the

bill such as clause six will have to

go if there is to be a transitional

deal.

Whatever else the honourable

lady is she makes the mistake that

many, I'm afraid, Metropolitan and

media commentators make which is to

assume that everything they told in

Brussels is the whole truth and

nothing but the truth! Kroos

citizens wait.

If you are trying to

sell me a card are assured you that

I was determined not to leave the

showroom without buying one, does he

imagine that that would strengthen

my negotiating hand?

He is right, it

is foolish proposition only enjoyed

the other side the House.

Mr Stephen

Kinnock.

Thank you Mr Speaker, I'm

sure the Secretary of State will

join me in congratulating his friend

the Foreign Secretary and the

secretary of state for Defra for the

rekindling of their bromance. Do

they understand that the EU has

stated clearly that a transitional

deal can happen only on the basis of

an existing regulatory budgetary

supervisory judiciary enforcement of

structures. Does he believe that

there on his benches understand that

this will be the basis of the

transitional arrangement?

Firstly

let me say to him a milder version

of what I said to us, Scottish

nationalist colleague, it should not

take just what the European

Parliament says is the end of the

exercise but he is right in one

respect, and that is that the

transitional arrangement will look

like what we have now but it will

not be membership and it will allow

us freedoms that we don't have now

and that is critical to remember.

Mr

Philip Davies.

We've always known

that the EU is desperate to UK money

but it seems it is now so strapped

for cash it has resorted to bid

diplomacy vision of aggressive

begging of the last few days. Will

my right honourable friend assure

the House that the government will

not be intimidated by the threats

and blackmail of the European

negotiating team because the

government will not be forgiven in a

time of austerity if more is paid

then is legally due from leaving the

EU, would he agree with me on that

basis that you don't need to pay £10

billion a year net for a £90 billion

trade deficit, you can have one of

those nothing. On his last point, it

is a point I made to one member

state only last week!

Tom brake.

Mr

Speaker, when I met residents in

South Armagh recently who are badly

affected during the troubles, they

had no solution to the question of

the Northern Ireland border and nor

has anyone else I've met since.

Secretary of State set out how we

can leave the customs union and for

there to be a no control border

between Northern Ireland.

There's a

whole range of options to him

including listed trusted schemes,

exemptions for small businesses,

which we talked about at length. He

just had to read them.

Mr Speaker

May I congratulate the Secretary of

State on the progress made in the

last couple of weeks, can I

emphasise how important it is that

we move onto the next stage in

December. Businesses are concerned

that we have that, moving on within

the next two or three weeks. Could

he reassure us on that?

Of course,

that is what we are aiming to do.

One point has become very clear in

the negotiation, some of the matters

like the border between Ireland and

Northern Ireland or soluble once we

get onto the next stage but cannot

be advanced as we stand now. So for

many reasons both economic and

political we want to make that

advance as soon as possible.

Stephen

Timms.

Mr Speaker May I ask about

arrangements during the two you're

also implementation period after

March 2019, when the Prime Minister

has already told us that the writ of

the European Court of Justice will

still run. He told the select

committee he helped from a positive

Council conclusion in December,

hopefully this will agree that 2018,

Michel Barnier said the same to the

select committee last week. Does

that not put huge pressure on

everyone involved to achieve a

successful outcome to the December

council?

I hope so, when he says

everybody involved and indeed one of

the major successes of the October

counsel was that they told the

commission team, so called task

force 50, to prepare for that,

because it is moderately complex, a

policy that has to be put in place,

there are a number of mildly

contentious areas of it, and

therefore, we need to be ready for

it. They are under way on that and

if we get the decision in December

we will deliver, I hope, on the

select committee. Subtitles will

resume at 11pm with Monday in

Parliament.