:00:22. > :00:32.Good afternoon. It is a pleasure to have you here. I will ask the first
:00:33. > :00:41.question. First of all, welcome to your new job. You bring extensive
:00:42. > :00:44.experience from the Foreign Office, but you have the challenge of coming
:00:45. > :00:49.not only at a time of turbulence, but also only a few weeks before
:00:50. > :00:56.your experienced deputy left for a new post. What have you been your
:00:57. > :01:05.priorities in the last few months and the circumstances?
:01:06. > :01:10.Pleased to be here, and of course, as you say, a huge privilege. It is
:01:11. > :01:15.an honour for me to return for the fourth time. My priorities, you
:01:16. > :01:21.allude to staffing. One important thing has been to make sure we have
:01:22. > :01:25.our top team in place, and you will have seen that we have made two
:01:26. > :01:30.appointments to complete our top team in recent weeks. We have
:01:31. > :01:39.brought in Katrina Williams as the new DVR, and Simon case as DTE for
:01:40. > :01:44.future relations with the EU and UK. That has been a priority for me, but
:01:45. > :01:49.the priorities have been twofold. One has been a lot of ongoing
:01:50. > :01:53.business which we need to continue to play our full part in, and that
:01:54. > :01:59.has been taking up a lot of my time, as it quite rightly should, or
:02:00. > :02:00.instructions from the minister and others, and also establishing
:02:01. > :02:05.relationships around town, talking to people in the context of the
:02:06. > :02:13.article 15 negotiations, which are imminent.
:02:14. > :02:20.Rules taking care and attention of the continuing day to day business
:02:21. > :02:28.and taking sure we are fully aligned for the negotiations. Are you having
:02:29. > :02:31.the difficulties in experiencing difficulties negotiations with the
:02:32. > :02:38.other member states throughout at the moment? Are they responsive? Are
:02:39. > :02:47.they negative? What is your sense of the direction from the other member
:02:48. > :02:53.states? I do not know if it is an ad vantage, -- advantage, and all
:02:54. > :02:59.surprised to I'm fully engaged in the debates and to be honest, the
:03:00. > :03:08.overwhelming sentiment is the position as we see it is that until
:03:09. > :03:12.we leave the EU, we play our full part and we have the obligations and
:03:13. > :03:29.rights of a member state and continue to exercise those. And how
:03:30. > :03:33.do you see it? We will continue to be for members and have our rights
:03:34. > :03:43.and obligations and fulfil those until we leave. It is a hugely
:03:44. > :03:49.important resource for us. Are you finding the atmosphere that you
:03:50. > :03:57.encounter when you meet them, either individually or collectively, is
:03:58. > :04:04.reasonable? I think in the immediate wake of the to vote, there was a
:04:05. > :04:09.sense of shock and it was clear that a lot of my counterparts had not
:04:10. > :04:14.expected the result of that referendum were concerned. That's
:04:15. > :04:20.changed and the atmosphere is now extremely cordial and businesslike
:04:21. > :04:27.and the longer I am here the longer I can build relationships of my
:04:28. > :04:40.counterparts. Interesting. Kate Green, no, sorry, Alan Brown first.
:04:41. > :04:53.There have been other levels... Assertive is better placed and this,
:04:54. > :05:06.but in the nature of things, there will be moves the Government
:05:07. > :05:10.departments. As far as I've seen it, I've seen people coming and going
:05:11. > :05:16.and I don't feel that this is unprecedented in terms of levels. We
:05:17. > :05:24.staffed over 120 people and fully engaged all the committees and we
:05:25. > :05:33.just completed the top team. Can you clarify how may people have left the
:05:34. > :05:43.civil service? No. In what space of time? Since we moved into this
:05:44. > :05:48.period following the vote. How many people have left? I'm not in a
:05:49. > :05:53.position to answer that question today. I haven't got the
:05:54. > :06:02.information. How many people are transferred at the departments?
:06:03. > :06:05.Again, it is in the age of the civil service that officials will move
:06:06. > :06:13.departments and there have been a number of movements in and out. I
:06:14. > :06:36.have another figures. -- I have not got the start.
:06:37. > :06:47.Clearly one would not wish her not to accept that sort of promotion. I
:06:48. > :06:53.think this committee has already interviewed him and no doubt has
:06:54. > :06:57.come to its own conclusions. I suppose what lies behind the
:06:58. > :07:01.question is whether or not there has been any sense amongst those who've
:07:02. > :07:06.been there over the last few years that they did not like the fact
:07:07. > :07:11.there was a vote on the 23rd of June and as a result of that, they've
:07:12. > :07:16.decided that they wanted to move on and do something else. I can
:07:17. > :07:25.honestly say it is not something I detected in all my dealings with
:07:26. > :07:30.officials there. It's not my impression either. It's a highly
:07:31. > :07:32.motivated team who are committed to carrying out the business of the
:07:33. > :07:48.Government. Thank you very much. Minister, where does the Department
:07:49. > :07:58.have a role and whether the Foreign Office lead? The role is to support
:07:59. > :08:07.the Prime Minister in the forthcoming negotiations. It is also
:08:08. > :08:11.effectively taking over the function of the FCO with relations with the
:08:12. > :08:31.European Union and in full all the functions previously fourfold.
:08:32. > :08:43.How do you divide your time and loyalty between departments? I've
:08:44. > :09:05.never found that to be a problem. I divide my time...
:09:06. > :09:16.Within the context of those councils I talk to my ministers and business
:09:17. > :09:23.across the board, but I work for HMV and it is my department at the
:09:24. > :09:30.moment, so it is cross Government. Thank you. I would like to ask
:09:31. > :09:41.another question about the name given to the Department. There is
:09:42. > :09:46.this question of whether there should be a special department for
:09:47. > :09:55.the European dimension after Brexit, in other words, whether we would
:09:56. > :10:00.assume that when Brexit actually takes place, that you then cease to
:10:01. > :10:04.have the same kind of relationship with Europe that we had before by a
:10:05. > :10:09.very long way. In those circumstances, is it within the
:10:10. > :10:16.Government's thinking at the moment that we might have a separate
:10:17. > :10:23.department to deal with the EU as we do in one sense, or that it will
:10:24. > :10:30.revert back to the Foreign Office? I have to say this is not a matter for
:10:31. > :10:33.my department. The Prime Minister will be responsible for the
:10:34. > :10:40.architecture of Government, just as she created this department, which
:10:41. > :10:43.by the way is the Department for exiting the European Union and not
:10:44. > :10:48.as a constituent wrote to me, congratulations on becoming a
:10:49. > :10:52.minister of department for the exciting European Union. I'd be
:10:53. > :10:57.overstepping the mark it all to speculate about the future
:10:58. > :11:05.architecture of Government. Kate Green? After Brexit we will still
:11:06. > :11:12.need to have a relationship with the EU. What is your vision for
:11:13. > :11:16.post-Brexit? How will the relationship be managed? After we've
:11:17. > :11:25.left, there will be a need for a strong British presence in Brussels.
:11:26. > :11:30.And therefore there may not be bad department, but I love a lot British
:11:31. > :11:38.representation. Do you envisage a larger team than its present at the
:11:39. > :11:44.moment? That is a matter for the future and much depends upon how the
:11:45. > :11:49.negotiations ultimately pan out and our continued relationship with the
:11:50. > :11:52.EU. I think that's right, and would be interested to know what you both
:11:53. > :11:58.think would be the core elements that might determine post-Brexit the
:11:59. > :12:03.decisions we will make about representation. What are the main
:12:04. > :12:10.element of that most likely to shape post-Brexit representation
:12:11. > :12:14.requirements? I think the issue of the degree of access we have so the
:12:15. > :12:19.single market may well be a factor that is influential in determining
:12:20. > :12:26.the size and shape of our representation at brussels. One can
:12:27. > :12:29.think of a whole host of conclusions to the negotiations that will have
:12:30. > :12:45.an effect upon the four-man summit of our representation. This is
:12:46. > :12:49.right. You can look at a variety of areas and there's the question of
:12:50. > :12:52.internal and external security relations and other operators. The
:12:53. > :13:10.truth around town as I've seen some of my colleagues, there are serious
:13:11. > :13:17.omissions from other countries. I would expect to see a considerable
:13:18. > :13:21.job still fought the UK in Brussels in terms of influence and in terms
:13:22. > :13:34.of the shape of the new relationship. The name could not
:13:35. > :13:42.possibly be accurate, because it will be another relationship for the
:13:43. > :13:46.UK. We would be less brothers and sisters are more cousins if I can
:13:47. > :13:50.put it that way. But does that not mean you will have to have a role
:13:51. > :13:59.which is commensurate with other countries such as the US or for that
:14:00. > :14:04.matter Russia, which have a lot of experience with and so on. In other
:14:05. > :14:07.words, we form a completely new relationship post-Brexit, and I mean
:14:08. > :14:13.at the end of the process altogether, but that we will be
:14:14. > :14:22.distinctly looking through the prism of our own national interest as an
:14:23. > :14:30.external operation and no longer part of the system itself? Yes,
:14:31. > :14:36.that's right. Whatever happens, the European Union will be an important
:14:37. > :14:42.trading partner of hours and we will have other interests in common. The
:14:43. > :14:45.level of representation will depend on negotiations and it will be a
:14:46. > :14:51.different relationship from the one we have now. We will be a third
:14:52. > :15:01.country after all the relationship reflect that. In terms of the
:15:02. > :15:02.devolved administrations, do you see a role for them in this new
:15:03. > :15:19.relationship? I certainly think the devolved
:15:20. > :15:24.administrations may well wish to continue to maintain a relationship
:15:25. > :15:28.in Brussels just as they do in various cities in the United States.
:15:29. > :15:34.Again, I think it depends very much on the outcome of negotiations and
:15:35. > :15:35.what sort of relationship we have with the continuing EU after we
:15:36. > :15:50.leave. We have the officers for our
:15:51. > :15:55.devolved ministrations of Brussels right now and they are part of our
:15:56. > :16:03.day-to-day business as colleagues and friends. So I expect that sort
:16:04. > :16:07.of relationship to continue. I'm not going to be future, because much
:16:08. > :16:26.will depend upon negotiations. We have had a focus on the UK's
:16:27. > :16:34.readiness for these negotiations, but of course, the EU and 27
:16:35. > :16:39.institutions also have to prepare. We've seen some difference of
:16:40. > :16:44.opinion about the representation of the European Parliament in the
:16:45. > :16:47.negotiations and there seems to be difference of opinion between the
:16:48. > :16:53.Council of the Parliament on that. That is next and that the EU has to
:16:54. > :16:54.get its House in order as well. How would you assess the readiness of
:16:55. > :17:05.the EU as a negotiating partner? It seems to me they have progressed
:17:06. > :17:13.substantially. They have established his own negotiating team. You are
:17:14. > :17:17.absolutely right, they are institutions of the EU will have
:17:18. > :17:21.various functions. I think it is a matter for them to decide how those
:17:22. > :17:26.functions actually interact one with another. I think it very helpful and
:17:27. > :17:32.important moment will be when the candle issues its guidelines after
:17:33. > :17:38.the preserve of Article 50 has been triggered. At that particular stage,
:17:39. > :17:47.we will be able to see how the choreography of the negotiations as
:17:48. > :17:53.far as the EU is concerned. Be as clear as the Minister has said that
:17:54. > :17:59.a lot of preparation has been done, people have known the timetable for
:18:00. > :18:02.Article 50, a spokesman for one of the institutions to date has
:18:03. > :18:05.underlined their readiness, the commission has its team readied the
:18:06. > :18:14.negotiation, because has a structure to support that in order other
:18:15. > :18:19.member states. The European parliament was just talking to MEPs
:18:20. > :18:25.who are ready to prepare the resolution which they were all adopt
:18:26. > :18:29.shortly after triggering Article 50 and the European Parliament has a
:18:30. > :18:34.greater concern at the end of the process according to be procedures.
:18:35. > :18:41.-- vote of consent. I don't think that is visible to us and it may
:18:42. > :18:47.still be discussed. If I could come back on one area where the EU does
:18:48. > :18:50.seem to be united as a rugby timetable and particularly this
:18:51. > :18:56.issue of whether it is possible to do the divorce deal and the feature
:18:57. > :18:59.framework deal before the spring of 2019. There seems to be a fairly
:19:00. > :19:04.unanimous view coming out of the EU Government and institutions and that
:19:05. > :19:08.is not going to be possible. Did you say a little bit more about the
:19:09. > :19:13.actual timetable? Both the initial timetable, where are we going, when
:19:14. > :19:17.will we first day back, be able to engage with the council, will it be
:19:18. > :19:21.after the French elections? And a broader point on whether it is
:19:22. > :19:27.possible to do both of the divorce and the feature framework within the
:19:28. > :19:33.two-year frame. In terms of timescale, I think it was EU
:19:34. > :19:37.indicated he wanted to see the entire negotiating concluded within
:19:38. > :19:43.18 months. To allow a six-month period at the end of two years
:19:44. > :19:48.prescribed by Article 50 four the necessary administrative and other
:19:49. > :19:57.measures that had to be put in place in order to complete it. I don't
:19:58. > :20:01.think he himself is so pessimistic as maybe some other people you have
:20:02. > :20:08.been talking to. Again, it depends very much on how negotiations pan
:20:09. > :20:16.out. My view is that Article 50 is quite clear, it talks about
:20:17. > :20:23.negotiating the terms of withdrawal against the framework of our
:20:24. > :20:26.continuing relation ship with the 27 and it is rather difficult to see
:20:27. > :20:29.how one can negotiate against the framework of that sort unless one
:20:30. > :20:37.talks about what the relationship is likely to be. We do believe that a
:20:38. > :20:45.twin track approach to the negotiation is a chat -- correct.
:20:46. > :20:51.That is what Article 50 seems to contemplate. In terms of timing
:20:52. > :20:57.again, we have a huge advantage in that we are already members of the
:20:58. > :20:59.European Union so in terms of standards, regularly requirements,
:21:00. > :21:06.we are ready in perfect alignment so that actually should have the effect
:21:07. > :21:10.of considerably reducing the time. But, again, we do need to wait for
:21:11. > :21:14.the negotiations to start and to see what is contemplated in the
:21:15. > :21:28.guidelines and then we will no doubt make our own representations. That
:21:29. > :21:34.means we framework, there's been a lot of speculation about this. The
:21:35. > :21:37.truth is no one has done this sort of negotiation, this negotiation
:21:38. > :21:42.before, the speculation is based on a different sort of negotiation but
:21:43. > :21:52.about countries which are not seeking to find a way to bridge
:21:53. > :21:55.gaps. On the first day after withdrawal, there will be
:21:56. > :22:00.convergence and therefore we are treating something different. We are
:22:01. > :22:06.going to get on with it and there is a timetable in which everyone has
:22:07. > :22:12.brought in two of two years and this is what we are going to do.
:22:13. > :22:19.I question that occurs is some people are saying that they already
:22:20. > :22:22.have a mandate but in relation to the preparation of these council
:22:23. > :22:27.guidelines which are going to be incredibly important in terms of our
:22:28. > :22:32.relationship mutually, are those guidelines themselves, numbers one
:22:33. > :22:37.to six, whatever they are, do they need to be decided by the council of
:22:38. > :22:40.ministers on qualified majority of those seen before before they are
:22:41. > :22:43.actually put together and published and then presented to the
:22:44. > :22:49.commission? Do you know the answer to that? No, I don't. The terms of
:22:50. > :22:55.Article 50 are somewhat vague on that. And I think it is a question
:22:56. > :23:09.of waiting to see how the council address that. Have you seen a draft?
:23:10. > :23:16.The place does leak like a sieve. I have not seen a draft. They will
:23:17. > :23:24.need to be prepared in accordance with what the UK right in the
:23:25. > :23:28.Article 50 letter. The expectation is they will put out draft
:23:29. > :23:32.guidelines pretty quickly. Those guidelines might be by unanimity
:23:33. > :23:42.that they will be commission mandates to follow. That is the sort
:23:43. > :23:48.of process we may well see. A similar theme to earlier and the
:23:49. > :23:51.comments about being an unprecedented situation. Can I ask
:23:52. > :24:00.both of you if you detect any willingness added EU level to
:24:01. > :24:03.consider special agreements? But is not something I have discussed and I
:24:04. > :24:09.think we have to make clear that we will be conducting these
:24:10. > :24:12.negotiations as the United Kingdom. This is a United Kingdom confidence,
:24:13. > :24:16.having said that, we will engage closely with the devolved
:24:17. > :24:19.administrations as indeed we have already and no doubt we will
:24:20. > :24:23.continue to do so throughout the course of the negotiations. So does
:24:24. > :24:31.not come up with any discussions with yourself. No. We have not
:24:32. > :24:35.trickled Article 50, the guidelines have not been issued. -- triggered.
:24:36. > :24:40.We must await the triggering of Article 50 and the issuing of
:24:41. > :24:50.guidelines. The milling with the EU mantra known negotiation before
:24:51. > :24:54.notification, Brussels within that. They are clear that they talk to me
:24:55. > :25:00.as a representative of the whole of the UK and it is my job to get the
:25:01. > :25:12.best deal all parts of the UK and all citizens of the UK. Would you
:25:13. > :25:18.ask the next question as well? Node negotiations but one thing I'm
:25:19. > :25:20.conscious is what the Government has said is Northern Ireland and
:25:21. > :25:26.Ireland, the travel area and they want a soft border as possible, and
:25:27. > :25:33.invisible border to be maintained. I'm just wondering, has there been
:25:34. > :25:41.any feedback from other member states? I think it is fair to say
:25:42. > :25:46.that everybody recognises the individual circumstances of Northern
:25:47. > :25:54.Ireland given that of course it will be the only line of the continuing
:25:55. > :25:59.member state. The other historical factors that come into play when one
:26:00. > :26:05.considers Northern Ireland. I think it is fair to say that I have a
:26:06. > :26:11.great deal of understanding from the ministers I've spoken to and again
:26:12. > :26:14.he himself as a commissioner, adviser in his own expense of
:26:15. > :26:20.Northern Ireland and he is also made statements himself that he fully
:26:21. > :26:30.understands the sensitivity of the Northern Ireland issue. It is the
:26:31. > :26:37.same extremes to me to be honest. If we move on then, in terms of
:26:38. > :26:41.relationship within the Council, the Government's expansionary tells us
:26:42. > :26:47.that the UK will remain a member of the EU and engage fully in
:26:48. > :26:50.negotiations until it exits. Even so, there were concerns that
:26:51. > :26:55.departments are not necessarily providing instructions on
:26:56. > :27:01.negotiations in good time and that was his concern. Is this still an
:27:02. > :27:03.issue? I can only repeat that we will be fully engage with EU
:27:04. > :27:12.business right up until the moment that we depart, we are full members
:27:13. > :27:16.of the EU, we make contributions and we will certainly added to our
:27:17. > :27:24.obligations but we will also insist upon the rights that we have. In
:27:25. > :27:28.terms of the enthusiasm in which we will continue engaging with the EU,
:27:29. > :27:34.I can only say that that will be undiminished. We will continue to
:27:35. > :27:42.engage just as we already have. Our departments providing instructions
:27:43. > :27:48.for negotiations in a timely manner? I can say with complete honesty that
:27:49. > :27:59.I don't like four instructions. We are fully engaged, I said to the
:28:00. > :28:07.committee, we have made sure we continue to do coordinating
:28:08. > :28:09.functions between ourselves and Whitehall Mitchell business is
:28:10. > :28:15.considered in the round and we continue to do so under the
:28:16. > :28:23.leadership. I cannot talk for Ivan's period, I not there. We have strong
:28:24. > :28:31.arrangements and DExEU has taken on some of the functions of the
:28:32. > :28:34.coordinating role. We are fully engaged on that and we are getting
:28:35. > :28:41.the instructions we require and we do require the instructions. In
:28:42. > :28:46.terms of what is happening right now moving forward, we have seen the EU
:28:47. > :28:49.27 quite often meet without the Prime Minister being in attendance.
:28:50. > :28:59.How is the UK actually making its voice heard effectively? It is quite
:29:00. > :29:03.understandable that as time passes and the closest we get to our
:29:04. > :29:06.departure that they continue in 27 will want to conduct their own
:29:07. > :29:13.business to the extent that it relates to our departure without the
:29:14. > :29:18.United Kingdom being present. I think that is not unreasonable, it
:29:19. > :29:25.is not something we would object to. So far as business is concerned that
:29:26. > :29:31.relate to the whole 20 1027 member unions, we have made it clear that
:29:32. > :29:39.we will insist on participating and I have no push back on that. I think
:29:40. > :29:45.that the other 27 that where they are discussing business that affects
:29:46. > :29:48.the concerns of the United Kingdom as part of the continuing European
:29:49. > :29:58.Union then we must be around the table. On that as well,, how are
:29:59. > :30:07.they negotiation within working groups? We are engaging robustly.
:30:08. > :30:10.That is what we are there to do and we are starting up early as
:30:11. > :30:16.expecting in working groups. The voices being heard. I think that
:30:17. > :30:21.takes us back as you rightly allude to the other's point that goes a lot
:30:22. > :30:27.of continuing business and we are paying full attention to that. We
:30:28. > :30:33.are not finding that we don't have the instructions and it is the
:30:34. > :30:37.centre part of my leadership that we will continue to do that. Is there
:30:38. > :30:54.any attempt to do grey -- negotiations? It seems there is a
:30:55. > :31:03.lot of plates spinning. That has not been reflected in the business I
:31:04. > :31:08.have been involved in so far. The nature of ongoing negotiations on
:31:09. > :31:12.existing business, do you or your officials identify any change in
:31:13. > :31:16.attitude given that we are negotiating with one eye on the door
:31:17. > :31:21.to leave when we are negotiating particularly in relation to matters
:31:22. > :31:24.that will not affect us all only affect us for a very brief period of
:31:25. > :31:34.time compared to negotiation when we were fairly committed to membership
:31:35. > :31:39.for the indefinite future? To be honest, my colleagues in my
:31:40. > :31:42.committee that I hear from working groups and the like is that people
:31:43. > :31:47.are continuing to fully engage with us. We have the voting rights, we
:31:48. > :31:51.have the obligations, we have the rights of other member states and
:31:52. > :31:56.that hasn't set as a direction whether it be from the EU
:31:57. > :32:02.institutions, member states of the presidency. We are fully part of the
:32:03. > :32:05.conversation. It doesn't feel artificial in any way to be in deep
:32:06. > :32:19.negotiation about something that has little bearing on us?
:32:20. > :32:31.To be honest, I have genuinely found in my committee that as we put our
:32:32. > :32:42.point of view forward, it it still takes into account... One of my
:32:43. > :32:46.colleagues came to the table after discussion and debate which I've led
:32:47. > :32:52.one side of and he said, business as usual. There is a lot of business
:32:53. > :32:57.and we still do it very seriously and that is what we are still there
:32:58. > :33:04.for as long as the forthcoming negotiations. Again, in the General
:33:05. > :33:11.affairs Council, it is business as usual. And to be fair to the other
:33:12. > :33:20.27, I never have any pushback, never any objection. We understand we will
:33:21. > :33:28.be engaged up to the moment. To go negotiations and trade-offs, I'm
:33:29. > :33:33.just wondering, within internal mechanisms, has there been
:33:34. > :33:41.departmental red lines thrown up where each department is saying,
:33:42. > :33:47.here is what I need to get from Brexit, has been collated in any
:33:48. > :33:56.way? No. The various dossiers are dealt with on their own merits and
:33:57. > :34:01.on the concerns of the UK and we are not designing our business to
:34:02. > :34:15.reflect the fact that we are leaving. It is business as usual, as
:34:16. > :34:23.Sir Tim said. We were always guided by the national interest. There may
:34:24. > :34:29.be a different way in which these things will impact on us in the
:34:30. > :34:33.future, but they matter to us and so we are going about our usual
:34:34. > :34:45.business. Of course everyone knows the context, but so far, in my
:34:46. > :34:51.experience, our voice is still heard and respected and we are part of the
:34:52. > :34:57.full discussion. Now to move on to the question of the manner in which
:34:58. > :35:03.we approach questions in relation to the moment when we have exited the
:35:04. > :35:10.EU. In relation to what you've just said, does our approach differ
:35:11. > :35:15.depending on whether or not a particular proposal is likely to be
:35:16. > :35:26.implemented after 2019, by which people we were not -- are expected
:35:27. > :35:29.to have left the EU? I'm trying to think of an example that might
:35:30. > :35:35.indicate that is the case, Sir William. I cannot. But it may well
:35:36. > :35:39.be that as time passes and as we get closer to the point of departure
:35:40. > :35:46.that that will more frequently be the case. Having said that, we have
:35:47. > :35:51.to recognise that we remain a full member of the EU and therefore our
:35:52. > :35:57.negotiating position must also reflect that fact until the moment
:35:58. > :36:00.we actually depart. I know that, but the same time, when you know you
:36:01. > :36:05.want not actually going be implementing something which is in
:36:06. > :36:12.the are going to have to adopt a different position. I mean, I just
:36:13. > :36:17.want to start with one simple point, when this bell stops, if it only
:36:18. > :36:24.would... Can you please ensure that every memorandum that is that the
:36:25. > :36:34.benefit of those watching, that every single proposal which comes up
:36:35. > :36:37.has to be put into an explanatory memorandum for the purposes of this
:36:38. > :36:41.committee to explain where the Government stands on the position as
:36:42. > :36:48.the proposal goes through. Can you ensure that every single explanatory
:36:49. > :36:51.memorandum does include a section on Brexit, so that we know exactly
:36:52. > :36:56.where the Government is coming from, which presumably we will be
:36:57. > :37:02.discussing with Sir Tim as well in terms of value position yourself. We
:37:03. > :37:05.believe that would not only help us as a committee, reporting to the
:37:06. > :37:09.House of commons, but it would also ensure that officials dealing with
:37:10. > :37:13.the dossiers in question would have to take account of their potential
:37:14. > :37:18.effects on the third countries, which is what we will be fairly
:37:19. > :37:24.soon. Can you tell me outright that you will ensure that that will
:37:25. > :37:28.happen, because it would be hopeless if in fact in our national interest
:37:29. > :37:35.it was clear that we were not going to take a position and we then found
:37:36. > :37:39.that had something going through the process of Parliamentary scrutiny
:37:40. > :37:45.based on false premises? -- based on false premise? That will become
:37:46. > :37:53.clearer when we get closer to departure. I will take it on board.
:37:54. > :38:00.Thank you. Relation to this national interest which we keep returning to,
:38:01. > :38:05.these explanatory memoranda are very informative and we take them into
:38:06. > :38:11.account and for that matter so do others elsewhere in the EU, because
:38:12. > :38:15.it is a matter of general knowledge. Can you tell us for sure, because
:38:16. > :38:24.I've mentioned this on a number of occasions, but I just want to tie
:38:25. > :38:29.this writes down. Last time you appeared before us, were talking
:38:30. > :38:36.about the ports regulation is a good example. This is manifestly not in
:38:37. > :38:41.the UK's interest and it was decide upon as a result of representations
:38:42. > :38:44.we made in this committee that the Government would state unequivocally
:38:45. > :38:50.that we are going to vote against this, in other words, consensus is
:38:51. > :38:55.no longer the order of the day and furthermore, that we would put down
:38:56. > :39:00.and note in the reasons that we would give, which were then minuted,
:39:01. > :39:05.so that people would know why it was that we object to a particular
:39:06. > :39:10.proposal. So are you going to make that into a fairly general rule,
:39:11. > :39:14.which is where the national interest is quite apparent and I see Sir Tim
:39:15. > :39:19.very carefully at this point, that she will not only vote against, but
:39:20. > :39:23.she will also record the fact that you've done so and make sure that
:39:24. > :39:32.that is minuted so the public at large will know where we are as we
:39:33. > :39:37.move from pipeline to Brexit? . Yes, the portal regulation was an example
:39:38. > :39:41.contrary to the national interest, whether or not we left the EU. But
:39:42. > :39:47.you are right, we voted against it and we stated the reason for doing
:39:48. > :39:52.so. I think again your suggestion is a sensible one. I think that if we
:39:53. > :39:58.do approach a particular measure, we should set out clearly our reasons
:39:59. > :40:02.for doing so. And on some dossiers, the Government have said that while
:40:03. > :40:06.it was against the proposals in principle, once it had realised it
:40:07. > :40:12.could not secure blocking a minority, it was better to negotiate
:40:13. > :40:16.the vote against. As that approached changed, too? The same principle
:40:17. > :40:20.seems to apply. The same principle does apply and it is more likely to
:40:21. > :40:34.apply, but closer we get to the departure. Richard Drax. The
:40:35. > :40:37.structure of the negotiating team an allegation of resources can be
:40:38. > :40:41.resolved as a matter of urgency. Minister, perhaps you could start.
:40:42. > :40:47.What progress has been made in this direction? The issue of our
:40:48. > :40:50.negotiating team will have two mirror whatever arrangements are put
:40:51. > :40:58.in place by the continuing European Union. Clearly, the Minister with
:40:59. > :41:02.overall responsibility for the negotiation will be the Prime
:41:03. > :41:09.Minister and she will be supported by the Secretary of State and again,
:41:10. > :41:14.this will be the whole of Government exercise, so depending on the
:41:15. > :41:17.various issues that we are discussing, departments from across
:41:18. > :41:23.Government will be engaged in the negotiation. In the negotiations
:41:24. > :41:30.themselves, bearing in mind that the British position is extremely clear,
:41:31. > :41:34.we want to leave the EU in every shape and form and become an
:41:35. > :41:38.independent country again, negotiating with people who do not
:41:39. > :41:46.want that, and are going to do everything they can to stop it, what
:41:47. > :41:51.is your view on the difficult and that negotiation is obvious, but in
:41:52. > :41:55.a sense that we going to have to compromise our very simple position,
:41:56. > :42:04.which is that we want to leave, and if we can't, will we fall back on
:42:05. > :42:09.World Trade Organisation rules? There's no room for negotiation,
:42:10. > :42:13.that's my point. Would you agree? Identikit is possible for our
:42:14. > :42:17.departure from the EU to be stopped. We have a right to leave it if we
:42:18. > :42:20.should go at the Article 50 process and as you probably know, we will be
:42:21. > :42:32.triggering that on the 29th of March. There is no means whereby any
:42:33. > :42:44.part of the EU, any institution in the EU can actually stop our
:42:45. > :42:48.departure. We want to secure the best possible deal for the United
:42:49. > :42:52.Kingdom and the sort of deal that we are seeking has been set out by the
:42:53. > :42:57.Prime Minister in her speech at Lancaster House on the 17th of
:42:58. > :43:03.January, which of course has been fleshed out by the white paper
:43:04. > :43:11.that... Which, by the way has been generally well received in the EU as
:43:12. > :43:14.to giving a great deal of clarity to our position. So we've set out
:43:15. > :43:21.already what we are seeking from our departure from the EU. There will be
:43:22. > :43:26.negotiations that will follow, but what is absolutely clear is that our
:43:27. > :43:36.departure cannot be stopped, because we have the right to leave. I don't
:43:37. > :43:46.meeting recently with a corporation and the representative said to me
:43:47. > :43:52.that they live the United Kingdom -- they love the United Kingdom. The
:43:53. > :43:56.more serious point was that I asked if she was speaking to business in a
:43:57. > :43:57.country that to maintain prosperity, wealth and jobs, which will be
:43:58. > :44:18.crucial for all of us, that the negotiating team... Maggie Pollard
:44:19. > :44:28.has already been engage various sectors of business in the UK. We've
:44:29. > :44:32.had to deal with various companies that are headquartered in the
:44:33. > :44:39.continuing EU. I think you are correct, the overwhelming impression
:44:40. > :44:43.I get is that businesses, wherever they are, want to continue to do
:44:44. > :44:49.business with us and why wouldn't they? It's in their interests and
:44:50. > :44:52.bills of their shareholders that they should be profitable and they
:44:53. > :45:02.would not want to cease all operations. That will be an
:45:03. > :45:08.important part of the negotiations to reflect the fight there is a
:45:09. > :45:15.stronger mutual interest in maintaining good business relations
:45:16. > :45:20.between the UK and the EU. We will be one of the biggest export markets
:45:21. > :45:29.for EU produced goods and services and we have different to remain that
:45:30. > :45:42.way. I agree that it's important, not just business as, the --
:45:43. > :45:49.businesses I think it's important that it's across the European Union
:45:50. > :45:58.and the UK and elsewhere. But also communities such as science and
:45:59. > :46:02.research. We need to talk about the shared interest we have in forging a
:46:03. > :46:06.new partnership with the UK outside of the EU. If I could just say, I
:46:07. > :46:19.think one of the advantages of having the commission as a
:46:20. > :46:31.negotiating partner in this, so there was have an important role in
:46:32. > :46:39.the negotiations. Whatever. Howard expects us to lead the negotiations?
:46:40. > :46:47.A lot will be done by them clearly. It depends on how the negotiations
:46:48. > :46:52.pan out. They will be operating the ministerial direction. I don't in
:46:53. > :47:01.the usual arrangements will be affected. On the question, who is
:47:02. > :47:08.going to be the Government Sherpa in the negotiations?
:47:09. > :47:16.Perhaps the Minister would like to answer. Or both of you. I think it
:47:17. > :47:20.is clear that both have an extremely important role in this process and
:47:21. > :47:24.I'm sure Tim will agree they will be working very much as a team.
:47:25. > :47:33.Absolutely right, we are already working as a team. He has the full
:47:34. > :47:41.role of Sherpa, I representative. There will be plenty of us to do
:47:42. > :47:45.together in this negotiation. The point is we and other officials will
:47:46. > :47:53.be acting under direct ministerial guidance for this negotiation. It
:47:54. > :48:01.has not escaped my notice to observe that a fact which was with very few
:48:02. > :48:08.exceptions, former civil servants and former secretaries of the
:48:09. > :48:17.Cabinet, I think to a man but there may be one who did not, all voted
:48:18. > :48:21.against the House of Commons on the amendments. Now, that strongly
:48:22. > :48:29.suggest to anybody who has eyes to see and ears to hear that there is a
:48:30. > :48:34.very powerful sense of Sir Humphrey in the civil service which quite
:48:35. > :48:41.clearly at the very highest level did not want the House of Commons
:48:42. > :48:44.effectively to be supreme in these matters until they have capitulated
:48:45. > :48:49.as a whole in the House of Lords. Can you give me a sense and I think
:48:50. > :48:54.I ought to direct this to the Minister that in the light of these
:48:55. > :48:57.protestations and I don't mean that cynically that the civil service is
:48:58. > :49:02.doing everything in its power to assist ministers under its
:49:03. > :49:07.instructions which is what they have to do as Crown servants, that that
:49:08. > :49:11.is embedded in the thinking of the civil service now and that the whole
:49:12. > :49:23.of these negotiations in new shape or form would be influenced or
:49:24. > :49:29.mitigated in terms of the decision to leave so we can be quite clear
:49:30. > :49:35.the civil service is 100% behind the Government and there will be no
:49:36. > :49:43.attempts whatever to get in the way? You know my background in the Brexit
:49:44. > :49:49.debate. I am sure that you will accept it when I tell you that I
:49:50. > :49:54.have never had any doubt whatsoever as to the loyalty of the civil
:49:55. > :49:59.service. Their complete willingness and determination to follow the
:50:00. > :50:04.instructions of ministers and to support ministers in this regard. I
:50:05. > :50:07.think that the British civil service is a huge asset to this country and
:50:08. > :50:12.I am really glad that we have got them on our side in these
:50:13. > :50:23.negotiations. That is the most encouraging answer, if I may say so.
:50:24. > :50:29.Good afternoon. Do you think the negotiation will be primarily
:50:30. > :50:31.political or primarily legal? I think there will be plenty of
:50:32. > :50:37.political discussion but there will be technical which I think is part
:50:38. > :50:41.what you meant by legal perhaps but a lot of it will be technical work.
:50:42. > :50:45.That is conventionally have these things are done, we have to get to
:50:46. > :50:56.levels of understanding which influences political decisions to
:50:57. > :51:03.take place. The legal part is interesting which was written by
:51:04. > :51:06.this committee's, legal adviser, who provided the encouraging legal
:51:07. > :51:12.opinion to say that it is matter of law we would not only the European
:51:13. > :51:16.Union any money. I just wondered whether that will be an important
:51:17. > :51:22.part of your opening negotiating strategy. That is why I want to know
:51:23. > :51:31.if your database on the legal principle or whether it is going to
:51:32. > :51:36.be a political, we are decent chaps. I think that report was certainly
:51:37. > :51:41.not unhelpful. I think what was quite clear from the report is that
:51:42. > :51:47.it is possible to have a range of views as to the legal position, but
:51:48. > :51:51.certainly as a starting but it is very helpful. There is no doubt
:51:52. > :51:58.however I've heard that there will be a big political element to the
:51:59. > :52:04.discussion and as the negotiations progress, it will be interesting to
:52:05. > :52:09.see how we balance actually develops between the political and technical
:52:10. > :52:13.or legal and where we ultimately land in negotiations. What are the
:52:14. > :52:21.count about saying about this if anything? -- counterparts. They have
:52:22. > :52:28.an interest in the legal opinions which have become forthcoming. There
:52:29. > :52:35.is plenty of discussion but I think most counterparts would agree there
:52:36. > :52:39.is legal and technical as part of this negotiation. I wonder if you
:52:40. > :52:43.might help clarify within the legal side and technical area back to the
:52:44. > :52:49.point they came up earlier between the twin track of bridge and they do
:52:50. > :52:53.not mind which to view answers this. Am I right in thinking that the
:52:54. > :52:57.great advantage of the twin track approach is that it is on the
:52:58. > :53:01.enhanced quality majority and can encompass anything in relation to
:53:02. > :53:05.the framework of the future relationship with the European
:53:06. > :53:12.Union? But that anything that is not within the Article 50 agreement may
:53:13. > :53:16.then be subject to different requirements and then with a train
:53:17. > :53:26.agreement may be required to have the anonymity? I think that there
:53:27. > :53:34.will probably more like to be relevant to the continued
:53:35. > :53:39.relationship. Again, I think it is a question of seeing how the
:53:40. > :53:47.negotiations develop. I think that there is no doubt that our terms of
:53:48. > :53:52.departure are far more realistic in terms of the likely outcome but
:53:53. > :54:01.clearly we want to continued relation with the EU and I think you
:54:02. > :54:05.are right, the issue of national parliaments and sub national
:54:06. > :54:11.parliaments will be irrelevant. The framework under Article 50 is
:54:12. > :54:15.covered under the same as 18 as the separation agreement, correct? So
:54:16. > :54:25.that would not bring in the national parliament? No, no, please. You will
:54:26. > :54:30.not be surprised to hear that there are varying legal opinions on this
:54:31. > :54:37.and one of the argument is the more that comes into either withdraw
:54:38. > :54:40.treaty regard to future continuing relation takes you into mixed
:54:41. > :54:47.agreement territory that there are brings in the different voting you
:54:48. > :54:53.discussed. Part of it depends upon content and where negotiations take
:54:54. > :55:01.us. I can see frustration. Can it be a mixed treaty if it is a treaty
:55:02. > :55:06.specifically provided for under the treaties on the European Union that
:55:07. > :55:10.provide for it to be a union of competence which I would suggest
:55:11. > :55:13.article $50? Or is this an argument that lawyers will have in the future
:55:14. > :55:19.where it is not quite clear at this stage? I think there is an argument
:55:20. > :55:25.for lawyers, the argument will be about how much of the future can
:55:26. > :55:30.come to withdraw. You can take a very legalistic view that because of
:55:31. > :55:34.the nature of the voting that actually not that much of the future
:55:35. > :55:36.could be brought into the treaty and therefore you need separate
:55:37. > :55:41.arrangements that will be mixed. If you bring more of the future into
:55:42. > :55:48.the withdraw treaty, does that make an mixed agreement and among
:55:49. > :55:51.different ratifications? That is in some the product of quite a lot of
:55:52. > :55:58.legal discussion I have had in the last weeks. Is it to some extent how
:55:59. > :56:06.you define a framework? It is within the Article 50, it might be beyond
:56:07. > :56:13.it. I think I will be doing the law is a disservice if I said it was a
:56:14. > :56:20.straightforward as that. -- lawyers. Could you give us the latest gossip?
:56:21. > :56:25.I imagine that you told your colleague over the weekend that the
:56:26. > :56:30.date for Article 50 being given was the 29th of March I'm very curious
:56:31. > :56:35.to know what the initial reaction was and what they might be looking
:56:36. > :56:43.at in terms of negotiating timetable from the sort of very early
:56:44. > :56:51.conversations in Brussels? I did not tell my colleagues. With regard to
:56:52. > :56:55.the date over the weekend. I had some conversations this morning as
:56:56. > :57:00.you will see from the releases and there was a welcome for the clarity
:57:01. > :57:08.of that date which fits full square in the commitment we have given the
:57:09. > :57:10.Prime Minister in the timetable. Insofar as that is gossip, that is
:57:11. > :57:22.the news from Brussels this morning. Thank you very much. Just ask them,
:57:23. > :57:28.the negotiations going forward, on the 20 47 new cycle, someone likes
:57:29. > :57:32.to tell someone something, can we get a commitment from yourself,
:57:33. > :57:39.Minister, that if it is to occur, that you will make a statement to
:57:40. > :57:43.the House of Commons are thoroughly examine negotiations going forward?
:57:44. > :57:47.I think it is impossible to give a blanket assurance. It depends very
:57:48. > :57:50.much on what we are talking about. It is easy to foresee and
:57:51. > :57:55.circumstances what a statement would be appropriate but I think to go
:57:56. > :58:02.into it in more detail at this moment is almost impossible. On this
:58:03. > :58:10.question of how much we owe as people put it, expressed by the
:58:11. > :58:19.House of Lords community but also by other people as well, essentially is
:58:20. > :58:25.it not just a legal question, it's also a political issue and there
:58:26. > :58:30.have been some extravagant statements, some would say, bring up
:58:31. > :58:34.as high as 60 billion as the money issue. Has anybody pointed out to
:58:35. > :58:41.them would you make sure that they do understand that we have been net
:58:42. > :58:46.contributors for many decades to the tune of what is now running at
:58:47. > :58:54.around nine or 10 billion a year, that are accumulated liabilities are
:58:55. > :59:00.offset by the extent to which we made these massive contributions?
:59:01. > :59:05.Perhaps also to bear in mind that back in 1953, there was nothing
:59:06. > :59:09.could be London debt agreement where Germany for all its malfeasance
:59:10. > :59:17.during the Second World War and its unprovoked aggression, found that in
:59:18. > :59:25.1953 in circumstances which were quite remarkable that we remitted
:59:26. > :59:30.one half of all German debt and that therefore if you compare that
:59:31. > :59:33.situation with what it is now, and giving Germany's extremely dominant
:59:34. > :59:39.role in the European Union at the moment, but it might be worth
:59:40. > :59:44.tactfully, not one of my strongest points, tactfully reminding people
:59:45. > :59:50.that there is a realistic position here in which we really do not owe
:59:51. > :59:55.anything to the European Union, whether it's legal or political. I
:59:56. > :00:01.am not entirely sure how tactful what can be when one is mentoring
:00:02. > :00:07.the London debt agreement. Nevertheless, clearly there are
:00:08. > :00:20.whole of issues will stop. I will probably prefer to Sir William.
:00:21. > :00:22.There are whole range that must emerge in the negotiations,
:00:23. > :00:28.certainly be House of Lords committee report was extremely
:00:29. > :00:31.helpful. I'm sure that it has not gone unnoticed in Brussels. And
:00:32. > :00:39.other European capitals for that matter. Thank you very much. We know
:00:40. > :00:48.that the Government intends to translate European law by a repeal
:00:49. > :00:52.Bill on the moment of Brexit and we have also understood that it is
:00:53. > :01:00.intended to secondary legislation predominantly of making EU law
:01:01. > :01:07.operable, major policy changes are needed, that will be done. It is
:01:08. > :01:11.then suggested that could amount to a legislation burden to this
:01:12. > :01:19.parliament, suggestions of between ten and 15 new bills. What is the
:01:20. > :01:26.Government's plan in relation to managing that legislation? You are
:01:27. > :01:31.right. There will be two elements. A secondary legislation and probably
:01:32. > :01:37.quite a lot of it. There were also certainly be the need for primary
:01:38. > :01:40.legislation, whether the figures that the Institute for Government
:01:41. > :01:43.have come up with are accurate or not, I cannot say with any certainty
:01:44. > :01:50.at the moment but there will be a lot of that. There was a very
:01:51. > :01:53.helpful report by the House of Lords Constitution committee recently
:01:54. > :01:59.which he very probably have read. Which I thought was a very helpful
:02:00. > :02:05.contribution to the debate and certainly the proposals in that
:02:06. > :02:09.report are being given careful consideration by the Government.
:02:10. > :02:14.Because you are right, management will be a challenging issue. I don't
:02:15. > :02:17.think anyone expect that our withdraw from the European Union
:02:18. > :02:27.after 44 years is going to be anything other than challenging.
:02:28. > :02:36.The Government fully intends to carry out its legislative programme
:02:37. > :02:42.as indicated in this manifesto. But again, I am under no illusions it is
:02:43. > :02:48.going to be challenging. Won I would agree. Over what period that the
:02:49. > :02:50.Government assess the legislation to affect EU law and policy
:02:51. > :02:57.consequences might need to take place? That depends on the progress
:02:58. > :03:06.of negotiations. Legislation will have to reflect what is agreed. But
:03:07. > :03:16.all I can say is before the end of this Parliament. Where currently our
:03:17. > :03:19.position is position by some reciprocal arrangement, or that fall
:03:20. > :03:27.away at the moment Brexit be replaced? Or we may be in a vacuum.
:03:28. > :03:35.I think ensuring the whole of the British statute works properly and
:03:36. > :03:41.that will be a priority it is hard to see how anything could be more of
:03:42. > :03:44.a priority. British law must work effectively at the moment of our
:03:45. > :03:55.departure and that is what we are aiming to do. There's going to be a
:03:56. > :04:04.pipeline problem. Have you set up the build teams? And how many? Yes,
:04:05. > :04:07.we have an active one within DexU, but there will be other departments
:04:08. > :04:11.need to put in place their own teams, because there is the digital
:04:12. > :04:14.Government indicated in its report, this will be departmental exercise
:04:15. > :04:27.and I'm sure those teams are in place... If you don't know, can you
:04:28. > :04:35.tell us? I can assist. On that point, can I ask this, you get
:04:36. > :04:38.through Article 50 and then get into the negotiations, but as we
:04:39. > :04:42.understand it, there will be a white paper soon. And in our white paper,
:04:43. > :04:49.there will be a number of guidelines as to the kind of procedures that
:04:50. > :04:53.will follow. In the Queen's speech, he said, so we hear, that there
:04:54. > :05:04.would be an announcement to the repeal bill. So one might expect
:05:05. > :05:11.that would be in May or early June. The question of dealing with the
:05:12. > :05:17.article 15 negotiations and the repeal Bill requires a break points,
:05:18. > :05:23.in other words, you have to have a completely separate procedure and
:05:24. > :05:27.have a boat which, as you know, I've prepared back in May last year and
:05:28. > :05:31.which seems to have been accepted by the Government as a matter of
:05:32. > :05:36.principle. No doubt Parliamentary Counsel had their own way going
:05:37. > :05:40.about it, but the object as we understand it is that it ought to be
:05:41. > :05:47.short and it ought to be clear and should deal with the position of the
:05:48. > :05:53.repeal and the withdrawal, but also the Henry VIII type clauses and I
:05:54. > :05:59.will be grateful if you could give some slight indication as to what
:06:00. > :06:02.the thinking is on that and also that completely separate from that,
:06:03. > :06:12.and I think there's some confusion in the public mind that the... But
:06:13. > :06:18.there is a kind of fuzziness in the boundaries. The fact is, there has
:06:19. > :06:23.to be a clear-cut point at which the Brexit takes place and only then
:06:24. > :06:29.that you bring in the bills to deal with immigration. Could you just
:06:30. > :06:33.look at that with us for a moment and give us an indication of where
:06:34. > :06:42.you see these break points taking place and the sequence of events?
:06:43. > :06:49.The Brexit bill, the great repeal Bill has got one primary objective,
:06:50. > :06:56.and that is to cease the operation to repeal the European Communities
:06:57. > :07:02.Act of 1972. That is its primary function. It also has to put in
:07:03. > :07:07.place arrangements, as you rightly say, by making provision for
:07:08. > :07:12.secondary legislation, whereby an cause distances in legislation that
:07:13. > :07:20.would otherwise arise are blocked and that means of course dealing
:07:21. > :07:27.with a wide range of legislation, where there may be references to EU
:07:28. > :07:33.institutions or whatever. Those will all be taking effect at the moment
:07:34. > :07:38.of our departure from the European Union at the conclusion of the two
:07:39. > :07:45.year process or earlier if terms can be agreed for our early departure.
:07:46. > :07:57.So that is the purpose of the repeal of the Limassol. Clearly policy
:07:58. > :08:01.changes will be affected by stand-alone legislation and, in
:08:02. > :08:04.other words, we don't anticipate policy will be addressed in the
:08:05. > :08:12.repeal Bill itself. The repeal of all itself well focused primarily on
:08:13. > :08:15.practicalities and that is why we heard from the institute of the
:08:16. > :08:22.Government today that there will be a larger number of bills to provide
:08:23. > :08:27.the primary legislative vehicle to take account of changes in policy
:08:28. > :08:32.that will also have to occur again at the moment of our departure.
:08:33. > :08:37.Whatever later period be agreed in the context of the negotiations.
:08:38. > :08:40.There's lots of talk about congestion, because we will have to
:08:41. > :08:44.deal with so many bills and people love it in their minds that there is
:08:45. > :08:47.going to be repeal Bill and a whole lot of the parallel of bills going
:08:48. > :08:53.on at the same time. Could you make it as clear as you possibly can in
:08:54. > :08:58.advance of the white paper is exactly what the liner will be? In
:08:59. > :09:03.other words, you get Article 50, have the negotiations, then the
:09:04. > :09:07.introduction of the great repeal bill based on the white paper and
:09:08. > :09:15.then, when all that is completed, you move -- move on to primary
:09:16. > :09:21.legislation. Is the intention? Yes. Having said that, the white paper is
:09:22. > :09:29.itself will provide a great deal more clarity and that will be
:09:30. > :09:34.rubbish soon. What preparations are being made to make sure the UK order
:09:35. > :09:40.for the consequences if there was to be no deal at all? Does a lot of
:09:41. > :09:51.work going on to address all sorts of eventualities. It's possible that
:09:52. > :09:57.the negotiations will turn out to be impossible to conclude or there may
:09:58. > :10:05.well be a negotiated settlement whereby we leave on other terms.
:10:06. > :10:09.That is why my department has been carrying out a huge amount of work
:10:10. > :10:15.over the last seven or eight months engaging with over 50 separate
:10:16. > :10:18.sectors of the economy, many of which have got crosscutting issues
:10:19. > :10:23.that must be addressed to ensure we are in a position to plan for
:10:24. > :10:27.whatever eventualities may take place. I must say I do not
:10:28. > :10:31.anticipate we will believe you without a deal, because, as I've
:10:32. > :10:37.already indicated, it is manifestly in the interests not just of the UK,
:10:38. > :10:49.but of the continuing EU that there should be a sensible resolution of
:10:50. > :10:53.our withdrawal. Thank you both for coming, it has been interesting.