0:00:08 > 0:00:11..
0:00:18 > 0:00:21Welcome to this afternoon session of the Foreign Affairs Committee
0:00:21 > 0:00:30on the ongoing enquiry into Brexit process.
0:00:30 > 0:00:34The Secretary of State, you are very welcome.
0:00:34 > 0:00:42I note this is your second meeting in two days
0:00:42 > 0:00:44and you told the House of Lords European Scrutiny
0:00:44 > 0:00:44Committee
0:00:44 > 0:00:46yesterday appearing in front of them
0:00:46 > 0:00:54was a particular pleasure.
0:00:54 > 0:00:56I hope to be back today.
0:00:56 > 0:00:58Is that what you schedule a meeting
0:00:58 > 0:00:59at that site of the building.
0:00:59 > 0:01:04It was not me who does the scheduling.
0:01:04 > 0:01:09The scheduling was theirs.
0:01:09 > 0:01:16You presumably make the decision to go there first
0:01:16 > 0:01:19and that is the gentle hook I want to take into my question,
0:01:19 > 0:01:22to examine your assessment of the legal and parliamentary
0:01:22 > 0:01:26implications of the Brexit process.
0:01:26 > 0:01:28Can you confirm there is going to have to be
0:01:28 > 0:01:32an Act of Parliament in order to leave the EU?
0:01:32 > 0:01:35There will have to be some legislation, no doubt about it.
0:01:35 > 0:01:38There are various stages.
0:01:38 > 0:01:43Firstly, legislation to deal with the European Communities Act 1972
0:01:43 > 0:01:49and the consequential legislation on from that.
0:01:49 > 0:01:59There may have to be parliamentary ratification under
0:01:59 > 0:02:04the relevant 2010 legislation.
0:02:04 > 0:02:06The so-called CRA legislation.
0:02:06 > 0:02:10That is the absolute minimum that I can see.
0:02:10 > 0:02:16So we cannot leave the EU if that is not in place?
0:02:16 > 0:02:21Well, we can leave but what the legislation does
0:02:21 > 0:02:30is put in place directives and various other pieces of law
0:02:30 > 0:02:36which will still have effect if we did not.
0:02:36 > 0:02:41Whilst we require a treaty change, we were in that sense still be
0:02:41 > 0:02:46reporting back to the European Court in some respects.
0:02:46 > 0:02:50What I am seeking to establish if there are acts of parliament
0:02:50 > 0:02:56to be put in place or repealed.
0:02:56 > 0:03:00So, that is perhaps why you were at the other side
0:03:00 > 0:03:05of the building, my assessment is that there is a majority
0:03:05 > 0:03:09in the House of Commons to support the Prime Minister in Brexit
0:03:09 > 0:03:12means Brexit and despite the fact the number of conservatives
0:03:12 > 0:03:16were campaigning to remain in the EU
0:03:16 > 0:03:19they have accepted the decision of the electorate
0:03:19 > 0:03:22and will now support the Government
0:03:22 > 0:03:27in the process of leaving the EU.
0:03:27 > 0:03:30However, it is my assessment you could not be as confident
0:03:30 > 0:03:34that is the position down the other end of the building
0:03:34 > 0:03:37in the House of Lords, would you agree?
0:03:37 > 0:03:39Well, you are wrong about the calculation
0:03:39 > 0:03:43in that there was no calculation in terms of who I saw first
0:03:43 > 0:03:46and second, I have not made an assessment of what the balance
0:03:46 > 0:03:51of power or balance of interest or voting with the end
0:03:51 > 0:03:55of each house.
0:03:55 > 0:04:01It is a bit early to do so for a start.
0:04:01 > 0:04:04Any legislative change would be based at least in part
0:04:04 > 0:04:08where the negotiation had got to buy them
0:04:08 > 0:04:13and whether or not individual members of each house approved.
0:04:13 > 0:04:16I do not know where we will be.
0:04:16 > 0:04:18My hope and intention is we will have a majority
0:04:18 > 0:04:20in both houses.
0:04:20 > 0:04:24Can I gently suggest the Government could be
0:04:24 > 0:04:28reasonably confident that of a majority in the Commons,
0:04:28 > 0:04:31in order to carry out the decision of the British people,
0:04:31 > 0:04:33that is a rather more open question
0:04:33 > 0:04:37about the attitudes of the house of Lords, where the Government has
0:04:37 > 0:04:41a significant minority and there are a number
0:04:41 > 0:04:52of conservatives who are appear to be determined to obstruct
0:04:52 > 0:04:55the country's route to Brexit.
0:04:55 > 0:04:58If you were in that place, then obstructing the Acts
0:04:58 > 0:05:01of Parliament that are required to enable Brexit is something that
0:05:01 > 0:05:05will have to be overcome by the House of Commons
0:05:05 > 0:05:08using the Parliament act.
0:05:08 > 0:05:11What I would suggest to you whether you would agree
0:05:11 > 0:05:14if it was a sensible idea for the legislative process to be
0:05:14 > 0:05:18commenced in sufficient time for it to be
0:05:18 > 0:05:21on the statute book having overcome opposition
0:05:21 > 0:05:25in the House of Lords by the use of the Parliament act
0:05:25 > 0:05:37so we can leave the EU by the early part of 2019.
0:05:37 > 0:05:41Again, I will challenge the basis on which you make your argument.
0:05:41 > 0:05:43The simple truth is what the Government is doing is
0:05:43 > 0:05:45carrying out the biggest ever mandate given
0:05:45 > 0:05:47to the Government by the British people.
0:05:47 > 0:05:56Nearly 17.5 million people.
0:05:56 > 0:05:59Had it been a general election between two parties called Leave
0:05:59 > 0:06:01and Remain, the majority for Leave would be bigger
0:06:01 > 0:06:03than Tony Blair's majority 1997.
0:06:03 > 0:06:07It is a clear mandate and the House of Lords
0:06:07 > 0:06:13would be unwise not to take that seriously.
0:06:13 > 0:06:18They have a perfectly reasonable possession and challenging
0:06:18 > 0:06:23elements of the negotiation but I would be very surprised
0:06:23 > 0:06:32if they were unwise enough to go down the route or blocking it.
0:06:32 > 0:06:34It has been a view of this committee the Government
0:06:34 > 0:06:37was guilty of gross negligence for not preparing
0:06:37 > 0:06:39for Brexit in advance.
0:06:39 > 0:06:42It is also the view that it may amount to gross
0:06:42 > 0:06:45negligence if you proceeded on the assumption all would-be
0:06:45 > 0:06:49hunky-dory and you would get you legislation in good order
0:06:49 > 0:06:59because the House of Lords were minded to upgrade instruction
0:06:59 > 0:07:01because the House of Lords were minded to obey instruction
0:07:01 > 0:07:02of the British people.
0:07:02 > 0:07:05Wouldn't it be prudent to make sure your legislation was then
0:07:05 > 0:07:08placed insufficient time to allow us to leave the EU?
0:07:08 > 0:07:11On a date of the Government's choosing or at the conclusion
0:07:11 > 0:07:13of negotiations two years after giving notice
0:07:13 > 0:07:15under article 50.
0:07:15 > 0:07:17under Article 50.
0:07:17 > 0:07:19You are jumping to the conclusion of the committee report
0:07:19 > 0:07:24on a decision I have yet to take.
0:07:24 > 0:07:28I suspect it is getting the committee ahead of itself.
0:07:28 > 0:07:32I am clearly intending to get us to a position of leaving the EU
0:07:32 > 0:07:35within the normal Article 50 timetable.
0:07:35 > 0:07:38I will make the legislative arrangements that are necessary
0:07:38 > 0:07:41to get there.
0:07:41 > 0:07:43That is the simple case of the matter.
0:07:43 > 0:07:46I will not, I am afraid, hypothesised with this committee
0:07:46 > 0:07:54or any other about the way I got house will vote.
0:07:54 > 0:07:57or any other about the way either house will vote.
0:07:57 > 0:08:01That is for the whips and the usual channels to do and I will make
0:08:01 > 0:08:02decisions based on the advice.
0:08:02 > 0:08:09I will not air this any more public
0:08:09 > 0:08:12to jeopardise them.
0:08:12 > 0:08:19I am grateful for Europe's reply this morning
0:08:19 > 0:08:21I am grateful for your reply this morning
0:08:21 > 0:08:23on my letter to the Attorney General
0:08:23 > 0:08:25of legal issues on leaving the EU.
0:08:25 > 0:08:29I wrote to him and invited him to reply by the 13th of July
0:08:29 > 0:08:32and I am delighted he finally replied on the 13th of September.
0:08:32 > 0:08:36Albeit from me.
0:08:36 > 0:08:39I am very grateful.
0:08:39 > 0:08:45What I am less satisfied by is the terms of your answers.
0:08:45 > 0:08:47I want to explore why you are unable
0:08:47 > 0:08:50to give answers to some rather basic questions.
0:08:50 > 0:08:54The first question I put to the attorney was can all be
0:08:54 > 0:08:57directly applicable regulations currently applied to the UK be
0:08:57 > 0:09:02transposed into UK law in a single act of Parliament.
0:09:02 > 0:09:04That struck me as a rather straightforward question
0:09:04 > 0:09:10and your reply said you would appreciate the questions raised
0:09:10 > 0:09:13in your letter touched on issues currently the subject of legal
0:09:13 > 0:09:24proceedings, to which the Government is party.
0:09:24 > 0:09:26Areas raised by them which it would therefore not be appropriate
0:09:26 > 0:09:28for me to comment on.
0:09:28 > 0:09:30Please do explain how this simple technical question
0:09:30 > 0:09:32about whether or not it is possible
0:09:32 > 0:09:34to use the single act of Parliament
0:09:34 > 0:09:36impinges on an action being taken against the Government
0:09:36 > 0:09:38about the operation of Article 50.
0:09:38 > 0:09:40I can talk about the issues relating
0:09:40 > 0:09:42to the act of Parliament.
0:09:42 > 0:09:45Let me do that here and now.
0:09:45 > 0:09:49There are a number of ways you can put into effect such
0:09:49 > 0:09:59an act of Parliament.
0:09:59 > 0:10:03One of them is to
0:10:03 > 0:10:05put everything in place at once.
0:10:05 > 0:10:08It would be huge and to come back to you earlier position
0:10:08 > 0:10:10about the timing on this,
0:10:10 > 0:10:13it would have to wait until very late on in the process
0:10:13 > 0:10:16because we would need to know what we were doing with each
0:10:16 > 0:10:20components of the exit from the EU.
0:10:20 > 0:10:29Even were it a simple exit with almost no amendments to it
0:10:29 > 0:10:38and were we setting out in order to do all the changes letter on it
0:10:38 > 0:10:43and were we setting out in order to do all the changes later
0:10:43 > 0:10:45would still be complicated because, taking a trivial example,
0:10:45 > 0:10:50when local government, under European law
0:10:50 > 0:10:53they have to put the bid into the European system.
0:10:53 > 0:10:55That would deal with all those tiny things
0:10:55 > 0:11:01either directly or with a spectacular
0:11:01 > 0:11:02Henry VIII clauses.
0:11:02 > 0:11:03That is one aspect.
0:11:03 > 0:11:06But you can do it rather more early
0:11:06 > 0:11:08and have a whole series of successive pieces
0:11:08 > 0:11:10of legislation,
0:11:10 > 0:11:14so there is a problem, which you can see...
0:11:14 > 0:11:18I am not sure I do.
0:11:18 > 0:11:21My question was, how does the question you opposed
0:11:21 > 0:11:26in my letter to the attorney excuse
0:11:26 > 0:11:31the reason you gave for not...
0:11:31 > 0:11:34No, your reason for not answering the question was that it impinged
0:11:34 > 0:11:37on that and I don't understand the connection.
0:11:37 > 0:11:40From memory, there was a reference to that, to Article 50,
0:11:40 > 0:11:40was in there?
0:11:40 > 0:11:49No.
0:11:49 > 0:11:52It was could all the current causes relating to the UK
0:11:52 > 0:11:54could be retained should Parliament wish that?
0:11:54 > 0:11:57Your argument is this is currently the subject of legal proceedings...
0:11:57 > 0:11:59That was an error because I thought
0:11:59 > 0:12:01it was a reference to Article 50.
0:12:01 > 0:12:02There was not.
0:12:02 > 0:12:06I wonder if you could have another go in a letter to the committee
0:12:06 > 0:12:07at answering that question.
0:12:07 > 0:12:14Of course we can but we can also deal with the substantive issue
0:12:14 > 0:12:17right here, which is the nature of the legislation we are likely
0:12:17 > 0:12:18to carry through.
0:12:18 > 0:12:20You can either have very simple legislation which meets your
0:12:20 > 0:12:22requirements of going earlier...
0:12:22 > 0:12:34What is the simplest?
0:12:34 > 0:12:37I suppose the position is that is, you've got all this directly
0:12:37 > 0:12:39applicable regulations not put through, so not in British law
0:12:39 > 0:12:42at the minute, we will leave the European Union-
0:12:42 > 0:12:45do we try to make a judgment about whether the 6987 regulations
0:12:45 > 0:12:49that directly apply, that we go through them one by one
0:12:49 > 0:12:52and decide which to keep on which to leave, when we leave,
0:12:52 > 0:12:54or will we keep...
0:12:54 > 0:12:58Put all of them into line take our time to go through and decide
0:12:58 > 0:13:00which ones we don't want?
0:13:00 > 0:13:04The decision we have to take is whether one has a simple piece
0:13:04 > 0:13:06of legislation with a cascading set of SIs
0:13:06 > 0:13:09following on from it and the House of Lords
0:13:09 > 0:13:13famously does not like that, it does not like things
0:13:13 > 0:13:18that create lots of statutory rights
0:13:18 > 0:13:22for ministers rather than going through primary legislation...
0:13:22 > 0:13:26Or you could do it with a small piece of upfront legislation
0:13:26 > 0:13:29and then a mixture of primary and secondary, or you could do
0:13:29 > 0:13:33a huge one that would need to be linked because you would need
0:13:33 > 0:13:38to know what the changes were before you started.
0:13:38 > 0:13:40Before you started the legislation.
0:13:40 > 0:13:42Right.
0:13:42 > 0:13:44It is...
0:13:44 > 0:13:48No, I think what you have said in answer to the first question
0:13:48 > 0:13:49is yes, which is obviously...
0:13:49 > 0:13:52I am grateful for an answer.
0:13:52 > 0:13:54Then there are options beyond that...
0:13:54 > 0:13:55Let me be clear.
0:13:55 > 0:14:12I do not want you to take this guidance from me.
0:14:12 > 0:14:14My answer to question one was yes.
0:14:14 > 0:14:16What was question one in this context?
0:14:16 > 0:14:19Can all the directly applicable legislation is that
0:14:19 > 0:14:20apply currently in the UK be translated
0:14:20 > 0:14:21to the law.
0:14:21 > 0:14:22Yes.
0:14:22 > 0:14:23Am grateful for that.
0:14:23 > 0:14:25The second question posted in the letter I posed.
0:14:25 > 0:14:31Let me for the benefit of the record...
0:14:31 > 0:14:36The second question I asked you.
0:14:36 > 0:14:41On what terms will the UK and EU trade at the end of the two-year
0:14:41 > 0:14:46negotiating period mandated by Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty,
0:14:46 > 0:14:51if no deal has been agreed between the UK and EU on the terms
0:14:51 > 0:14:54of the UK's exit from the EU, or no deal has been agreed
0:14:54 > 0:15:03on the future relationship between the UK the EU?
0:15:03 > 0:15:06What that posits is the rather obvious possibility that there
0:15:06 > 0:15:09is either a blocking minority amongst the 27 who declined
0:15:09 > 0:15:11to come to an agreement, or the European
0:15:11 > 0:15:16Parliament who has a majority against whatever is negotiated
0:15:16 > 0:15:20between you and the 27.
0:15:20 > 0:15:24That strikes me as a rather obvious possibility.
0:15:24 > 0:15:30The answer you gave to me and the committee was,
0:15:30 > 0:15:32"Turning to trade, we are about to begin these
0:15:32 > 0:15:35negotiations and it would be wrong to set out further unilateral
0:15:35 > 0:15:39positions in advance."
0:15:39 > 0:15:42"As the Prime Minister has said, the UK will strike a bespoke
0:15:42 > 0:15:46agreement that gets the best deal for people at home and the right
0:15:46 > 0:15:49deal for Britain abroad."
0:15:49 > 0:15:53That is not in the gift of the Prime Minister, is it?
0:15:53 > 0:15:56It will have to be an agreement between us and our 27 partners
0:15:56 > 0:16:00endorsed by a majority of the European Parliament?
0:16:00 > 0:16:11The Prime Minister cannot make that statement.
0:16:11 > 0:16:12No, those are her aims.
0:16:12 > 0:16:15Those are her aims, yes, but the fact is
0:16:15 > 0:16:17she cannot guarantee it and neither can you.
0:16:17 > 0:16:18Nobody can guarantee the negotiations.
0:16:18 > 0:16:22The process we are about to embark on, there is no agreement.
0:16:22 > 0:16:22That is...
0:16:22 > 0:16:23That as a possible outcome.
0:16:23 > 0:16:24One possible outcome.
0:16:24 > 0:16:28But all I have done is asked you, or as the Attorney General,
0:16:28 > 0:16:33and you were kind enough to send me a letter which...
0:16:33 > 0:16:36Has not in my judgment entirely addressed the question,
0:16:36 > 0:16:37shall I say?
0:16:37 > 0:16:39That...
0:16:39 > 0:16:41I think it is a rather straightforward
0:16:41 > 0:16:43and simple question.
0:16:43 > 0:16:47And I think there is a very important reason you should answer
0:16:47 > 0:16:51it as soon as you are in a position to do so,
0:16:51 > 0:16:54and that is it is a kind of technical question.
0:16:54 > 0:16:56What happens if there is no agreement?
0:16:56 > 0:17:00That then addresses a vast amount of the uncertainty that is out
0:17:00 > 0:17:02there, for example, you know, in a memorandum
0:17:02 > 0:17:06from the Japanese, for example.
0:17:06 > 0:17:09People looking for certainties as to what happens.
0:17:09 > 0:17:12If it is clear, if there is no agreement in the negotiation,
0:17:12 > 0:17:15what the position is, then you address a vast amount
0:17:15 > 0:17:17of the uncertainty out there with individual companies
0:17:17 > 0:17:20and the rest, and they can then watch the negotiations
0:17:20 > 0:17:22and make their commercial judgment according to
0:17:22 > 0:17:26how they perceive them as going given whatever guidance
0:17:26 > 0:17:29you will be able to get,
0:17:29 > 0:17:33but then they will at least know how bad it can get
0:17:33 > 0:17:36from their position, or how good it can get,
0:17:36 > 0:17:37if there is no deal.
0:17:37 > 0:17:39There may be an opportunity for them
0:17:39 > 0:17:40if there is no deal,
0:17:40 > 0:17:42but simply explaining what the technical position
0:17:42 > 0:17:45is going to be, our terms of trade into the Single Market,
0:17:45 > 0:17:47in those circumstances, that strikes me as firstly
0:17:47 > 0:17:50answerable and indeed necessary to answer.
0:17:50 > 0:17:52It depends what you are after.
0:17:52 > 0:17:56If you want a factual statement of what the outcome could be,
0:17:56 > 0:17:59I guess it is what is normally known as world trade
0:17:59 > 0:18:03organisation rules, largely.
0:18:03 > 0:18:05That is I guess what the conclusion would be
0:18:05 > 0:18:08if we are outside with no deal, but I would not
0:18:08 > 0:18:12anybody to think in my view that was a likely outcome.
0:18:12 > 0:18:15I am not asking whether it is a likely outcome or inviting
0:18:15 > 0:18:21you to put probability on it.
0:18:21 > 0:18:25I am inviting us to get us tooks to an agreed understanding
0:18:25 > 0:18:26it is World Trade Organisation rules that
0:18:26 > 0:18:31will govern us into the Single Market...
0:18:31 > 0:18:37I think that is a matter of commonly held fact.
0:18:37 > 0:18:40That is all I was seeking to get the confirmation
0:18:40 > 0:18:43of because there have been people suggesting there are complications
0:18:43 > 0:18:46about putting the World Trade Organisation rules in position
0:18:46 > 0:18:50and if you are telling this committee that is a matter
0:18:50 > 0:18:53of commonly held fact, and it is a fact, then that gives
0:18:53 > 0:18:56everybody a bottom-line from which to work all the...
0:18:56 > 0:18:59And all the interests, which as you know is
0:18:59 > 0:19:02a very large number...
0:19:02 > 0:19:07Except, and this is one of the problems, we are dealing
0:19:07 > 0:19:19with negotiations which as I said yesterday
0:19:19 > 0:19:20are extremely complicated.
0:19:20 > 0:19:23The World Trade Organisation rules essentially apply just as tariffs
0:19:23 > 0:19:26but the nontariff barriers are one of the primary barriers.
0:19:26 > 0:19:27It is a simple answer.
0:19:27 > 0:19:30Of course there is a complacency about how the nontariff barriers
0:19:30 > 0:19:35are operated on the rest.
0:19:35 > 0:19:40But I think there is a very great need for as much clarification
0:19:40 > 0:19:45of what can be reasonably clarified
0:19:45 > 0:19:48and is part of the obvious bounds of which a negotiation
0:19:48 > 0:19:51can take place and obviously one of those is no agreement,
0:19:51 > 0:20:03for that to be clearly established and put out there.
0:20:03 > 0:20:05You've gone very great deal further in answers
0:20:05 > 0:20:06to me than you,
0:20:06 > 0:20:09than the you probably signed off in some case this morning
0:20:09 > 0:20:10when he realised it was outstanding.
0:20:10 > 0:20:12It was not outstanding for me...
0:20:12 > 0:20:15Yes, and the Attorney General has not done this to mind
0:20:15 > 0:20:22and I appreciate that, and I am grateful...
0:20:22 > 0:20:24No good deed ever goes unpunished.
0:20:24 > 0:20:25LAUGHTER
0:20:25 > 0:20:30I am very grateful for the detail you have now given.
0:20:30 > 0:20:33One further question from me before moving on to Mr Gates.
0:20:33 > 0:20:40Sorry, but who will you be negotiating with?
0:20:40 > 0:20:52First off, the commission has appointed Mr Barnier,
0:20:52 > 0:21:15the Parliament has appointed Mr Verhofstadt,
0:21:15 > 0:21:28and I went to Dublin and spoke to Mr Flannigan, and...
0:21:28 > 0:21:34My question is, in a sense, who are you
0:21:34 > 0:21:36formally negotiating with?
0:21:36 > 0:21:39We are formally negotiating with the council.
0:21:39 > 0:21:42And...
0:21:42 > 0:21:50There appears to be some dispute between the council.
0:21:50 > 0:21:53If you will forgive me that is not for me to resolve.
0:21:53 > 0:21:56We may return to the involvement of the European Parliament
0:21:56 > 0:22:07later in questions.
0:22:07 > 0:22:11I wanted a little bit more clarity on the question of the letter
0:22:11 > 0:22:14when you see it is possible to have a position where we adopt
0:22:14 > 0:22:16all the 6800 EU laws...
0:22:16 > 0:22:18But I thought he then went on to say
0:22:18 > 0:22:21that would be problematic and give the example of the local
0:22:21 > 0:22:23authority having to publish all their European...
0:22:23 > 0:22:25So it wouldn't be workable?
0:22:25 > 0:22:28You have to deal with that by a series of follow-on
0:22:28 > 0:22:31legislation, something like that- would through an SI,
0:22:31 > 0:22:35and it would not be confirmed to just that.
0:22:35 > 0:22:40It would not be confirmed to the sort of minor problems
0:22:40 > 0:22:43like that - they would be substantive changes,
0:22:43 > 0:22:46changes in immigration law, changes in a whole series
0:22:46 > 0:22:50of matters currently to do with European Union,
0:22:50 > 0:22:54some of which could be quite significant.
0:22:54 > 0:22:59So the problem there is generating a lot of secondary legislation
0:22:59 > 0:23:01and possibly some primary legislation.
0:23:01 > 0:23:04It may not resolve the issue in the way your chairman
0:23:04 > 0:23:05was saying earlier.
0:23:05 > 0:23:09If there is not time to get it through, what happens?
0:23:09 > 0:23:11That is why it is difficult.
0:23:11 > 0:23:14And just on the timetable and of course I completely
0:23:14 > 0:23:18understand you cannot give any committee a running commentary
0:23:18 > 0:23:22on negotiations or positions the Government would take,
0:23:22 > 0:23:26but could you at least see when you expect the Government
0:23:26 > 0:23:31to agree a clear set of objectives for Brexit negotiation.
0:23:31 > 0:23:34Do you have a target?
0:23:34 > 0:23:37That is one of them and probably the primary one
0:23:37 > 0:23:41is the Prime Minister has said we will not trigger Article 50
0:23:41 > 0:23:44is the Prime Minister has said we will not trigger Article 50
0:23:44 > 0:23:48until sometime in the New Year, after the end of this year.
0:23:48 > 0:23:52Because we are going through that process as it stands,
0:23:52 > 0:23:56and I can talk you through that if you want to hear it.
0:23:56 > 0:23:58Assessing, negotiating aims, negotiate and tactics,
0:23:58 > 0:24:01the legalities, the very things we have been speaking about,
0:24:01 > 0:24:04the legalities of Article 50, and all those things really have
0:24:04 > 0:24:09to be fairly clear before you start,
0:24:09 > 0:24:13so we will arrive at that something in the New Year.
0:24:13 > 0:24:16So you will have all of your objectives in place sometime
0:24:16 > 0:24:21in the New Year, so by January?
0:24:21 > 0:24:25I will not guess on that, with the best will in the world.
0:24:25 > 0:24:28I have said before I would rather go one month late
0:24:28 > 0:24:30and get it right and go a month early
0:24:30 > 0:24:31and get it wrong.
0:24:31 > 0:24:33That has slightly flipped the phrase
0:24:33 > 0:24:34but it characterises it.
0:24:34 > 0:24:36But early in the New Year?
0:24:36 > 0:24:45Your target?
0:24:45 > 0:24:47The Prime Minister certainly one very public comment and one
0:24:47 > 0:24:49that was implicit I figured what she said.
0:24:49 > 0:24:51Firstly, it will not be this year.
0:24:51 > 0:24:54Secondly, she knows that British people expect us to be
0:24:54 > 0:24:55expeditious about it.
0:24:55 > 0:24:57After reaching that position when will the Government set
0:24:57 > 0:25:00out your objectives or will you not
0:25:00 > 0:25:03set them out at all?
0:25:03 > 0:25:06We will certainly set out some objectives,
0:25:06 > 0:25:18the level of detail of the game is another matter but the overall
0:25:18 > 0:25:18Is
0:25:18 > 0:25:19Is that
0:25:19 > 0:25:29aim will be set out clearly.
0:25:29 > 0:25:32Apart from anything else, you have got Parliament is having
0:25:32 > 0:25:35an interest in its and as I said yesterday to the Lords committee
0:25:35 > 0:25:38we will meet that as far as we can without jeopardising
0:25:38 > 0:25:39the overall aim.
0:25:39 > 0:25:42Also, we have, when rewriter Donald Tusk under Article 50
0:25:42 > 0:25:46we will write a letter and a sum that would include a statement
0:25:46 > 0:25:46of our aims.
0:25:46 > 0:25:49So that would be early in the New Year?
0:25:49 > 0:25:54I will not be drawn on dates.
0:25:54 > 0:26:02You said you would hold roundtable debates with stakeholders.
0:26:02 > 0:26:09Can you explain in more detail how the process will actually work?
0:26:09 > 0:26:11Will you publish open calls for evidence or contributions
0:26:11 > 0:26:13from stakeholders will you and other departments
0:26:13 > 0:26:22select those who you wish to hear from?
0:26:22 > 0:26:23A bit of both.
0:26:23 > 0:26:26Some of it is self-selecting because anybody who is concerned
0:26:26 > 0:26:30about their own industry will be wanting to have a round table so,
0:26:30 > 0:26:32for example, last week a city group
0:26:32 > 0:26:41had a roundtable chair by the Chancellor.
0:26:41 > 0:26:55I have one other retail this week.
0:26:55 > 0:26:57I have set in the house I saw the TUC,
0:26:57 > 0:27:02they were the first people I saw.
0:27:02 > 0:27:07The fishermen's organisations, you name it.
0:27:07 > 0:27:10The whole series where we think it is at issue
0:27:10 > 0:27:13and people who are concerned.
0:27:13 > 0:27:17And that is how you ensure it is wide-ranging and representative?
0:27:17 > 0:27:18Bear in mind...
0:27:18 > 0:27:21Sorry, I left out the section.
0:27:21 > 0:27:27Also bear in mind is we put to one side the devolved administrations
0:27:27 > 0:27:29because they have got a separate set
0:27:29 > 0:27:33of almost parallel operations going on,
0:27:33 > 0:27:37but every single department is it's also been asked,
0:27:37 > 0:27:41was passed at the beginning of the summer.
0:27:41 > 0:27:50Coming back with their primary concerns and their client group.
0:27:50 > 0:27:53That is also happening.
0:27:53 > 0:27:56I cannot think of any other way of making any
0:27:56 > 0:27:57more exhaustive comments.
0:27:57 > 0:28:07And the Department is suitably resourced for this?
0:28:07 > 0:28:16More of the resources in the department that with us.
0:28:16 > 0:28:19My department is quite small but has expanded rapidly
0:28:19 > 0:28:28in the past month but is still only around 200 people.
0:28:28 > 0:28:31What we are doing, the strategy we are taking is having a small
0:28:31 > 0:28:36number of very high calibre civil servants of each of the main
0:28:36 > 0:28:38departments, not trying to replicate
0:28:38 > 0:28:41the entire policy went off, let's say, the Home Office.
0:28:41 > 0:28:46That makes it work better, more effective, we not duplicating,
0:28:46 > 0:28:53there are no turf wars and it is a better way of doing it.
0:28:53 > 0:28:57How will it work when you start negotiating?
0:28:57 > 0:29:00You are missing out this step.
0:29:00 > 0:29:04The step between now and then, the negotiations starting,
0:29:04 > 0:29:06will involve a degree of assessments
0:29:06 > 0:29:13of the size of the problem.
0:29:13 > 0:29:18For example, somebody has said that the nontariff barriers
0:29:18 > 0:29:26are better than tariff barriers and they have cited various ways
0:29:26 > 0:29:29are bigger than tariff barriers and they have cited various ways
0:29:29 > 0:29:32so we will do a quantification of natural before we start
0:29:32 > 0:29:35negotiating we will have an idea of what is big or small
0:29:35 > 0:29:37and what matters and what does not.
0:29:37 > 0:29:40We will not necessarily publish all that because that is a gift
0:29:40 > 0:29:43to the other side that we will know it.
0:29:46 > 0:29:47Welcome, secretary of state.
0:29:47 > 0:29:50These are complex negotiations at you do not want to compromise
0:29:50 > 0:29:56your position, but many of us believe if access to the single
0:29:56 > 0:30:04market cannot be gains on terms reasonable to both sides then
0:30:04 > 0:30:07market cannot be gained on terms reasonable to both sides then
0:30:07 > 0:30:10certainly for those goods subject to tariffs we should not be afraid
0:30:10 > 0:30:12to fall back on the WTO rules.
0:30:12 > 0:30:16Is there any reason we should not do that?
0:30:16 > 0:30:20I will not commit to any particular strategy at the moment,
0:30:20 > 0:30:24for obvious reasons.
0:30:24 > 0:30:31Firstly, let me offer a philosophical approach.
0:30:31 > 0:30:34I think it is a bad idea to go into negotiation
0:30:34 > 0:30:35fearing any outcomes.
0:30:35 > 0:30:41Because that weakens you in one respect of another.
0:30:41 > 0:30:45Speaking about the calculations that
0:30:45 > 0:30:48will go on and we will assess not just
0:30:48 > 0:30:51what the costs of a given strategy is but also
0:30:51 > 0:31:00what the policies that go with it.
0:31:00 > 0:31:04So, people might say it will cost this or that,
0:31:04 > 0:31:06they have not necessarily taken on board how we might
0:31:06 > 0:31:08mitigate costs.
0:31:08 > 0:31:11I see nothing to fear in any outcome.
0:31:11 > 0:31:15On immigration, mainly in the EU Commission the early suggestions
0:31:15 > 0:31:22are linking immigration or free movement with trade negotiations.
0:31:22 > 0:31:26Many of those who voted to leave, one of the key reasons was we had
0:31:26 > 0:31:30a immigration system discriminatory against the rest of the world
0:31:30 > 0:31:35outside the EU and what was wanted was fairness,
0:31:35 > 0:31:37whatever the criteria that will guide the policy
0:31:37 > 0:31:41going forward it must be fair
0:31:41 > 0:31:50so that is the discrimination.
0:31:50 > 0:31:54so that there is no discrimination.
0:31:54 > 0:31:57Is that the sense of the position within the Government,
0:31:57 > 0:31:58as you see it?
0:31:58 > 0:32:05My job is to get those powers back,
0:32:05 > 0:32:09respect the will of the British people which I tend to think of...
0:32:09 > 0:32:17To respect that as much as we can in negotiations.
0:32:17 > 0:32:20When we get it back it is only Home Office to make decisions
0:32:20 > 0:32:24on how to use that power.
0:32:24 > 0:32:31Whilst I have sympathy with your description of it,
0:32:31 > 0:32:33it is not me who the decision.
0:32:33 > 0:32:36The decision on how we decide on the final policy.
0:32:36 > 0:32:39Final question.
0:32:39 > 0:32:42The certainty of that position is if you endear to the principle
0:32:42 > 0:32:44of fairness, whatever the criteria used, essentially adhere
0:32:44 > 0:32:48to the principle there will be no discrimination,
0:32:48 > 0:32:51you effectively divorce immigration
0:32:51 > 0:32:55and free movement from the trade negotiations
0:32:55 > 0:33:01because you can offer nothing special to the EU as such.
0:33:01 > 0:33:04You need to explain that begin to me.
0:33:04 > 0:33:06The subtlety of the principle of fairness is not only
0:33:06 > 0:33:11that it is right, in that you will not discriminate
0:33:11 > 0:33:15against one region of the world against another, but in pursuing
0:33:15 > 0:33:19the principle of fairness you actually divorce in effect
0:33:19 > 0:33:24immigration and free movement of labour from trade negotiations.
0:33:24 > 0:33:31I did actually understand that the first time.
0:33:31 > 0:33:45For obvious reasons I will not be drawn on it.
0:33:45 > 0:33:46Can you not say anything?
0:33:46 > 0:33:48Can I pressure on this?
0:33:48 > 0:33:50It is a key plank of the campaign.
0:33:50 > 0:33:53The Prime Minister made it plain the current system cannot be
0:33:53 > 0:33:54allowed to stand.
0:33:54 > 0:33:57She said we will not have free movement as it now is.
0:33:57 > 0:34:00She talked about control borders so I do not think there is
0:34:00 > 0:34:03any doubt about the priority that is on this
0:34:03 > 0:34:06and I do not think our European partners would doubt that either.
0:34:06 > 0:34:09And some of them have commented publicly in disagreement with her,
0:34:09 > 0:34:13for example, the Irish head commented over the weekends
0:34:13 > 0:34:16disagreeing with us but it is plain
0:34:16 > 0:34:25this is a priority.
0:34:25 > 0:34:27You mentioned you have a meeting with the TUC,
0:34:27 > 0:34:32which is very welcome and unusual for the Government
0:34:32 > 0:34:35in recent years to have such an early meetings with
0:34:35 > 0:34:39ministers and the TUC.
0:34:39 > 0:34:46You previously...
0:34:46 > 0:34:48I do have form on this.
0:34:48 > 0:34:50Perhaps then you can answer the question that you previously
0:34:50 > 0:34:56said workers should not lose their rights as a result of Brexit.
0:34:56 > 0:34:59Is that your personal view or is that because the view
0:34:59 > 0:35:00of the Government?
0:35:00 > 0:35:03It is a personal view but I have not
0:35:03 > 0:35:04been disagreed with.
0:35:04 > 0:35:07So there has been no discussion in Government yet about an erosion
0:35:07 > 0:35:13of workers' writes?
0:35:13 > 0:35:15of workers' rights?
0:35:15 > 0:35:21Not on that specific issue and what I have said two other
0:35:21 > 0:35:24Not on that specific issue and what I have said to other
0:35:24 > 0:35:27members of the committee is we will not get drawn
0:35:27 > 0:35:28into the policy elements of this.
0:35:28 > 0:35:32Because it has implications that would...
0:35:32 > 0:35:36To put it another way, if you lay a red lines
0:35:36 > 0:35:39you are negotiating opponent does is head straight for that line
0:35:39 > 0:35:43and use it against you.
0:35:43 > 0:35:53I do not propose to elaborate but the comment stands.
0:35:53 > 0:35:56Yesterday you told the Lords Select Committee
0:35:56 > 0:36:00you will ask businesses to give you a quantitative
0:36:00 > 0:36:03assessment of theimpacts of various scenarios
0:36:03 > 0:36:08on their sectors.
0:36:08 > 0:36:15How are you going to assess that data, the validity of that paper?
0:36:15 > 0:36:19I was talking to Lord Green and what I said
0:36:19 > 0:36:22what we would carry out these assessments and some
0:36:22 > 0:36:29of the information will,
0:36:29 > 0:36:32come that but the same way you test any data
0:36:32 > 0:36:36given to you, you look at how it is calculated.
0:36:36 > 0:36:38Will the businesses carry out or will you.
0:36:38 > 0:36:41We will carry out some of our own.
0:36:41 > 0:36:43Earlier I sighted people comparing effect of tariff and nontariff
0:36:43 > 0:37:01barriers on how you set it.
0:37:01 > 0:37:11You said your department does not date have the capacity says
0:37:11 > 0:37:15You said your department does not date have the capacity to access
0:37:15 > 0:37:22When do you expect to have that capacity?
0:37:22 > 0:37:24Before we need it but the sequence of events
0:37:24 > 0:37:28is like this, at the moment we are doing the round tables
0:37:28 > 0:37:28and bilateral discussions.
0:37:28 > 0:37:31We will then asked for data and submissions from them,
0:37:31 > 0:37:33we will then begin assessment.
0:37:33 > 0:37:35That is a little while away but I suspect the department
0:37:35 > 0:37:38will double again in size.
0:37:38 > 0:37:40Will that be before or after Article 50's triggered?
0:37:40 > 0:37:46Before.
0:37:46 > 0:37:49You will not trigger Article 50 until your department
0:37:49 > 0:37:51is at capacity to carry out the functions.
0:37:51 > 0:37:52To carry out those functions.
0:37:52 > 0:37:54That is self evident, I would have thought.
0:37:54 > 0:37:56And will you be drawing on the competencies
0:37:56 > 0:38:03and documentation produced by ministers before the referendum,
0:38:03 > 0:38:06the whole process went through when William Hague
0:38:06 > 0:38:10was Foreign Secretary.
0:38:10 > 0:38:16Most of this is a new process.
0:38:16 > 0:38:19I think when the committee...
0:38:19 > 0:38:23It is a very big process and there is a lot of work
0:38:23 > 0:38:25going on and pretty much every department is involved
0:38:25 > 0:38:28and they will be doing a fair amount of analysis
0:38:28 > 0:38:32themselves and then challenging it.
0:38:32 > 0:38:35Final question.
0:38:35 > 0:38:41Given the clear reluctance you have two states
0:38:41 > 0:38:47what you're negotiating position is going to be and not give
0:38:47 > 0:38:49answers today or yesterday,
0:38:49 > 0:38:57how long do you think you can sustain this position?
0:38:57 > 0:39:00Isn't the reality that it will become politically impossible
0:39:00 > 0:39:06domestic calling, not just internationally and are
0:39:06 > 0:39:08therefore it might be better that the Prime Minister
0:39:08 > 0:39:11and her new team actually got a mandate from the British
0:39:11 > 0:39:16people before they trigger Article 50?
0:39:16 > 0:39:21An early general election before article 50.
0:39:21 > 0:39:29I am tempted to say that is above my pay grade
0:39:29 > 0:39:32but it puts the rest of your questioning in context.
0:39:32 > 0:39:36My questions are the kinds of questions people want answers
0:39:36 > 0:39:41to your job is to answer them.
0:39:41 > 0:39:44My job is to make decisions on behalf of the people.
0:39:44 > 0:39:49We have a mandate like no other.
0:39:49 > 0:39:54It is our job to deliver on that mandate and our job to do it as best
0:39:54 > 0:39:59we can which means carrying out the negotiation in an intelligent
0:39:59 > 0:40:02way, making the decisions on the basis of the data we collect,
0:40:02 > 0:40:07analyse and make a decision on that basis, not the other way round.
0:40:07 > 0:40:10It may be your approach to save because we are asking
0:40:10 > 0:40:13the question you must tell us the answer before you have out
0:40:13 > 0:40:16but that seems daft, to me.
0:40:16 > 0:40:20You have not worked out the answers to any of these questions yet?
0:40:20 > 0:40:24We have worked out some answers but not to the questions you have
0:40:24 > 0:40:28asked and we have a major exercise under way and we will look at every
0:40:28 > 0:40:33single sector industry, every single department of state has
0:40:33 > 0:40:36got the workloads on less and they will come to intelligent
0:40:36 > 0:40:40conclusions and that will drive the outcome,
0:40:40 > 0:40:44empirical outcome to this process, not politically driven answers
0:40:44 > 0:40:49but allowing you to say should we have an election.
0:40:49 > 0:40:52I think these questions have established the level
0:40:52 > 0:41:05of negligence...
0:41:05 > 0:41:08Not above my pay grade...
0:41:08 > 0:41:21Yes, not responsible to, Secretary State.
0:41:21 > 0:41:24Good to see you back in Government, Mr Davies.
0:41:24 > 0:41:27We are clear on the accentuation of the fact that was preparatory
0:41:27 > 0:41:30work on the situation post Brexit, and it has clearly been indicated
0:41:30 > 0:41:34the ball is in our court for triggering this.
0:41:34 > 0:41:38Can I ask you, bearing in mind we have up to two years for this
0:41:38 > 0:41:45renegotiation process, what are the delays in invoking
0:41:45 > 0:41:46Article 50?
0:41:46 > 0:41:55The primary delay is doing the necessary preparations.
0:41:55 > 0:41:58It would be quite difficult for any government to do the level
0:41:58 > 0:42:00of analysis we are undertaking now.
0:42:00 > 0:42:04It is enormous.
0:42:04 > 0:42:07As I say, every department is involved in it, pretty much.
0:42:07 > 0:42:10That is the first thing.
0:42:10 > 0:42:12It is time consuming, it simply is time-consuming,
0:42:12 > 0:42:15first to collect the data, to establish the nature of the...
0:42:15 > 0:42:20Let me give you another example.
0:42:20 > 0:42:24The City of London, there has been a lot of concern about passports
0:42:24 > 0:42:28and so on, and some companies have raised issues about this.
0:42:28 > 0:42:31Some companies care about it and some do not.
0:42:31 > 0:42:33We need to understand why some care and some don't
0:42:33 > 0:42:36and what the differences are, we need to understand
0:42:36 > 0:42:40whether there needs to be a policy as do it or can be fixed
0:42:40 > 0:42:43the problems themselves with brass plates around the place and so on?
0:42:43 > 0:42:49There are a whole series of issues and that is just one sector.
0:42:49 > 0:43:02And the ecosystem is not an industry which fits together like a complex
0:43:02 > 0:43:06tower as many as are of the opinion, say 'aye'.
0:43:06 > 0:43:09To the contrary, 'no'.
0:43:09 > 0:43:11Together like a complex jenga tower.
0:43:11 > 0:43:14The only way to do this responsibly is to do the analysis first,
0:43:14 > 0:43:17and clearly work out what the National priorities are,
0:43:17 > 0:43:20on the basis of that, then designed a negotiating
0:43:20 > 0:43:23strategy around that.
0:43:23 > 0:43:26That is why it takes time and I make no bones about it.
0:43:26 > 0:43:29I think the British people want us to do this properly,
0:43:29 > 0:43:34not necessarily incredibly fast.
0:43:34 > 0:43:37I understand obviously there is a huge amount of work to be
0:43:37 > 0:43:40done, analytical work, and we want to be ready for those
0:43:40 > 0:43:44negotiations with all the facts at our disposal.
0:43:44 > 0:43:47It is not an issue, though, however, on lack of resources
0:43:47 > 0:43:49for your department, is it?
0:43:49 > 0:43:51Do you have sufficient resources?
0:43:51 > 0:43:54There is a time constraint in the sense that the department has
0:43:54 > 0:43:57come from scratch.
0:43:57 > 0:44:01It did not exist two months ago, a little over two months ago.
0:44:01 > 0:44:03Most people around this table, you know what Whitehall
0:44:03 > 0:44:05is like in August.
0:44:05 > 0:44:07The recruitment process is not a straightforward
0:44:07 > 0:44:09as you might think.
0:44:09 > 0:44:11So it has taken time.
0:44:11 > 0:44:13There is no way round it.
0:44:13 > 0:44:16It is not a shortage of money resource.
0:44:16 > 0:44:18It is just a question of establishing the organisation
0:44:18 > 0:44:20in place.
0:44:20 > 0:44:26As I said to the Lords' committee yesterday,
0:44:26 > 0:44:32at the moment it is mostly civil servants, in fact entirely civil
0:44:32 > 0:44:34servants, and they are all quite young, smart people,
0:44:34 > 0:44:36but they do not have experience in the City,
0:44:36 > 0:44:41in industry, in various other areas, and the next phase is to bring
0:44:41 > 0:44:46in some grey hair to bring in that experience.
0:44:46 > 0:44:55It is not resources in the sense of money.
0:44:55 > 0:44:57There is no problem with that.
0:44:57 > 0:44:59our European partners have been I think very understanding,
0:44:59 > 0:45:03certainly in public, about our delay.
0:45:03 > 0:45:08Obviously they are keen for us to invoke it as quickly as possible.
0:45:08 > 0:45:11Do you envisage a time when they will start to say publicly
0:45:11 > 0:45:16that they are concerned about the delay?
0:45:16 > 0:45:19Have you had any discussions with them about that?
0:45:19 > 0:45:21I think I am right...
0:45:21 > 0:45:25What the Prime Minister has been saying, and it may well have come up
0:45:25 > 0:45:28in those discussions, but I don't think it is material.
0:45:28 > 0:45:30The French government have been saying they wanted
0:45:30 > 0:45:34to be precipitated soon.
0:45:34 > 0:45:39I think one or two members of the Commission,
0:45:39 > 0:45:42Mr Jean-Claude Juncker, he has said he would like to be
0:45:42 > 0:45:44soon, but, you know, they are the other side
0:45:44 > 0:45:45of this negotiation.
0:45:45 > 0:45:48We will not necessarily do everything they say when they want
0:45:48 > 0:45:51us to do it.
0:45:51 > 0:45:56The counter to this is that they need some time as well.
0:45:56 > 0:45:59For example, to give you the parallel to this,
0:45:59 > 0:46:04my opposite number within the commission if you like,
0:46:04 > 0:46:08Michel Barnier, is just at the moment about to establish his
0:46:08 > 0:46:12own Department of 25 people, not 200 or 400, but 25 for this
0:46:12 > 0:46:16instance so he can do his analysis, and they will need to work out
0:46:16 > 0:46:19for themselves what the consequences of our negotiating request questions
0:46:19 > 0:46:22are and they are also starting a process I do not think
0:46:22 > 0:46:29it is wasted time.
0:46:29 > 0:46:34OK, thank you.
0:46:34 > 0:46:41I can say I am familiar with some of the young talent supporting
0:46:41 > 0:46:44you in this role, obviously which iss some of which I am aware
0:46:44 > 0:46:45of as a minister.
0:46:45 > 0:46:48But speaking about grey hair, has approved rather more difficult
0:46:48 > 0:46:59to find experienced servants to come and join your department?
0:46:59 > 0:47:00You say experienced civil servants...
0:47:00 > 0:47:05And others...
0:47:05 > 0:47:06Outsiders?
0:47:06 > 0:47:07Yes.
0:47:07 > 0:47:10This morning we had on offer, and I probably should not mean
0:47:10 > 0:47:14the company, but we had an offer of three senior partners from a very
0:47:14 > 0:47:18major law firm in this area, so we have had other offers as well.
0:47:18 > 0:47:21So no, there is not a shortage of interest in getting involved.
0:47:21 > 0:47:24For many of the companies in the City, indeed,
0:47:24 > 0:47:29in business in Britain, there are strong interests,
0:47:29 > 0:47:31shall we say?
0:47:31 > 0:47:34In providing us with good calibre people when they can.
0:47:34 > 0:47:37Some of the interest groups, not companies,
0:47:37 > 0:47:40are doing their own analyses as well, which we will incorporate
0:47:40 > 0:47:45and draw on as well.
0:47:45 > 0:47:48I wouldn't worry...
0:47:48 > 0:47:52I mean, I will tell the committee if I run into a constraint on this
0:47:52 > 0:47:56and I'm very happy to do so, but I am not at the moment
0:47:56 > 0:47:57concerned about that.
0:47:57 > 0:48:00There is a natural limitation on how long it takes to set
0:48:00 > 0:48:01up an organisation.
0:48:01 > 0:48:04I am setting up a battalion from scratch, basically.
0:48:04 > 0:48:07To put it in words you would be familiar with.
0:48:07 > 0:48:11You know, I am the recruiting Sergeant...
0:48:11 > 0:48:13Well, actually, it might be a battalion!
0:48:13 > 0:48:15We will see what we get.
0:48:15 > 0:48:19It will be as big as it needs to be.
0:48:19 > 0:48:23Good afternoon, Secretary of State.
0:48:23 > 0:48:27The people voted to leave the European Union.
0:48:27 > 0:48:31They expect us to leave the European Union.
0:48:31 > 0:48:35And we understand that it takes time to get these things right before
0:48:35 > 0:48:36we can actually do it.
0:48:36 > 0:48:40But in the meantime can you reassure the public,
0:48:40 > 0:48:43can you take actions, even small symbolic actions,
0:48:43 > 0:48:47to indicate that the Government is absolutely serious,
0:48:47 > 0:48:50deadly serious, about doing this, because there are jitters
0:48:50 > 0:48:53and there are people worried that this is not actually
0:48:53 > 0:48:58going to happen in the way they thought?
0:48:58 > 0:49:00Well, at the beginning of the summer, the Chancellor
0:49:00 > 0:49:08carried out the statement that we would underpin spending,
0:49:08 > 0:49:11structural funds, CEP funds and so on.
0:49:11 > 0:49:16If you wanted signal we wanted to reduce the jitters and say,
0:49:16 > 0:49:23we are definitely doing this, that was one CAP.
0:49:23 > 0:49:29That was one decision.
0:49:29 > 0:49:37Those argument is notwithstanding the be made over again.
0:49:37 > 0:49:39Those arguments notwithstanding the be made over again.
0:49:39 > 0:49:43There was a debate I think in Westminster Hall last,
0:49:43 > 0:49:45in fact last Monday, on whether there should be
0:49:45 > 0:49:47a second referendum.
0:49:47 > 0:49:50The Prime Minister has said time and time again,
0:49:50 > 0:49:54you know, no second referendum, no reversals, nor avoidance.
0:49:54 > 0:49:58We are leaving the European Union.
0:49:58 > 0:50:01As a transition between now and when we leave
0:50:01 > 0:50:07the European Union, is there a possibility
0:50:07 > 0:50:11that we could look at EFTA is a way of continuing the existing trade
0:50:11 > 0:50:14relations and leaving the European Union much earlier
0:50:14 > 0:50:24by actually having that kind of transition?
0:50:24 > 0:50:26No, I don't think so.
0:50:26 > 0:50:29I don't want to get into it and I will not get
0:50:29 > 0:50:34into what arrangement we end up with when we leave.
0:50:34 > 0:50:37There are people who argue that as an outcome.
0:50:37 > 0:50:41There are others who argue instant departure, so I will not get
0:50:41 > 0:50:47into that but, no, I think this is the case.
0:50:47 > 0:50:51The strategy of the Government is to depart the Union at the end
0:50:51 > 0:50:52of the Article 50 process.
0:50:52 > 0:51:03Up until then, the Government will absolutely obey
0:51:03 > 0:51:09the European Union law and will be a good European Union citizen,
0:51:09 > 0:51:13that is the approach we are taking and we think
0:51:13 > 0:51:17that is the approach we are taking and we think it is the best approach
0:51:17 > 0:51:18in terms of our responsibilities
0:51:18 > 0:51:21and also we think it is the best negotiating approach.
0:51:21 > 0:51:25We will not walk away from our responsible days.
0:51:25 > 0:51:27We will take a stronger stance on European matters on defence,
0:51:27 > 0:51:30security and a whole series of other things.
0:51:30 > 0:51:32This is a bit of an indicator.
0:51:32 > 0:51:45But whether there are things we can do that would be legally OK to do,
0:51:45 > 0:51:47that show we are symbolically...
0:51:47 > 0:51:51One example is new passports that will be issued from now on will go
0:51:51 > 0:51:54back to the traditional blue British passport rather than the pink things
0:51:54 > 0:51:56we have been using.
0:51:56 > 0:51:58You would need to ask the Home Secretary...
0:51:58 > 0:52:02Could we have symbolic gestures such as that to show the British people
0:52:02 > 0:52:06we are absolutely serious about leaving the EU?
0:52:06 > 0:52:10Attractive as the idea is, we're not in the business,
0:52:10 > 0:52:13or at least I am not in the business, of symbolism.
0:52:13 > 0:52:16I am in the business of delivering on this,
0:52:16 > 0:52:18and that is the point.
0:52:18 > 0:52:21On that very point of delivering, in your deliberations
0:52:21 > 0:52:23and negotiations and discussions about Britain's future,
0:52:23 > 0:52:27the United Kingdom's future, with the EU, what assurance can
0:52:27 > 0:52:34you give your taking into account the interests of Gibraltar
0:52:34 > 0:52:37and the British Overseas Territories and Crown dependencies,
0:52:37 > 0:52:39but particularly Gibraltar that have a huge amount of concerns
0:52:39 > 0:52:44about their position following Brexit?
0:52:44 > 0:52:47Well, we are, and I am seeing the chief minister of Gibraltar
0:52:47 > 0:52:51almost after this meeting.
0:52:51 > 0:52:54Simon thank you very much.
0:52:54 > 0:52:57The Secretary of State seems reluctant to go into specifics
0:52:57 > 0:53:01about exposing his negotiating hand but as you will recall straight
0:53:01 > 0:53:06after the referendum there was huge uncertainty in markets.
0:53:06 > 0:53:17The pound slumped, share prices down.
0:53:17 > 0:53:21We were led to understand they would not be a rush to invoke
0:53:21 > 0:53:21Article 50.
0:53:21 > 0:53:24To give some breathing space and the markets and many major
0:53:24 > 0:53:33investors time to speculate, on which approach we will take.
0:53:33 > 0:53:36You clearly do not want to be transparent about this
0:53:36 > 0:53:39but our markets, businesses and inverses want is to some degree
0:53:39 > 0:53:49transparency that the outcome will be something they can live with.
0:53:49 > 0:53:54You made it quite plain that you are not sure an EFTA model
0:53:54 > 0:53:58is for Britain, but do you have some arrangement you will keep secret
0:53:58 > 0:54:06until the last minute and that at the end of tonight years will be
0:54:06 > 0:54:09until the last minute and that at the end of two years will be
0:54:09 > 0:54:13brought out like a rabbit out of the hat, that the international
0:54:13 > 0:54:15community, and in particular the business community,
0:54:15 > 0:54:18will be satisfied with, and in the meantime what damage do
0:54:18 > 0:54:20you think that will do to our international standing
0:54:20 > 0:54:24in the markets and the strength of the pound, and what is happening
0:54:24 > 0:54:25in investment in this country?
0:54:25 > 0:54:28Let me take it apart from the beginning.
0:54:28 > 0:54:30Firstly the description of the financial markets was just
0:54:30 > 0:54:32simply not true.
0:54:32 > 0:54:38The FTSE 100 and all the various indicators are good.
0:54:38 > 0:54:55The standing of the pound is not in a poor place.
0:54:55 > 0:54:57Indeed a previous government believed that that is where it
0:54:57 > 0:55:00should be, so I am not in the business of speculative
0:55:00 > 0:55:04on that but that description you have given is a little
0:55:04 > 0:55:06like descriptions people were giving in August trying to blame things
0:55:06 > 0:55:10on Brexit then of course all those things they were calling on Brexit
0:55:10 > 0:55:11dissolved on wearing there, so...
0:55:11 > 0:55:12Let me finish.
0:55:12 > 0:55:14You ask the question so I will answer.
0:55:14 > 0:55:16Firstly, your description of the economy is simple
0:55:16 > 0:55:17not the case.
0:55:17 > 0:55:21The first thing to say to you is a big business decisions
0:55:21 > 0:55:26are not taken on the right thing of one commentator
0:55:26 > 0:55:30in the Financial Times, they are taken over a period of time
0:55:30 > 0:55:33and not taken off the back of the movement of the markets
0:55:33 > 0:55:35on one day or another.
0:55:35 > 0:55:39You will see the foreign investment into this country after the election
0:55:39 > 0:55:44of a Government that had undertaken the referendum was as high as it
0:55:44 > 0:55:49has ever been.
0:55:49 > 0:55:59We saw investment in the country in a big way.
0:55:59 > 0:56:02We saw investment.
0:56:02 > 0:56:06One business said they were going to continue to invest.
0:56:06 > 0:56:10So I frankly do not accept the premise but let's take the next
0:56:10 > 0:56:16step as well.
0:56:16 > 0:56:20That is what business views as uncertainty.
0:56:20 > 0:56:23A business that wants to see a decision taken on the basis
0:56:23 > 0:56:26of the facts, a Government doing representing the national interest
0:56:26 > 0:56:30and that is what this Government is doing.
0:56:30 > 0:56:33If I were still in business and worrying about whether to
0:56:33 > 0:56:38invest, I would not be panicked by a Government taking its time
0:56:38 > 0:56:45but by the Government rushing to do something in a tremendous hurry.
0:56:45 > 0:56:49The premise of your question is flawed.
0:56:49 > 0:56:52You say that, I know you had discussions with the Japanese
0:56:52 > 0:56:57ambassador so let me give you a short passage.
0:56:57 > 0:57:00What Japanese businesses wish to avoid the situation
0:57:00 > 0:57:09in which they are unable to play discern the rear brakes
0:57:09 > 0:57:12in which they are unable to play discern the Brexit
0:57:12 > 0:57:14and negotiations are going and only grasping the whole picture
0:57:14 > 0:57:15at the end.
0:57:15 > 0:57:18It is imperative to regain the confidence of the world
0:57:18 > 0:57:20and ensure competitiveness by increasing the predictability
0:57:20 > 0:57:21of the Brexit process.
0:57:21 > 0:57:23That is not just through a Japanese company
0:57:23 > 0:57:25but of companies around the world is wondering
0:57:25 > 0:57:27whether or not to pull out of Britain.
0:57:27 > 0:57:34Because we will not have access.
0:57:34 > 0:57:38You said yourself, we may not be in the single market when this
0:57:38 > 0:57:43process is finished.
0:57:43 > 0:57:44Did I say that?
0:57:44 > 0:57:48You are basing that on what evidence?
0:57:48 > 0:57:51Let me deal...
0:57:51 > 0:57:52Secretary...
0:57:52 > 0:58:00Let me finish, secretary of state.
0:58:00 > 0:58:02You mention investment but that is not companies
0:58:02 > 0:58:04like Nissan and a wholly owned by building factories,
0:58:04 > 0:58:20it is a British company is taken over by a Japanese company.
0:58:20 > 0:58:22It is not jobs and hard manufacturing.
0:58:22 > 0:58:25Let's not mix this thing as equivalent to the big car
0:58:25 > 0:58:32investments made in this country.
0:58:32 > 0:58:35You were the one who raised is the FTSE numbers.
0:58:35 > 0:58:37Many of the companies listed on the FTSE foreign-owned
0:58:37 > 0:58:41and that is why the FTSE has not been affected to the same degree.
0:58:41 > 0:58:46Where was the question at the end of that?
0:58:46 > 0:58:52Let me deal with the Japanese point first.
0:58:52 > 0:58:57The simple way of dealing with it is to go back to the Today
0:58:57 > 0:59:00programme on the first day of the G 21 Japanese ambassador said
0:59:00 > 0:59:07about how attractive Britain is and will continue to be.
0:59:19 > 0:59:20If there is nothing new,
0:59:20 > 0:59:24then the Court of Appeal aren't going to change their decision.